New Hampshire committee debates making ivermectin available over the counter

The New Hampshire House Health, Human Services and Elderly Affairs Committee convened on April 16, 2025, to discuss the potential for making ivermectin available over the counter. The meeting highlighted a growing debate surrounding the medication, which has been used for decades as an anti-parasitic treatment and has garnered attention for its safety profile and historical significance.

Proponents of the bill argued that ivermectin should be accessible without a prescription, citing its extensive global use—over four billion doses administered worldwide—and its classification as an essential medicine by the World Health Organization. They emphasized that making ivermectin available over the counter would empower individuals to manage their health more effectively and alleviate pressure on healthcare providers. Supporters pointed out that other medications with higher risk profiles are available without prescriptions, questioning the rationale behind the current restrictions on ivermectin.

Several states, including Tennessee and Arkansas, have already passed legislation allowing over-the-counter sales of ivermectin, with Idaho's bill awaiting the governor's signature. Advocates for the bill in New Hampshire expressed hope that the state would follow suit, noting that many countries, particularly in Latin America, have long allowed over-the-counter access to the drug.

However, the discussion also included significant opposition. Medical professionals and pharmacists raised concerns about the safety and appropriateness of allowing pharmacists to dispense ivermectin without a prescription. They highlighted the importance of the patient-provider relationship in ensuring safe medication use and cautioned against potential misuse or misdiagnosis without proper medical oversight. The New Hampshire Medical Society, representing over 2,000 physicians, opposed the amendment, arguing that it sets a concerning precedent for legislating medical practices.

The committee also heard from the chief medical officer of the New Hampshire Department of Health and Human Services, who noted that while the underlying bill could save the state significant funds, the proposed amendment could complicate the existing healthcare framework. The discussion underscored the need for careful consideration of both public health implications and the integrity of medical prescribing practices.

As the committee deliberates, the outcome of this legislation could have far-reaching effects on healthcare access and the management of parasitic infections in New Hampshire. The next steps will involve further discussions and potential revisions to the proposed amendment before any final decisions are made.