I don’t think you have to propose esoteric mechanisms of action. Plaquenil suppresses the immune system. Well established. But you have to admit it’s a little scary intentionally knocking someone’s immune system down when they are becoming deathly ill.
Typically we see what we do as “helping” someone’s immune system fight the infection. It’s your best ally. Intellectually it’s like steering into a skid but it can be the right thing to do. If someone of impeccable integrity from Mass Gen or Johns Hopkins comes forward with some real guidance based on real evidence we could stop with the controversy.
The fact this is being pushed by YouTube and email i find more than a little disconcerting. For some reason the people who should be speaking up aren’t. This is not the time for commercialism and quackery. There’s real data out there and more growing by the minute. The people who have access to it have an obligation to speak up before THEY destroy the Profession of Medicine. If they let that happen the entire country will suffer immeasurably for decades.
Do you know what an ionophore is? Did you know that hydroxychloroquine acts as an ionophore to ferry zinc into the cell where the zinc stops the replication xyxle of the virus? You have been given the link to a video explaining this fact yet appear to have either not watched it or you believe you are such an expert that you can ignore and reject the facts.
In software, my domain of expertise, there is a serious issue with the ability to determine what consequences come from a specific action/change. In this case, we are talking about a different mechanism for why the drug(s) might be effective against the disease agent - the virus.
In the end, the data shall set us free, but acknowledging interesting theories is not acquiescence. It is recognizing that the common understanding of a drug-pathogen interaction may not be properly understood by the medical community.
It is interesting material, but certainly not persuasive, given the lack of empirical evidence as to its correctness. Sometimes, those that “should speak up” are too busy to speak. Other times, they know that to speak up has one of two effects: (1) diminish their reputation (when they gainsay a factual position) or (2) diminish their reputation (when they support a hypothesis absent empirical data).
You are much more closely tied to this community than I am, but I have seen too many instances where expert communities were surprised by the intuition of non-expert commentators.