I don't personally have a dog in this fight, really this is the first time that I've read up on this.
I think you boil it down properly in your A and B. The AMA notes that not enough research has been done for the cocktail during phase 1, so we have a lack of data to show the benefit (A). There is an abundance of research for Phase 2 and 3 patients, mostly based on data from hospitals and not clinical trials, which do bring about some warning signs for use in Phase 2 and 3 (B). We have to remember that those reports can differ as shown in two of the articles we read, and that there was no clearly defined rhyme or reason to the usage; as such, the data can be flawed in ways that we don't know since we aren't looking at raw data.
I'm not sure that Trump's doctors at Walter Reed would have been able to use it as a treatment because at the time OLDU approval had been rescinded, so I'm not sure how much weight to lend that.
If I could, I would ask the ID doctor which studies debunk it in Phase 1, since the AMA seems to think that there has not been enough research into the efficacy of the treatment. Obviously the only one that I read was the previously linked study that was actually for using it as a treatment. I would hope as an ID that he has read far more than me. 😁 I would also defer to his medical opinion if I were his patient. I trust in my doctors, because I know they usually want to keep me alive.
My biggest issue with this is that the waters have been made murky because some people are advocating for Phase 1 use, and other people are railing against that because of failures noted in Phase 2 and 3 studies, no one seems to be able to logically separate this out when they discuss it. Jimbasil linked to a drugs.com article in the other thread that had been "updated" on 14 December but still referenced a rescinded study from the NEJM. This is bad information that people are taking to heart. That is part of the problem. The other part of the problem is that people take this information to heart and then believe that they are more informed than doctors, who I hope are reading more than one study like me, and not listening to drugs.com to make their decisions. This discussion should never have become political, with people taking sides, the only thought someone who is not a doctor like me should have is, I hope my doctor is reading up on this and makes the best decision possible for me if I get COVID.
I don't mind having a discussion with someone about it, but bring information to the table like you did, and have an open mind about it. Too often this board devolves into closed minded yelling matches where no one posts anything but opinion pieces from their favorite partisan sites. And that goes for both sides, so I appreciate your attempts to suck people into real conversations on topics. I'm normally a lurker who reads a lot and posts not as often because I'm usually to busy to continue a conversation.