Pretty much every virologists I listened to said "this stuff might work", because it's entirely plausible that it might work. > That's a long read, but it's pr

Pretty much every virologists I listened to said "this stuff might work", because it's entirely plausible that it might work. > That's a long read, but it's pretty damning. It actually isn't. All it says is that the evidence is poor and done by people with questionable reputation. It doesn't say "it doesn't work". What if it does work, but only in the early stages, when symptoms aren't severe (yet)? You wouldn't know. Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine are somewhat dangerous drugs and are therefore far more likely to only be given as a "last resort" rather than as a "precautionary measure", given their unproven status. What are the odds that a reputable person is going to put their reputation on the line, doing such a dangerous trial on patients that aren't at high risk? Early on, a disreputable person is way more likely to do it. There won't be any good evidence for a while, in the meantime it's all a gamble. This study is important, but limited in its scope. It shouldn't poison the well.