You write, "HCQ+ Never Could deliver on its promise...a combination of very poor studies...and no biochemical chance of success."

This is false. Totally false. The paper you linked to examined hydroxychloroquine as the only drug used (which is HCQ, not HCQ+), when it has to be combined with zinc and azithromycin. It also referred to the flawed studies using only hydroxychloroquine and NEVER mentioned HCQ+.

Why does hydroxychloroquine have to be used with zinc and azithromycin? As Dr. Zekenko AND Dr. Risch AND Dr. Fareed have pointed out, hydroxychloroquine is the agent which introduces zinc into the SARS-CoV-2 virus. So when you say it had no biomechanical chance of success, you made a false statement.

Again, the studies were not poor. For the millionth time, your hero the Great Fauchino had a personal medical philosophy of not accepting observational trials as valid, so that's where you're getting the studies were "poor."

As to Paxlovid, don't you find it odd - very odd - that RCTs were IMMEDIATELY conducted on vulnerable-aged patients within five days of symptom onset? Why? Because, although not identical, Paxlovid was designed to mimic HCQ+ and by this time Pfizer KNEW how HCQ+ was supposed to be used. (You probably don't remember but you once linked to an "expert" who pooh-poohed the five-day window, saying if HCQ+ worked within five days it should have worked after that....that opinion didn't age well.)

While I appreciate you engaging me in this conversation, every point and link you've brought out is just wrong and I've explained why. I realize you may be incredulous that your hero the Great Fauchino, the FDA and most of the medical establishment got this wrong...but they unfortunately did.