ld be effective. And there's some thinking, again anecdotal, it's not proven, that it might be the most effective if you give it to them early on in the symptoms and then they won't progress to needing a ventilator. So that's unproven, but you know, anecdotally that looks to be the case.

And so I asked myself, is that the way we're testing it? So we know that there are a number of trials going on, different drug trials. But are we trialing hydroxychloroquine for people who are just getting symptoms, or are we only testing it for people who are already in bad shape where there's some indication it could help but not nearly as much?

Now again, if this were a few weeks ago I would have said well, obviously we're doing both. Duh. You know, if you're doing multiple drug trials you're gonna do the obvious ones. So one trial where you give it to them early, one trial where they get it later. But you're gonna try both of those things. However, having seen the massive incompetence from our professionals so far, here I'm talking about the World Health Organization, the CDC, our Surgeon General telling us that masks are not a good idea when you knew they were. So if we'd not just witnessed obvious and unambiguous massive lying and incompetence, I would have said well, you can count on the fact that they're doing the right kind of drug trial. Right? But as of today I'm not so sure.

So this is something I would like a fact check on. Ideally the task force would tell us today, is there a trial of the hydroxychloroquine that does not focus on people who are already bad off? Is there any trial of the people who are taking it early? I don't need results yet, although I would think we might even have some preliminary results. But are we not even testing that? Because there's part of me that's a little bit worried that we're not even fricking testing it. And only because of the massive incompetence I've seen so far. Otherwise I wouldn't even question that. So I'd like an answer on that today.

Oh, and in my tweet I said something that is medically probably a terrible idea, which is that maybe people should be taking the azithromycin and the hydroxychloroquine before they have symptoms. But somebody in the comments pointed out that if you're taking an antibiotic, the azithromycin part, you might just cause the virus to become resistant. So it probably doesn't make sense to take an antibiotic until you actually have symptoms. But it might make sense, and again this is a question not a statement, to take the hydroxychloroquine ahead of any symptoms because that one's not an antibiotic per se.

All right. So there are two problems with the pandemic models that I can see. Number one, I mentioned last night in Periscope, if you're throwing the New York data in with the rest of the country data and then averaging it, you get an average that doesn't mean anything because it's like averaging an apple and an orange. So really you should look at New York by itself as if it's the only country and the rest of the country, because the rest of the country is not nearly as bad off. So if you're projecting what's going to happen by throwing New York into the mix, it's probab