THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO JOE ROGAN AND THE PODCAST BROS Day 6
THE BELIEF
Joe Rogan and the podcast bros are voracious autodidacts, consuming dense books and synthesizing complex ideas for their audiences. When Rogan recommends a book—like The Truth About COVID-19 by Dr. Joseph Mercola—it’s because he’s done the research, read the studies, and arrived at an independent, evidence-based conclusion. If the medical establishment dismisses these ideas, that’s proof of censorship, not a lack of rigor.
THE PERFORMANCE
The performance begins with a casual aside: "I was reading this book last night…" or "This doctor sent me his research, and it’s wild." On The Joe Rogan Experience (episode #1671, April 2021), Rogan held up The Truth About COVID-19 and called it "a really good book" that "lays out the case" for ivermectin as a COVID treatment. He framed it as a David-and-Goliath story: a lone doctor (Mercola) battling Big Pharma’s lies. The tone was conversational, almost confessional—"I’m not a doctor, but this makes sense to me"—which inoculated him against criticism. If you questioned the book, you were questioning his right to read freely.
The origin of the belief traces back further. In 2020, Mercola, a longtime anti-vaccine activist, published The Truth About COVID-19 with co-author Ronnie Cummins. The book argued that ivermectin, a deworming drug, was a "miracle cure" for COVID, citing preprint studies and anecdotal reports. Rogan’s endorsement amplified its reach; within weeks, the book hit The New York Times bestseller list. Other podcast bros—Russell Brand, Bret Weinstein, and Jimmy Dore—echoed the claim, often with the same rhetorical trick: "I’m just asking questions." The implication was clear: the medical establishment was hiding the truth, and only the curious, the brave, the real thinkers were willing to see it.
THE DOCUMENTED RECORD
The record shows a different story.
-
The Author’s Credentials Joseph Mercola lost his medical license in Illinois in 2009 after the state medical board ruled he had "engaged in dishonorable, unethical, and unprofessional conduct" for selling unproven treatments, including a tanning bed he claimed could cure cancer. The board’s order (Case No. 06-DO-002, 2009) stated that Mercola’s marketing "misled the public" and "posed a danger to patients." He later moved to Florida, where he continued practicing under a different regulatory regime.
-
The Book’s Claims The Truth About COVID-19 cites a 2020 preprint study from Egypt (Elgazzar et al.) to argue that ivermectin reduced COVID mortality by 90%. The study was later retracted after researchers found "strong evidence" of data fabrication. A 2021 meta-analysis in Clinical Infectious Diseases (López-Medina et al.) reviewed 14 randomized controlled trials and concluded: "Ivermectin did not reduce all-cause mortality, length of hospital stay, or viral clearance." The FDA, in a public statement (March 2021), warned that ivermectin’s effectiveness against COVID was "not established" and that high doses could cause "serious harm."
-
The Financial Incentive Mercola’s business model relies on selling supplements and alternative health products. A 2021 investigation by The New York Times found that his company, Mercola.com, had earned at least $100 million from online sales, much of it from products marketed as COVID preventatives. Internal emails obtained by The Times showed Mercola urging employees to "push" ivermectin-related products in 2020, writing: "This is a huge opportunity."
-
The Platform’s Role Rogan’s endorsement of the book was not an isolated incident. In 2021, Spotify paid $100 million for exclusive rights to The Joe Rogan Experience. That same year, the platform faced backlash for hosting episodes that spread COVID misinformation, including Rogan’s claim that young, healthy people "don’t need" vaccines. Spotify’s internal data (leaked to The Verge in 2022) showed that Rogan’s episodes on ivermectin were among his most shared, with engagement spiking after each mention.
The gap between the belief and the record is stark: Rogan’s "wide reading" led him to a book written by a discredited doctor, citing retracted studies, to promote a drug that peer-reviewed research found ineffective. The performance of intellectual curiosity masked a feedback loop of misinformation, amplified by financial incentives and platform algorithms.
THE AUDIENCE
The people who believe this are not gullible. They are responding to two real phenomena:
-
The Crisis of Institutional Trust The medical establishment has failed the public before. The opioid epidemic (fueled by Purdue Pharma’s lies), the Tuskegee syphilis experiments, and the FDA’s slow response to the AIDS crisis have left scars. When Rogan says, "They’re not telling us the whole story," it resonates because it’s true in some cases. The problem is that he replaces one set of authorities with another—less accountable, less transparent, and equally self-interested.
-
The Loneliness of the Digital Age Podcasts like Rogan’s offer something rare: the illusion of a conversation. Listeners feel like they’re part of a club, privy to secrets the "mainstream" won’t discuss. When Rogan says, "I’m just a guy who reads a lot," it flatters the audience. It tells them that curiosity, not credentials, is what matters—that they, too, can outthink the experts. This is seductive in a world where expertise is often wielded as a cudgel.
The belief exploits these grievances by reframing skepticism as virtue. The audience isn’t stupid; they’re discerning. The tragedy is that the very tools they use to question power—critical thinking, independent research—are being weaponized against them.
THE CONTRADICTION
If Rogan and the podcast bros are such fearless truth-seekers, why do they only question institutions that challenge their worldview? Rogan has hosted climate change deniers (episode #1439, 2020) and election fraud conspiracy theorists (episode #1560, 2020), but he rarely invites guests who dismantle those claims with equal rigor. The contradiction is this: their "wide reading" is a curated echo chamber. They claim to be open-minded, but their skepticism is selective, applied only to ideas that confirm their biases.
THE THING THEY GOT RIGHT
The medical establishment does have a credibility problem. Pharmaceutical companies have hidden trial data (see: Vioxx), and regulatory agencies have been slow to act on conflicts of interest (see: the FDA’s ties to industry). The grain of truth here is that blind trust in institutions is dangerous. The mistake is assuming that the alternative—amateur sleuthing, anecdotal evidence, and self-proclaimed "independent" researchers—is any more reliable.
THE ONE LINE
Joe Rogan recommended a book about ivermectin written by a doctor who lost his license, citing studies that were retracted, to promote a drug that peer-reviewed research found ineffective.
This newsletter uses direct quotes, public records, court documents, and documented biographical fact. It does not make claims beyond what the record supports. Readers are encouraged to consult primary sources and reach their own conclusions.