The problem is that the "evidence" is that while HCQ is a useful drug that is effective against malaria and helpful with Lupus, it hasn't been shown in scientific studies to be effective again COVID-19, and there really hasn't been much in the way of scientific studies on that topic.
It's been approved for treating Malaria and Lupus, but it's not been approved, nor shown to be effective against COVID-19. The only really positive study from France was based upon only 80 cases, and while only 1 person died in that study, that's all the deaths that we might expect to see if *no treatment at all* were offered to those same 80 individuals. Most of them were "mild" cases which is in fact typical and such cases don't even require hospitalization or anything external to "cure" the virus.
There's a big difference between believing that a particular drug "should" be available to be tried if the patient so chooses, and knowing with scientific certainly that it's going to make someone better. The problem is that there isn't sufficient evidence yet to "know" it's going to do anything.
I think you have that backwards. The virus spreads fear, anxiety, distress and even death. A *demonstrate cure* would counterbalance that kind of reaction. Unfortunately a "hypothetical" cure isn't going to have that same ability or that same effect. That's where we are right now. It's nobody's fault, it's just where things stand right now.
We also run the risk of creating a "false positive" narrative that causes people to have a sense of 'false hope/belief' that there's a cure out there so they act with less caution, only to get themselves infected and they die as a result of a 'false hope/belief'.
I'd be *thrilled* if a dozen or so studies all supported the belief that *any* treatment was effective, but unfortunately nothing like that currently exists.
Melatonin? Stem cells? Researchers step up with unconventional approaches to COVID-19
Even Melatonin has been floated as having positive effects, but again, there's simply no strong 'scientific evidence" to suggest it's an actual "cure" for COVID-19.
I think your basic argument cuts both ways. A false positive is actually more dangerous however because it may cause people to act less responsibly and lead to more deaths. A false negative might unnecessarily prolong fear, but it's not likely to increase the body count. That's probably why most medical professionals are "cautious" about claiming that A) there is any "cure' at all right now, or B) that HCQ is such a cure. There just isn't sufficient scientific evidence to support that assertion, and at least some evidence to refute it.
It's worth *knowing* that it *might* be effective, and offering the individual the *option* to help "test" it's effectiveness, but it's premature to suggest it's a 'done deal'.