You wouldn’t be able to prove pt got better with hcq. If you want to measure viral load changes as a surrogate marker..you could do it on the sicker patients.
Why give something with possible adverse effects to someone who doesn’t need it? It takes meds from someone who might really need it..exposes person to drug toxicities...and cost money.
The NY doctor does send younger people home with instructions to monitor their health, but if a person in a higher risk category tests positive he treats them and sends them home with the same instructions. So far, he claims to have only three or four hospitalizations out of 700 patients and they are doing okay so far, i.e., not requiring intubation.
If others find they have the same experience, I see no reason why that isn’t a rational way to treat. Why wait until they need hospitalization, especially when the side effects are minimal and we already know which health conditions are aggravated by the drug.
If you have a wide spectrum of patients, you will be able to better gauge who will benefit the most from the drug. Having mild or no symptoms doesn’t mean that the infection will not get worse. And there may be a point where the patient is too far gone to receive any benefit. A person is considered cured when they have two negative tests in a row. Someone who has had the disease and recovered would show up as negative but have antibodies indicating they had a previous infection.
From purely a humanitarian perspective, we should seek to cure anyone who is a confirmed positive. The adverse side effects could be addressed thru tests and previous medical history. I have taken the drug for three years without any adverse reaction. The USG mandated that I take it. I had no choice. The anti malarial costs about 5 cents a dose. The Zpac is more expensive. When you shut down at least a quarter of the US economy, these costs pale in comparison.
Sure thing there, Dr. Fauci.
This "business as usual" attitude is killing people.