> random stuff which isn't obviously efficacious off the back of a misunderstanding of the science 1) It's not random stuff; there is associated research and a

> random stuff which isn't obviously efficacious off the back of a misunderstanding of the science 1) It's not random stuff; there is associated research and a theory of operation how it counteracts the virus 2) Lacking obviousness? By the time the research is settled, you may be very sick already. 3) There is no misunderstanding, there is a risk analysis based on the currently available knowledge. Risk of chloroquine poisoning X probability of effectiveness X risk of acute viral infection. 4) Crowd-sourcing information has shown to be very effective in other times of crisis, a viral outbreak is no different. The internet is not a place for the information police. We share our ideas here.