Follow Which Science?

It seems that the situation is worse than I thought as, we not only have politicians choosing which 'scientific results' they prefer to follow, we have dubious bodies influencing bona fide organisations/ journals  (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/03/covid-19-surgisphere-who-world-health-organization-hydroxychloroquine). A tiny (with possibly as few as 3 employees), little-known US body called 'Surgisphere' is reported to have changed policy to the Covid-19 pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO) and resulted in publications in Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine. This is in spite of the body reportedly employing a science fiction aficionado and an adult hostess as 'key' operatives. Their claim was that they had extracted and analysed a substantial body of data from hospitals, around the world, on people who had been both infected with the virus and treated with the anti-malarial hydroxychloroquine. It appeared from their 'review' that hydroxychloroquine was linked to a high incidence of heart disease and, on this basis, the WHO curtailed further studies on the compound. The journals carried articles partially authored by the head of Surgisphere. Doubts have since been raised about a) the accuracy of the data base and b) the appropriateness of the analysis (the journals now have disclaimers). I appreciate that these are difficult times (people are desperate for information on Sars CoV-2 and its potential treatment) but I do think that scientists need to be very careful about the sources that they use (as they say, 'beware of Greeks baring gifts'). At the very least, it will add fuel to conspiracy theories (especially in the White House?).