• Louisiana and New Hampshire lawmakers are considering legislation to make ivermectin more accessible, sparking debate about its efficacy and safety.
• Proponents argue for patient freedom and cite off-label use as common practice, while opponents raise concerns about the lack of FDA approval for COVID-19 treatment and potential risks.
• Similar legislation has faced vetoes and failed overrides in the past, highlighting the contentious nature of this issue and the division between medical and political opinions.

Multiple states are considering legislation regarding access to Ivermectin, an anti-parasitic drug. The proposed bills aim to make Ivermectin available either over-the-counter or through standing orders from medical professionals. This push is happening despite the FDA's stance that Ivermectin is not approved for COVID-19 treatment and concerns about potential misuse. The debate reflects broader tensions between patient autonomy, medical expertise, and political ideologies.

• What: State legislatures are considering bills to make ivermectin more accessible, either over-the-counter or through standing orders.
• Who: Key individuals include Louisiana Sen. Michael Fesi, Louisiana Surgeon General Ralph Abraham, New Hampshire State Reps Yuri Polozov, Gary Woods, Linda McGrath, Mark McLean, Lucy Weber, Jessica Lamontagne, Sue DeLemus, and former New Hampshire Governor Chris Sununu. Organizations involved include the FDA, WHO, and state health committees.
• When: The legislative efforts are taking place in 2025, with roots in debates during the COVID-19 pandemic.
• Where: The events are occurring in the state legislatures of Louisiana and New Hampshire.

The push for easier access to ivermectin reflects a complex interplay of factors. Proponents emphasize patient autonomy and the right to off-label drug use, framing it as a matter of individual freedom. Concerns are raised by the FDA regarding its use for non approved cases. This highlights the broader challenge of balancing individual liberties with public health concerns and the role of government regulation in medical practice.

"I look at it as a patient-freedom-type-choice...if they are going to take it, I want to be part of that conversation."

"It is one of the safest medicines available so allowing physicians to do this makes sense."

"Let’s really follow the science in this situation...We don’t need to or should legislate that."

"The news media and the government agencies were telling people if you used ivermectin, it was a horse medicine and you were an idiot. And I thought, that's not right."

"I'm really pretty aghast at this amendment, frankly. We don't make medical policy off of, you know, anecdotal evidence. And what we hear on the internet."

The debate over ivermectin access continues to be a contentious issue in state legislatures. While proponents champion patient choice and off-label drug use, opponents emphasize the lack of scientific evidence supporting its efficacy against COVID-19 and the potential risks associated with its misuse. The future of these bills remains uncertain, hinging on legislative votes and potential gubernatorial vetoes, reflecting the ongoing tension between individual autonomy and evidence-based medical policy.