I can't believe there are still people who doesn't think it works, I am living proof at 83 that it does.
I am glad you recovered but N=1. In some cases you can draw conclusions with an N of 1 but in this case you can't. When you got sick there were 4 possible outcomes and now that you recovered thank god there are only 2. The null hypothesis is that the HCQ did not have an affect and you would have recovered with the standard treatment. The alternative hypothesis is that the HCQ aided your recovery. In this case you cant serve as your own control and you need more statistical power to generalize findings to a larger population
Randomized Control trials allow for a more systematic evaluation of the efficacy of HCQ by adding multiple treatment conditions plus control conditions. They add statistical power by adding data points. Usually you are looking for at least 500 participants for a RCT to gain sufficient statistical power. I have read 4 different studies. One from Brazil, One from Vanderbilt Medical Center, One from Spain and One from the UK. Based on the results from those studies it is pretty clear that there is no difference in outcomes between the standard care and the standard care + HCQ.