You claimed it was a proven drug that had been around for years. I countered that that was true and wasn't really a point of contention. Instead the argument was that it had not been used to treat COVID19 (not surprising since it's a new virus) and thus there haven't been any studies of how effective it is or whether it is worth the potential side effects. This is basic medical science. It was also touted at points as a preventative measure which your own text above contradicts. If the drug helps a very sick person who doesn't have a lot of time left that's great. And that's something that should be discussed between that person's doctor, the patient, and their loved ones. But advocating that usage on a massive scale without any kind of testing runs counter to just about all medical science procedure. Never mind that I can just as easily find you instances and studies where the drug did not help at all. If they develop a vaccine for COVID19 and it works on the first person or group of persons they try it on would you declare that safe for everyone? Of course not.

It's weird b/c when it comes to a viewpoint you disagree with like masks you want full on studies showing without a shadow of a doubt that the masks work. But then when it comes to using a drug that has not been tested or approved as a treatment you don't want any kind of studies and are perfectly happy accepting anecdotal evidence as gospel. At least you're consistent with your conspiracy theories though I guess.