Technologies

Ivermectin and COVID-19: Why poison centers are getting calls about this controversial drug

Is this a miracle pill or a sham?

Since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, some medical professionals have reviewed already available drugs to see if they could be used as effective treatments. Ivermectin, an anti-parasitic, was administered to some patients across the globe, with seemingly positive effects. However, more studies show it has little to no effect when it comes to treating COVID-19. There’s also been an increase in calls to poison centers by people who are taking ivermectin intended for animals.

On one side, there are doctors who say ivermectin could help end the pandemic if used globally. On the other are public health officials who have reviewed the data and say the drug’s effectiveness against COVID-19 isn’t conclusive.

Here’s everything you need to know about ivermectin and its use for COVID-19.

What is ivermectin?

Ivermectin is an anti-parasitic medicine «that works by altering cellular channels,» said Dr. Soumi Eachempati, CEO of Cleared4 and former professor of surgery and public health at Weill Cornell Medical College. The drug inhibits some viruses from infecting cells, thus preventing the virus from spreading. Ivermectin is usually given to treat parasitic infections like lice and Strongyloides, according to Eachempati.

Scientists at pharmaceuticals giant Merck discovered ivermectin in 1975 and began to use it to treat scabies, river blindness and other parasitic diseases carried by worms and lice starting in 1981. It’s on the World Health Organization’s list of essential medicines for a basic health care system. More than 250 million people take the drug across the globe each year, and it’s effective for animals as well.

The drug is considered safe when taken in appropriate dosages. Side effects for the ivermectin vary depending on whether it’s taken orally to treat intestinal infections or topically for skin infections. Oral tablets can cause drowsiness, nausea, vomiting and, in very rare cases, an increase in heart rate and seizures. Side effects for the topical ivermectin can include skin rash and irritation, while dry skin and stinging pain are severe and rare.

Can ivermectin be used to cure COVID-19?

This is where things get complicated. Public health agencies, including the Federal Drug Administration, the National Institutes of Health and the World Health Organization, don’t suggest ivermectin’s use to treat COVID-19. They cite the lack of data from large, randomized trials confirming the drug’s effectiveness to treat the disease.

Doctors who cited multiple smaller studies and firsthand experience say otherwise. They claim ivermectin does work to prevent people from developing symptoms from COVID-19 and can shorten recovery time for those already infected.

What do the public health agencies say about ivermectin use for COVID-19 treatment?

The FDA said in March it hasn’t approved the use of ivermectin to treat COVID-19. It warned that large doses of the drug are «dangerous and can cause serious harm.» The agency also advised against human use of ivermectin produced for animals, such as cows and horses, as the doses aren’t the same and could contain ingredients intended only for animals.

window.CnetFunctions.logWithLabel(‘%c One Trust ‘, «Service loaded: script_twitterwidget with class optanon-category-5»);

A growing number of people have been taking ivermectin for animals as word’s spread on social media about its possible use against COVID-19. This has resulted in some people calling state poison centers after taking the drug, since the medication is intended for animals. On Aug. 20, the Mississippi State Department of Health sent out an alert regarding the number of calls its poison center received, with 70% related to the «ingestion of livestock or animal formulations of ivermectin purchased at livestock supply centers.»

In April, the FDA reaffirmed in a post on its website that ivermectin isn’t approved to treat COVID-19 nor has it been given emergency use authorization.

The NIH said in February there was insufficient data to «recommend either for or against the use of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19.» It did say lab tests found the drug stopped the reproduction of the SARS-CoV-2 virus that cause the disease. However, to be effective, the dosages would need to be «100-fold higher than those approved for use in humans.»

While some clinical studies showed ivermectin to have no benefit, the NIH said others saw a lower mortality rate among patients. However, those studies were incomplete or had methodological limitations such as small sample sizes or patients receiving additional medicine along with ivermectin, according to the NIH.

The WHO said in March the current evidence on the use of ivermectin for treatment of COVID-19 was «inconclusive.»

A doctor in Arkansas who prescribed the drug to patients is under investigation by the state medical board, according to a report from CNN. He reportedly gave ivermectin prescriptions to prisoners at the county jail where he was contracted to provide medical services.

Who says ivermectin is a treatment, and what information do they have?

Ivermectin’s potential use as a COVID-19 therapeutic made headway last December during a Senate Homeland Security Committee meeting called Focus on Early Treatment of COVID-19. Dr. Pierre Kory, a pulmonary and critical care specialist, testified about the drug’s usage for treatment of the disease.

«Ivermectin is highly safe, widely available, and low cost,» Kory said in the Senate meeting. «We now have data from over 20 well-designed clinical studies, 10 of them randomized, controlled trials, with every study consistently reporting large magnitude and statistically significant benefits in decreasing transmission rates, shortening recovery times, decreasing hospitalizations, or large reductions in deaths. These data show that ivermectin is effectively a ‘miracle drug’ against COVID-19.»

During his testimony, Kory referred to a paper he authored — Review of the Emerging Evidence Demonstrating the Efficacy of Ivermectin in the Prophylaxis and Treatment of COVID-19 — that was published in the May edition of the American Journal of Therapeutics.

The paper was also included in the Frontiers of Pharmacology journal in January but was then removed in March. Dr. Frederick Fenter, chief executive editor of the journal, said the paper was removed due to «strong, unsupported claims based on studies with insufficient statistical significance, and at times, without the use of control groups.» Fender also said the authors promoted their own specific ivermectin-based treatment, which goes against editorial policies.

A study listed in Kory’s paper involved giving ivermectin to 234 uninfected health care workers in Argentina and found those who received the drug were far less likely to be diagnosed with COVID. For mildly ill patients, an Iraq study saw a quicker recovery time.

There are also studies that show otherwise. A clinical trial of 476 patients found ivermectin didn’t improve the recovery time in patients who had COVID-19. A review of 10 random clinical trials, with more than 1,000 participants, also didn’t find improvements with ivermectin. One Egyptian study claimed to show positive results, but it’s since been redacted over ethical concerns. Another study, of 1,500 patients, found that ivermectin had «no effect whatsoever.»

Merck, the company that discovered ivermectin, released a statement in February saying there was «no scientific basis for a potential therapeutic effect against COVID-19 from pre-clinical studies» and «no meaningful evidence for clinical activity or clinical efficacy in patients with COVID-19 disease.» It also cited a lack of safety data from major studies.

Why is there controversy over ivermectin?

The debate about ivermectin’s usage to treat COVID-19 has gone from the hospital to social media, exacerbating the discourse as well as the vitriol. While those in support of the drug appear to want an end to the pandemic, their arguments in favor of ivermectin have become fodder for anti-vaxxers and conspiracy theorists.

Groups that have spread misinformation about COVID-19 throughout the pandemic latched onto ivermectin’s usage following Kory’s Senate testimony. Anti-vax groups on Telegram share misinformation about the vaccine while asking where they can buy the drug. Rumble, an alternative video platform to YouTube, has pages of videos falsely saying vaccines are ineffective while advising people to also take ivermectin.

Anti-vax posts and videos can also be found on YouTube, Facebook and Twitter, although the companies are attempting to take these posts down or make them harder to find.

Kory was a guest on the Dark Horse Podcast hosted by Bret Weinstein, a former professor at Evergreen State College, on June 1 to talk about ivermectin. That video was eventually demonetized on YouTube and Weinstein’s channel received a strike, which prevented him from posting content for one week and could lead to its removal if he receives two more strikes within 90 days.

YouTube says its actions on Weinstein’s videos were part of its policies.

«While we welcome open discussions of potential treatments and clinical trials related to COVID-19 on YouTube, based on guidance from the CDC, FDA and other local health authorities, we don’t currently allow content that recommends ivermectin as an effective treatment or prevention method for the virus,» said Ivy Choi, a YouTube spokesperson. «We craft our policies to prevent the risk of egregious real-world harm, and update them as official guidance evolves. We do allow exceptions to our policy about ivermectin, including content that also gives viewers the full context of the FDA’s current position.»

Because of YouTube’s decision, the controversy over ivermectin grew and became tied to what some claim to be «big tech censorship.»

What is required for ivermectin to get approved for COVID-19 treatment?

For the public health agencies, it’s going to come down to the results of large clinical studies being conducted around the world.

«In the UK, it was announced that ivermectin will be added to the Principle Trial, a large clinical study designed to assess potential COVID therapies for non-hospitalized therapies for patients at higher risk for severe disease,» said Dr. David Shafran, head of pediatrics at telehealth app K Health. «This should demonstrate more definitively the efficacy of ivermectin in early-stage COVID infections. Fingers crossed because it’s a cheap medication with a good safety profile. It would be great to add this to the armament of medication to fight COVID.»

The Oxford University Principle Trial has more than 5,000 participants and will give a three-day course of oral ivermectin treatment to individuals randomly and compare their results to individuals who will receive standard care.

In the US, the NIH is evaluating therapeutics for COVID-19 with its Accelerating COVID-19 Therapeutic Interventions and Vaccines (ACTIV) master protocol. ivermectin was added in phase three of ACTIV-6, which will test the effectiveness of repurposed drugs.

«The ACTIV prioritization group, trial team and trial oversight groups continuously track new data on any agent we are studying in our trials and evaluate that data for how it might influence our testing of that agent and the safety/well being of the participants in the trial,» said Dr. Sarah Dunsmore, a program director at the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences that is part of the NIH.

What’s unclear is how long the whole process will take. The studies need time to be completed, and then the agencies will require additional time to come up with decisions based on the data.

Technologies

We Learned How to Share Info About ICE and Police Raids on Apps Like Ring Neighbors

If you’re wondering how to post about ICE on neighborhood apps, here are some tips.

The US Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency has been in the spotlight due to its repression of immigrants and targeting of protesters, not only in Minnesota but across the country. The FBI has also been investigating related Signal chats, and Facebook is taking down posts about ICE. Earlier this month, the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression accused the Department of Homeland Security of forcing tech companies to censor «protected speech» on social media platforms.

I contacted two social platforms — Nextdoor and Ring Neighbors — to see what they allow and what happens when you see ICE activity from your video doorbell or in person. I learned what sort of posts they allow, what gets taken down and how to talk about nearby raids. Here’s what you should know, too.

Are posts getting banned on apps like Ring Neighbors?

I reached out to Ring about its Neighbors app policies regarding recent events and police raids, as well as Reddit reports about posts being taken down. The company provided information about its policies and explained why Ring tends to remove certain posts or prevent them from going live on Neighbors.

Posts about a general law enforcement presence can get nixed. So if someone said ICE was spotted in «Bell Gardens,» their post would be denied because that’s too vague. Or if a post asked, «Hey, is there any ICE activity in town?» it wouldn’t be allowed. Other posts get banned if they:

Explicitly obstruct law enforcement
Voice political opinions
Assume immigration status or other types of prejudice
Don’t pertain to local events

Read more: Is it Legal for Police to Seize Your Home Security Videos?

What’s a safe way to post about police activity?

Posts that cite an exact location or images showing agents directly connected to an event tend not to be taken down. If someone said, «I saw ICE knocking on doors at the IHOP on Florence and Pico,» that would be allowed under Ring’s guidelines. Other allowed posts provide information on the exact cross streets, addresses, complexes, blocks and so on.

Bans aren’t always immediate. Sometimes posts that violate guidelines are taken down after the fact, either through post-published moderation, flagging or user deletion. Customers can usually appeal moderation decisions to ensure consistency.

When I turned to Nextdoor, another popular neighborhood app used for discussing events, a company spokesperson said something similar: «Our platform fosters discussions of local issues and, as such, our Community Guidelines prohibit broad commentary or personal opinions on national political topics.»

As long as it’s a local issue and users follow the basic community guidelines (be respectful, don’t discriminate and use your true identity), then posts should be fine.

What are the guidelines for posting on Ring Neighbors?

When I visit my own Neighbors app, I see — contrary to some reports — that users frequently post about hearing sirens or police activity in their own neighborhoods, ask about masked strangers or raise questions about law enforcement.

You can still post about security concerns on Ring Neighbors and other apps, even and especially when they involve police activity. You can also post about people you don’t recognize and strangers knocking, which opens the door (not literally) to talking about masked federal ICE agents who aren’t wearing any identifiers.

In other words, it looks like what Ring said mostly tracks. Explicit information citing current, local events, preferably with address data, is allowed.

«Focus on the behavior that raised your suspicion,» Nextdoor recommends. «Describe the potentially criminal or dangerous activity you observed or experienced — what the person was doing, what they said (if they spoke to you). Include the direction they were last headed.» If you post with an eye toward your neighborhood’s safety, your post is less likely to be removed.

Finally, avoid posts that include gruesome content or violate someone’s privacy, as these are also red flags likely to lead to a block.

Is Ring currently sharing information with ICE?

You may also be concerned that Ring is sharing your security videos with ICE or the surveillance company Flock Safety. In early 2026, Ring canceled its pending contract with Flock and has not announced any direct arrangements with law enforcement services.

Ring’s published guidelines say the company doesn’t share information with the police or federal agencies without a binding request, such as a search warrant, subpoena or court order. However, since Ring’s plans have changed abruptly over the past several months, they could shift again in the future. CNET will continue to report on further developments.

Can users coordinate on apps like Ring Neighbors?

This is a gray area, and it’s hard to know whether discussions will be removed. In my experience on the Neighbors app, many discussions about sirens and unexplained police presence were left up, allowing people to share their own perspectives and what they heard on police scanners.

It’s possible that the more these posts mention ICE or federal enforcement, the more likely they’ll be removed, and if conversations move into discussions about national issues or general legal advice, they may be taken down. But many people have reported successfully using apps like Neighbors to discuss nearby law enforcement raids, so I don’t see any evidence of a blanket ban.

Groups using the Neighbors app to communicate important information or provide help should also be aware of the Neighbors Verified tag, which is available to public safety agencies and community organizations. This tag makes it easier for Neighbors users to trust information and announcements from specific accounts. Verified accounts don’t have access to any additional user information.

Can agents cover up my security cam or doorbell?

In the past, published footage and news reports have shown federal agents covering up a video doorbell during an ICE raid. While it’s not common, civil rights attorneys have said actions like these are illegal. This issue connects to a larger fight over filming ICE in general, something the Department of Homeland Security has said is illegal, and US courts have said is protected under the First Amendment.

Devices on your own property should be fine if ICE follows the current law — you can find more details here — but it’s always a good idea to immediately save any pertinent video footage, preferably in more than one device.

What are my rights if I’m worried about ICE raids?

Whether you’re concerned about federal immigration raids, curious about what law enforcement is doing or just want clarification about your rights, it’s a good idea to consult the American Civil Liberties Union and the National Immigrant Justice Center. Here is some advice they give.

Don’t escalate: In cases where federal agents or people appearing to be agents have knocked on doors, people have done nothing and simply waited for agents to leave. Remember, without a warrant, they usually can’t enter a house, and if you have a video doorbell, it can still record everything that happens. Avoid confrontation when possible, and don’t give law enforcement anything to act on. Remember, everyone still has the right to remain silent.
If you feel your safety is endangered, call 911 or seek help from a nonprofit: Calling 911 is very helpful if you feel unsafe because of nearby events. You can explain the situation and have a record of the call. 911 is an emergency response service and isn’t in the business of reporting to federal agents. There are also local immigrant rights agencies you can contact to report ICE, and groups like the ACLU can usually point you in the right direction.

For more information, take a look at the latest news on what Ring is letting the police see (it’s good news for privacy fans), the legal ramifications of recording video or audio in your home, and what you and landlords can legally do with security cameras.

Technologies

This 160-Watt Anker Charger Just Dropped to $106, but Probably Not for Long

The Anker Prime charger can power three devices simultaneously, including laptops.

You’ll never run out of charging ports again with this Anker 160-watt, three-port charger, especially while it’s down to just $106. It’s currently at its lowest price of the year, but we can’t promise that it’ll stay that way. That’s why we recommend acting fast if you want to snag this bargain charger.

This Anker charger would normally set you back around $150, so you’ll save $44 with this deal. You won’t even have to enter any discount codes or clip any coupons to do it.

The charger has three ports pumping out a total of 160 watts of power — and a single port can charge at 140 watts. That’s enough for the M5 14-inch MacBook Pro and even its larger 16-inch relative, too.

There’s a handy display that shows you information on how the charger is performing, and the pins can be folded away to make the charger perfect for traveling. In fact, Anker’s charger is around the same size as a pair of AirPods Pro 3 earbuds, so it’s highly portable.

Why this deal matters

You can never have too many chargers, and this one does the job of three. It isn’t cheap, to be sure, but with plenty of power on tap and a design that makes it great for taking on the road, it’s still a great buy with this discount.

Technologies

Meta and AMD’s Multibillion-Dollar Deal Is All About the AI Chips

Meta will take a stake in the chipmaker in exchange for a commitment to buy billions of dollars’ worth of AI chips.

Meta is joining OpenAI as one of the major tech companies to take a stake in chipmaker AMD, as part of an AI hardware buying frenzy. Meta and AMD on Tuesday announced a partnership that will involve CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s tech giant buying billions of dollars’ worth of AMD Instinct GPUs in order to fuel its ambitions to build out AI offerings across Meta platforms, including Instagram, Facebook and WhatsApp.

In a release, Meta described the deal as «multi-year,» and said the AI purchase will provide Meta with up to 6 gigawatts of AMD GPUs, «the silicon computing technology used to support modern AI models.»

According to the US Department of Energy, a single gigawatt (1 billion watts) is equivalent to nearly 2,000 large solar panels or 100 million LED bulbs.

In AMD’s version of the announcement, CEO Lisa Su said, «We are proud to expand our strategic partnership with Meta as they push the boundaries of AI at unprecedented scale.» As part of the deal, Meta will take a 10% stake in AMD.

AMD, based in Santa Clara, California, previously signed a deal with ChatGPT-maker OpenAI that it announced last October, which is similar to the Meta deal and also gives its AI rival 10% ownership of AMD.

(Disclosure: Ziff Davis, CNET’s parent company, in 2025 filed a lawsuit against OpenAI, alleging it infringed Ziff Davis copyrights in training and operating its AI systems.)

What does this mean for the rest of us?

AMD’s two megadeals may not have an immediate impact on people who use Meta’s social networking and communications apps, or even on those who buy AMD’s products, including desktop processors and graphics cards.

But it signals that large companies making huge bets on the future of AI are doing what they can to secure the hardware they need as supplies tighten and prices rise for components such as RAM. Some of those constraints aren’t expected to end anytime soon, and shoppers could begin to see prices rise even more than they already have for computers, smartphones, vehicles and other products that heavily rely on computing components like these.

It is also a sign that Meta’s ambitions for AI are not slowing down as it continues to compete with companies including OpenAI, Microsoft and Google to develop AI products and tools.

Also a factor: Meta’s push into wearables

Another reason AMD may want access to AI chips goes beyond its own data centers and online platforms: Meta has increasingly been focused on wearables such as its Oakley Meta AI Glasses and other potential new portable products.

In addition to what AMD’s GPUs can offer Meta for AI infrastructure power, AMD may also be part of its wearable future.

«With AI models requiring unprecedented processing power to process real-time data and information, Meta is focused on securing the supply chain necessary for its wearable devices,» said Michael J. Wolf, founder and CEO of the consulting firm Activate.

Wolf believes that the deals Meta and OpenAI have signed won’t be the last time a major AI-focused company locks down a supply of semiconductors.

«As consumer hardware transitions from smartphones to smart glasses, we will absolutely see more of these mega-deals,» Wolf said.