Regarding the first two, I can’t say a thing. However, Christian Drosten addressed the Chloroquine paper and named some very important facts about the study which make him very cautious about the results.
The trial was not fully randomised and not double-blind. This probably lead (FTR, likely involuntarily!) to a biased sample considering age and, more importantly, STAGE OF THE INFECTION (which is not clearly stated, but as as specialist for SARS, he can deduce from the facts given). The treated group was older and in a later stage of infection. While this seems to be even supporting the efficacy of the drug, it probably does not because of the way they tested for the efficacy: they used throat swaps to measure the virus concentration instead of lung expectorant test. Drosten said in relation to their own studies (on the Munich cluster, published here ) that they have reason to believe that the virus replication is strongest in the throats during the early stages. Later stages do so in the lung. Combined with other information given in the study and about chloroquine, he is very cautious about the results.
ETA days later:
I frigging forgot the link to the Munich cluster study.
Added.
