- develop a scale to assess the degree of illness with COVID-19. Could be simple, maybe 0-5, 0 being completely free of COVID-19 symptoms; 5 meaning death. Each grade between 0-5 could represent an increasing level of severity with symptoms.
- has several arms: a standard of care or control arm, treated with medicines other than HCQ; an HCQ arm; an HCQ + Azithromicin arm; and an HCQ + Azithro + Zinc arm.
- treats moderately to severely ill patients; i.e., those that sought medical care at either a hospital or doctor's office.
When the patient is recommended to the trial by a referring physician, the patient is assessed according to the scale. The patient is then randomly assigned to an arm of the trial, and will receive both daily assessments according to the scale, and an assessment at the end of their treatment, according to outcome.
I work in research and development for a pharmaceutical company. I'm not a doctor, but I've supported enough clinical trials that a design like this should be a no-brainer. It's a shame that HCQ has been politicized the way it has in the developed world--the world that supposedly "embraces science."
Zelinski’s treatment has a significant number of patients on your third choice: “an HCQ + Azithro + Zinc arm.” His results are being rejected for no other reason than ‘someone’ doesn’t want his results entered into the debate. Because his regimen has had dramatic success in his target patient demographic?