Would this still be the case if monkey studies showed the treatment to be worthless? It's one thing to give someone a treatment that is believed to be effectiv

Would this still be the case if monkey studies showed the treatment to be worthless? It's one thing to give someone a treatment that is believed to be effective that carries a 1% chance of HIV infection. It's completely another thing to use a treatment that has had no controlled human studies against Ebola and the one controlled monkey study didn't show any benefit against Ebola, and carries a 1% chance of HIV infection. Now, as mentioned in the article, the blood will be screened for a variety of pathogens, including HIV, so the risk of HIV infection should be very low.