Nice writeup and points well-raised.
Without a doubt, we can agree that the pace of the virus infection did not give much time to the frontline responders and medical researchers to develop and update the existing protocol to treat patients with COVID 19 infections.
I am giving them a benefit of doubt in that not much was known about the virus, its impact and potential physiochemical implications when hospitals and doctors started to treat patients. Had there were proven, commonly agreed upon evidence against any of the protocols followed, the medical community would have done that, I hope.
But, if there was hard evidence any of the treatment protocols, such as not using ventilators and the doctors still followed the existing protocols without updating, then that's not acceptable. Also, I am not sure about the administrative process and protocols to alter and update the existing treatment plan and how cumbersome that process is.
So, in fact the problem lies in the fact that the whether doctors across the globe were provided with enough and timely evidence and the way those hard facts were handled by administrations and governments.
Thoroughly enjoyed reading this article. Deep dived into the facts. :)
HCQ was known to have an effect in vitro on coronavirus since 2005. They could have tried it. How did Trump know about it, in March was it? Cmon... Even vitamin treatment works to treat. Is that some deeply guarded secret? Kyle-Cydell did post that video, because he knew, and others just kept doing business as usual regardless. The evidence was in treatments working. Try those rather than repeat the same bad treatment over and over.
Agreed. That's why I also pointed to the administration and/or governance that manages the protocol update. Had it been efficient and fluid, doctors and hospitals would have been legally bind to follow the updated protocol (with HCQ potentially).
I still believe that the ventilator vs mask issue would have been more practical with select controlled population of patients.