I have over the past 23 months of having sifted "8M COVID-19 stories" in the naked city, more than necessary to formulate a scientific opinion of least cost/benefit pharmaceutical intervention that's "right for me." (boilerplate "consumer-patient" compliance lit)

"Low-tech" (not jeebus) or nothing.

My path is not your path. I've detected a pattern in mechanism of action (MOA) disclaimers in academic "discussions" or legal notes found in every.single. advertisement: "common adverse reaction" notices; but you (pl.) have to gather the bread crumbs in order to find a reasonable "pathway" to your health care objective d/b/a "quality of life"... or death.

I've been living on the sidelines with one of the most mysterious autoimmune diseases on the planet (MS) for 24 years, thereby being "uniquely positioned"--as the PR industry is wont to say--to evaluate prospective claims, statistical descriptions of, and GAPS in clinical and palliative outcomes, published by industry incumbents and "market entrants" in "my space" of "standard of care". Reasonable expectation of toxicity ("secondary conditions") arising from contraindicated combinations of "immunomodulating" drugs has been an turnkey risk criterion in my book since Day1 diagnosis for myself as well as propounded by intimate knowledge of deleterious effects of disease "modifying treatments" prescribe to my parents (RIP) that are routinely prescribed to similarly situated patients.

More significant, only this last month, have I acquired (1) relevant, personal experience with an experimental medication "approved" by the FDA that adversely reacted with another medication whose efficacy is established and (2) access to proprietary focus group session recordings, prepared by a PR firm for a couple of high-profile pharmaceutical manufacturers soliciting cancer and MS endorsements from "health care provider" and patient respondents to "language" prompts. So.

You do you.