In Austin, Texas, a new political battle is unfolding years after the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, as Republican lawmakers move to force the Texas Medical Board to reverse disciplinary actions taken against doctors who prescribed Ivermectin as a treatment for the virus. At the center of the debate is Dr. Mary Talley Bowden, a Houston-area ear, nose, and throat specialist who gained national attention for defying federal guidelines and promoting Ivermectin, an anti-parasitic drug, as a potential COVID therapy.
During the pandemic, Ivermectin became a controversial alternative treatment championed by vaccine skeptics and some conservative political figures, despite repeated warnings from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and the drug’s manufacturer, Merck, that it was not proven to be effective against the virus. Several peer-reviewed studies found no significant benefit in using the medication to treat COVID-19, and high-profile adverse events—including the death of a Rhode Island man who reportedly took daily doses—fueled concerns about its misuse.
Dr. Bowden, who was suspended from Houston Methodist Hospital in 2021 for spreading misinformation and prescribing Ivermectin without supporting clinical evidence, insists she was unfairly targeted. “I was persecuted for trying to help my patients,” she says in a statement to lawmakers, adding that her approach was rooted in early intervention and personal medical judgment. Bowden later filed lawsuits against health agencies and the hospital system, and has since become a symbol of medical freedom for some conservative groups.
Now, Texas Republicans are calling for vindication. A new resolution introduced in the Texas Legislature demands that the Medical Board expunge disciplinary records of physicians sanctioned for off-label COVID treatments, including Ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine. Lawmakers argue that doctors should not be punished for trying to provide alternatives during an unprecedented health crisis, especially when government guidance was evolving rapidly.
“Doctors on the frontlines were trying to save lives with the tools they had,” said one Texas legislator backing the measure. “They should not be treated as criminals or conspiracists for stepping outside the mainstream.”
Public health officials and medical ethicists have sharply criticized the move. They warn that erasing disciplinary actions could set a dangerous precedent and undermine the authority of regulatory boards to ensure evidence-based medical practice. “This isn’t about political disagreements—it’s about protecting patients from treatments that were proven ineffective or even harmful,” says Dr. Ellen Gold, a bioethics professor at the University of Texas.
The controversy over Ivermectin reflects deeper national divisions that emerged during the pandemic. While the FDA never banned physicians from prescribing it, the agency repeatedly warned against its use for COVID-19, particularly in large or veterinary doses. Despite the warnings, prescriptions surged, largely fueled by misinformation on social media and support from conservative media outlets.
In response to the political pressure, the Texas Medical Board has issued a statement reaffirming its commitment to upholding professional standards and prioritizing patient safety. It says any changes to disciplinary records must follow legal review and be based on sound medical and ethical reasoning.
As the resolution moves through the state legislature, it revives an enduring debate about the intersection of politics and science. For many physicians who adhered to public health guidelines, the effort to rewrite the narrative of pandemic treatments is seen as an attack on scientific integrity. For others, it’s a matter of defending personal liberty and restoring reputations tarnished by what they view as government overreach.
The broader public remains divided, with some Texans applauding the push for transparency and others questioning why disproven therapies are being revisited when the focus should be on improving future pandemic response.
Sources:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C86Kbh3Bvdc
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/13/us/mary-talley-bowden-covid-ivermectin.html
https://www.texastribune.org/2025/04/01/texas-doctors-ivermectin-covid-legislation/
https://www.statnews.com/2022/03/30/ivermectin-covid-studies-analysis/
https://www.fda.gov/consumers/consumer-updates/why-you-should-not-use-ivermectin-treat-or-prevent-covid-19
https://www.npr.org/2025/03/30/ivermectin-covid-texas-doctors-sanctions-repeal-debate
https://www.cnn.com/2025/04/01/health/ivermectin-covid-texas-doctors-medical-board/index.html
