The numerous* stories that I have read recently about medical professionals writing themselves prescriptions for hydroxychloroquine so that they can have it available for themselves and their families suggests to me that the French trial is not the only reason to be hopeful about hydroxychloroquine's efficacy against COVID-19.
Sure, medical professionals are not necessarily any kind of super-rational savants, but I think it's unlikely that all of the medical professionals who are trying to hoard hydroxychloroquine are being irrational hysterics. They might be engaging in ethically questionable acts by hoarding hydroxychloroquine, but that doesn't mean that they don't know what they're doing from a self-preservation standpoint.
That said, it's not that I think they are necessarily trying to hoard hydroxychloroquine because they are convinced that it works - it's probably more that they want it on hand in case it turns out that it works. However, some of them may also have directly seen it help people, or may have heard or read about it helping.
Given that hydroxychloroquine has already been used for, as I understand it, weeks in treating people ill with COVID-19, I am actually surprised that there is not more anecdotal evidence about its efficacy. But I probably have just not been reading in the right places.
*Edit: I probably shouldn't have said "numerous stories", since "numerous" implies more than the number that I actually have seen.
The vast majority of medical professionals are not researchers, and are not trained in evaluating clinical trial data. They are notoriously poor at assessing such information.
You can be a remarkable clinician without ever interacting with the primary literature. These are simply different things.
> The vast majority of medical professionals are not researchers, and are not trained in evaluating clinical trial data. They are notoriously poor at assessing such information.
Citation, please. This is a very strong statement.
As someone who works in drug development, this is very accurate.
Understanding, designing and executing clinical trials is an entire specialty within medicine. Your average doctor will be familiar with the concepts, but not necessarily adept at evaluating a clinical trial.
> The vast majority of software professionals are not researchers, and are not trained in evaluating computer science research. They are notoriously poor at assessing such information.
You absolutely cannot be a remarkable clinician without engaging primary literature. Not sure where that claim comes from. Physicians need to know how to interpret and criticize findings from clinical trials to incorporate into their practice and communicate with patients. Plenty get away without doing that, but they are not counted among the best of us.
Recently I learned you can be a doctor without getting a baccalaureate.
It may not still be a thing, but I happened to run across the factoid while reading the wikipedia page of a middle-aged and famous doctor that just got the coronavirus.
I feel like they'd start doing that even if they thought the chances were ~10% of it working. Its relatively inexpensive and they know its availability would drop dramatically as soon as more data is available.
> The numerous* stories that I have read recently about medical professionals writing themselves prescriptions for hydroxychloroquine
A doctor friend of mine showed me a Facebook group consisting entirely of prepper medical professionals trying to decide whether or not to buy guns (in Australia!) for self-defense.
Medical school tends to select for a personality type that is, shall we say, somewhat obsessive?
The doctors are likely doing the intelligent thing, not necessarily hoarding. They should know that antivirals tend to work only at disease onset or as preventives. The production of these drugs can be ramped up very quickly so the amount these doctors took from the supply should be immaterial - esp. in the US where testing is limited to later stage patients when antivirals are less likely to help.
Sure, medical professionals are not necessarily any kind of super-rational savants, but I think it's unlikely that all of the medical professionals who are trying to hoard hydroxychloroquine are being irrational hysterics. They might be engaging in ethically questionable acts by hoarding hydroxychloroquine, but that doesn't mean that they don't know what they're doing from a self-preservation standpoint.
That said, it's not that I think they are necessarily trying to hoard hydroxychloroquine because they are convinced that it works - it's probably more that they want it on hand in case it turns out that it works. However, some of them may also have directly seen it help people, or may have heard or read about it helping.
Given that hydroxychloroquine has already been used for, as I understand it, weeks in treating people ill with COVID-19, I am actually surprised that there is not more anecdotal evidence about its efficacy. But I probably have just not been reading in the right places.
*Edit: I probably shouldn't have said "numerous stories", since "numerous" implies more than the number that I actually have seen.