ego: I did think you were calling for public release of treatments and outcomes, so I apologize for that misunderstanding.
But I am sure the disclosure of treatments and outcomes to the treating physicians is already occurring through the CDC. That is, whenever a hospital has a suspected Ebola case they must call the CDC. If they actually do have a case, then the treating physicians and the CDC docs discuss what needs to be done to manage the patient and that will include possible experimental therapies. TKM-Ebola and its successes are not secret from the people making the choice of what experimental therapy to use.
What is working against TKM-Ebola is its novelty, its clinical hold after the SAD, and the initial side effects experienced by Sacra and perhaps others. Except for Fauci none of the docs we've seen on tv are likely to know much about RNAi whereas they are all very familiar with monoclonal antibodies and nucleoside analog antivirals. Given they will be treating a disease with which they are unfamiliar, they are probably going to pick a drug type that is familiar just to keep the unknowns to a minimum. The clinical hold and side effects, even if they were in the end "well-tolerated," are also going to be off-putting to docs. The "first, do no harm" mantra is really part of MD thinking.
It is interesting that the government has clearly pushed to get more ZMapp made even though it would be hard to use in Africa logistically and there are reports of side effects with its use. In at least one case (Brantly?) it was described as an anaphylactic reaction, which is a scary thing as side effects go. But ZMapp is still being favored and I think the only explanation is that it is in a category of drugs with which docs are familiar and its mechanism of action is something all docs understand. Most of them don't understand TKM-Ebola.