The Other Ivermectin: DMSO
A Repurposed Drug for Paralysis, Pain, Stroke, Spinal Cord Injury, and Nuclear Attacks?
Ball-and-stick model of the dimethyl sulfoxide molecule, (H3C)2SO
Speaking as a physician who has directed a Stroke Rehabilitation Program, I was stunned when I first read AMD’s article on the effectiveness of DMSO in these patients. Speaking as a Rehabilitation Specialist, I was even more taken back by the claims of DMSO potentially reversing paralysis in Spinal Cord Injured patients. I had known too many, including close colleagues of mine, whose paralyses were all too permanent, and I could not believe a treatment existed that could benefit this group of individuals.
However, like my readers, I kept an open mind and read the referenced PubMed studies; I reviewed the source materials and the case reports. And I came away angrier than ever this material had been suppressed.
What follows is my attempt to share my DMSO awakening experience with you. I am truly grateful to A Midwestern Doctor for posting this information on DMSO.
When Dr. Pierre Kory testified before Ron Johnson’s Senate Committee on December 8, 2020, I sat mesmerized by him. He discussed the results of a drug against COVID-19 that stretched belief. “If you take it, you will not get sick - And if you take it, you will not die, or you’ll die at much lower rates.”
And soon, in the coming months, Dr. Kory was proven correct.
Families fought to get it for their loved ones - for those dying in hospitals and those sick at home. Even now, Kory’s drug is the gift that keeps on giving. Not only has it been the most effective drug against COVID-19, but numerous case reports show it to be effective against Turbo Cancers, and it happens to be highly effective against inflammatory conditions such as Rosacea.
The cat is out of the bag on Ivermectin, but there is another drug, equally as unknown as Ivermectin once was and perhaps equally miraculous, and its virtues were extolled in another Congressional Hearing, this one taking place on March 24, 1980, before Claude Pepper’s Select House Committee on Aging. The drug was DMSO, and the opponent, as in Senator Johnson’s Hearing, was once again the FDA.
As with Ivermectin, the FDA [Bureau of Drugs] Director, Dr. J. Richard Crout, explained—tongue in cheek—that the agency would be the first to advocate DMSO’s use if it had only evidence that it worked.
“The FDA is willing, indeed anxious, to approve DMSO for such uses whenever controlled trials meeting the statutory standard are available [Page 61].
In place of Dr. Pierre Kory sat Dr. Stanley Jacob, a professor of surgery at the University of Oregon Medical School. Dr. Jacob was the dynamic Harvard-trained physician who headed the University of Oregon Transplant Program and had discovered many of the benefits of DMSO after first using it as a cryoprotectant.
Dr. Jacob testified before the committee in 1980, just as Dr. Kory would do some 40 years later, in 2020, and told an unbelievable story to a group of Washington D.C. insiders about the miraculous benefits of an almost unknown drug.
Like Dr. Kory, he has been proven correct.
Dr. Kory authored a book about his experience entitled The War Against Ivermectin: The Medicine that Saved Millions and Could Have Ended the Pandemic.
Dr. Jacob authored the book Dimethyl Sulfoxide (DMSO) in Trauma and Disease.
Dr. Satoshi Omura discovered Ivermectin in 1975 in soil on a Japanese golf course. DMSO, a synthetic organic compound, was made in a lab by Russian Chemist Alexander Zaytsev in 1866. Both Ivermectin and DMSO are safe compounds. Dr. Stanley Jacob told Mike Wallace in an episode of 60 Minutes that no one has died from DMSO. Indeed, even the FDA [Dr. J. Crout] agrees that DMSO has no serious adverse effects.
Likewise, Dr. Kory explained that Ivermectin is one of the safest drugs known.
In the Congressional Hearing in 1980 were many incredible testimonials from a variety of credible people, all relaying nearly unbelievable stories concerning pain relief, improvement following brain injury or paralysis, and accelerated healing.
Ivermectin was FDA-approved as safe and effective in treating River Blindness in 1987. It was FDA-approved to treat Rosacea in 2014. Two years later, in 2016, the German government approved it to treat scabies. Now, it is used off-label to treat Cancer, COVID-19, and a variety of other conditions rampant in 2024.
Yes, the cat is out of the bag on the healing powers of Ivermectin.
But not so on DMSO, where it appears another FDA coverup has succeeded, depriving millions of sufferers from life-saving pain relief and possibly much more benefits in spinal cord and brain injury. In the 1980 Congressional Hearing, Dr. Jacob pointed out that those physicians at the FDA who were charged with making policy recommendations on DMSO - those who directed the Arthritis Advisory Committee - lacked basic knowledge about the diseases that DMSO was so effective at treating. Dr. Jacob highlighted this problem with Dr. Evelyn Hess.
Dr. Jacob commented, “Dr. Evelyn Hess was the chairman of the committee. She showed so little knowledge of the disease that she denied that patients who had ulcers came to amputations. I was appalled that they would bring an expert who didn’t recognize patients with non-healing ulcers, with scleroderma come to amputation. That, to me, is an insult [Page 71].”
Director Crout defended his committee, “That group is established to evaluate remedies in the field of arthritis.”
Ohio Congresswoman Mary Rose Oakar quickly asked, “Could it possibly be they are negatively disposed and want to kill this drug?”
“I am amazed Dr. Crout would say there is no disease altered by DMSO. It shows a complete lack of knowledge. I respect Dr. Crout and like him. He is from Oregon. However, it shows a complete lack of knowledge of the literature in DMSO.
It can be stated with certainty that there are many diseases that are altered by DMSO. I would like to ask a question that will be embarrassing, but I would like to ask it.
Dr. Gyarfas is in charge of the DMSO evaluations. He is on the record as saying, “I am going to bury that drug once and for all.” I would like Dr. Gyarfas to either deny or accept that statement before this committee under oath.”
Dr. Crout and Gyarfas successfully skirted the question without answering it. Instead, they agreed that Dr. Gyfarfas would promise to evaluate DMSO fairly. And the fox once again was put in charge of the henhouse.
DMSO met the same fate in 1980 as Ivermectin did following Dr. Kory’s Congressional hearing in 2020: The FDA buried it.
Despite all the clinical evidence produced by expert physicians with vast experience with DMSO, showing healing scleroderma ulcers following DMSO treatment, as well as impressive evidence of consistent pain relief in a safe drug, the FDA coldly refused to approve it.
In the hearing, the FDA admitted it was generally safe and probably relieved pain; however, they did not find evidence that it treated underlying disease. One must wonder why the drug was not approved for simple pain relief. It could have been employed as an alternative to opioids which are still prescribed daily across the nation and around the world for chronic pain. Opioids carry serious risks for adverse effects, including addiction, respiratory suppression, and death through overdose. Not a single person has died from DMSO. Why was it not approved for pain management?
The FDA approved DMSO for a very narrow use in 1978. It is approved as safe and effective for treating interstitial cystitis, a chronically painful condition of the bladder and urinary tract that is not caused by infection. It is used by irrigating the bladder with a DMSO solution.
Like Ivermectin, DMSO has also been successfully used in veterinary applications. It has been used extensively in million-dollar racehorses, including Secretariat. DMSO has also been used off-label to treat painful backs, shoulders, knees, and other areas in professional athletes and average-suffering patients to astounding effect.
It promotes nerve regeneration, quickens the healing of skin ulcers, and can help with amyloidosis. It improves blood flow and is recommended by plastic surgeons doing skin flap procedures.
It is legally available in Florida, Oregon, Washington, and Montana with restrictions but has effectively been banned for medicinal use in most other states by any licensed medical professional—with the limited exception of treating the sole FDA-approved use—interstitial cystitis.
Many states have laws that steer licensed physicians away from prescribing DMSO for anything other than interstitial cystitis, and one must ask why.
A Midwestern Doctor explained it best.
“Finally, there is essentially no therapy for recovery from stroke—which in short explains why stroke is the second leading cause of death and the third leading cause of disability worldwide.
In turn, it would be paradigm shifting if an effective stroke therapy existed which:
•Effectively treated ischemic strokes.
•Had no risk of worsening a hemorrhagic stroke.
•Could easily be taken at home, and more importantly, be quickly given on ambulances.
•Protected brain tissue from dying.
•Prevented reperfusion injuries.
•Healed damaged brain tissue after a stroke.”
What would have happened if this drug were allowed to be prescribed freely by American physicians for stroke?
If Ivermectin had been acknowledged to effectively treat COVID-19, a 100-billion-dollar vaccine Emergency Use Program would have been wiped out. Similarly, the profitability of stroke treatment would have shrunk beginning in 1980. Hospital profits, prescription drug profits, and outpatient stroke treatment profits, to name a few, would have evaporated.
The FDA shut down research on DMSO in 1965 after an estimated 100,000 patients began enjoying its benefits.
The FDA claimed that it could theoretically “alter the refractive index of animals’ eyes” and was, therefore, potentially dangerous to humans. Translation: It could possibly cause blurred vision in non-humans, so all human research on it should be stopped. This was never proven in animals; it was merely suspected, and it was never seen in humans. The ban was lifted around 1980, near the time of the Congressional Hearing.
Today, many people obtain DMSO in gel form, often through farm supply stores. They hear about it through word of mouth. Many are lucky enough to live in one of the states where it is legal to receive it from a physician. Most physicians, however, may be risking their licenses to prescribe it. While it is technically legal to prescribe DMSO under Federal Law as an off-label drug, states can impose additional restrictions that have a chilling effect on a doctor’s willingness to prescribe.
For example, this California Statute reads,
A licensed physician and surgeon shall, prior to treating a patient with a DMSO preparation, inform the patient in writing if DMSO has not been approved as a treatment or cure by the Food and Drug Administration for the disorder for which it is being prescribed.
If DMSO is prescribed for any purpose other than for those purposes approved pursuant to Section 111550 of the Health and Safety Code, informed consent shall first be obtained from the patient. As used in this subdivision, "informed consent" means the authorization given by the patient for treatment with DMSO after each of the following conditions have been satisfied:
The patient is informed verbally, in nontechnical terms, about all of the following:
A description of treatment procedures to be used in administering DMSO.
A description of any attendant discomfort and risks to the patient that can be reasonably expected from treatment with DMSO.
An explanation of any benefits to the patient that can be reasonably expected.
An explanation of any appropriate alternative procedures, drugs, or devices that might be advantageous to the patient, and their relative risks and benefits.
An offer to answer any inquiries concerning the treatment of the procedures involved.
The patient signs and dates a written consent form acknowledging that disclosure has been given pursuant to paragraph (1), and acknowledging consent to treatment with DMSO pursuant to this section. The patient shall be provided with a copy of the signed and dated form.
Other states have laws specifically protecting physicians stating that no physician can have their license suspended or limited due to prescribing DMSO.
For example, Montana’s DMSO protection law reads:
A physician may not be subjected to disciplinary action by the board of medical examiners for prescribing or administering DMSO to a patient under the physician's care as an adjunct to recognized, customary, or accepted modes of therapy in the treatment of any malignancy, disease, illness, or physical condition.
DMSO is a powerful solvent, meaning it can dissolve and travel rapidly through human tissues and throughout the body. It can carry other substances with it. Thus, one would want their skin to be contaminant-free before applying it.
The drug can be administered topically, intramuscularly, intravenously, and orally. There are other studies, both animal and human, showing rapid recoveries from seemingly permanent paralysis in spinal cord injury and stroke. It has even shown benefits in such patients years after the injury.
It is particularly effective in reducing increased intracranial pressure following head injury.
Perhaps the most clear-cut evidence of medical benefit is in patients with scleroderma, a connective tissue disorder, who develop painful ulcers. DMSO can dramatically reduce pain, often within seconds, and accelerate the healing of these sores.
Similarly, DMSO can be used to relieve the pain of peripheral neuropathy in diabetics, and it can hasten the healing of diabetic ulcers.
In the Claude Pepper, 1980 Congressional Hearing are numerous anecdotes of patients with chronic spine pain, often associated with nerve damage and weakness, who found life-changing improvement through DMSO. Sometimes, the DMSO could be stopped following their healing with permanent benefit.
What is timely for humanity living in 2024 is DMSO’s potential benefits for those living in an age where Nuclear War looms closer than ever. The drug happens to help heal gamma ray burns, and it does do so by repairing double-stranded DNA damage. This study reveals that following gamma irradiation exposure, DMSO repaired some 90% of the double-stranded DNA breaks [DSBs]. The researchers wrote:
“From comparison of the data on DSBs and survival for alpha-particle irradiation, it is inferred that the severity of damage is reduced by DMSO through minimizing the formation of OH-induced sugar/base modifications in the vicinity of nonscavengeable DSBs.”
Further studies corroborated DMSO’s remarkable ability to repair radiation damage of the kind that would be experienced in a Nuclear Attack.
Perhaps the most unbelievable cases were in patients with developmental brain disorders, such as Down’s Syndrome where they had been developmentally delayed for years with seemingly hopeless chances. In those patients, testimonial evidence reflected astonishing and lasting recoveries following DMSO administration.
Let us review the highlights.
Mike Wallace of 60 Minutes featured DMSO and Dr. Stanley Jacob in this 1980 Segment, which is still available on Odyssey. Dr. Jacobs is filmed in his University of Oregon Clinic treating patients, some in wheelchairs, others in severe pain, and most singing the praises of the good doctor.
Dr. Jacobs comes across as professorial and scholarly, making it difficult to discredit him. After all, he was Harvard-educated and the Chief of the Transplant Surgery Team at the University of Oregon Medical School. Nonetheless, the FDA saw fit to stop 1,000 active studies on DMSO in 1965 by instituting a research ban on the drug—ostensibly related to their duty to protect the public from possible ocular harm, and all with no evidence.
However, even in 1980, there was evidence of DMSO’s benefit—with plenty of it in the form of testimonials, especially from scleroderma patients.
In the Congressional Record, one can read testimonial after testimonial, some written by Ph.D.-level educated individuals—all circa 1980. And now, of course, in 2024, there is no shortage of confirmatory material on PubMed supporting these testimonials, very well covered by A Midwestern Doctor.
The 1980 Hearing FDA sabotage of DMSO was painfully obvious to many, and caused Dr. Arthur Sherbel of the Cleveland Clinic to write this letter to Chairman Claude Pepper.
Dr. Arthur Scherbel wrote, “It is apparent to me that FDA is determined to withhold this drug from clinical use indefinitely. I feel certain that they will continue to allow clinical investigation, but clinical studies that are submitted will never be satisfactory for FDA to approve clinical use of this drug. There is now overwhelming evidence that the drug, used as recommended, is clinically effective and without serious toxicity.”
The testimonials presented at the 1980 Congressional Hearing were powerful and would make anyone wonder what the FDA has against this drug, especially given the fact it has not killed anyone, and is much less toxic than many much less effective drugs that have been approved.
“During the last six months, I have spent many hours in Dr. Jacob’s clinic with his beautiful and caring staff, watching miracle after miracle happen right in front of my eyes. I have seen people who have been totally paralyzed for twenty years or more being treated and starting to move. The wonder in their eyes is indeed a sight to behold. I have witnessed the awe in the eyes and actions of a young couple whose young child is being treated for Down’s Syndrome and listen with rapt attention as they relate how far that child has come from Death’s door to today. I have sent or personally brought people with various illnesses or pains to Dr. Jacob’s clinic and seen them smile with utmost satisfaction at having been cured or helped after years of discomfort and pain.”
Clara Fox wrote this as part of a three-page letter. In this, she described how her son Bill had broken his neck and was initially not expected to survive. However, she was told that if he did survive, he would be permanently paralyzed from the neck down. Instead, he was given DMSO infusions and began regaining his strength. At some point during his lengthy rehabilitation, the DMSO was stopped, and his progress stalled. After appealing this denial, the DMSO was resumed on condition that it would be halted once again if progress stopped. Clara reported these improvements following DMSO resumption:
“For close to three months after they took Bill off of the DMSO, we fought daily to have the intravenous procedure continued without much luck. But we finally got our point across shortly after the Christmas holidays, and they did agree with certain stipulations. The first of these was to agree to let them take him across town to Good Samaritan Hospital for a series of neurological tests to be run on him.
If these tests gave them any type of room for some noticeable improvement to which they could credit to the DMSO, then they would put him back on it twice a week for a given number of weeks. After that, he would be returned to Good Samaritan for another series of the same tests for a reevaluation.
If there were no significant changes, then we were to drop it. From that time on, Bill quickly and steadily improved to the point where he could now tolerate maximum occupational and physical therapy for three to five hours per day [previously – without the aid of the drug, he was only managing fifteen minutes to half an hour of therapy a day before the fatigue and pain would send him back to his bed].
He jumped from lifting two and a half pounds of weights on his right arm and wrist to between fifty and sixty pounds, and from one and a half with his left arm and wrist to between thirty-five and forty.”
Clara finished her letter with this wish:
“I can only summarize with all my hopes and prayers, along with millions of others, that this humble man [Dr. Stanley Jacob] can see all his work and dreams materialize into the final success of having DMSO returned to the market by the Federal Drug Administration so that all Americans might have the chance to be helped or saved through all those efforts. I urge everyone connected with this possibility to please check carefully all the facts, and help answer these prayers.”
Mrs. Savage wrote a scathing letter critical of both 60 Minutes and Big Pharma:
Dear Mike Wallace:
Keep reading with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to Repurposed Drugs: Powers & Possibilities to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.