Speaker 1: Hi everyone, I'm Katie Curic and welcome to Next Question.
Speaker 1: For a special edition of Next Question, I had a
Speaker 1: wonderful conversation with Dr Anthony Faucci. Dr Faucci, how are
Speaker 1: you fine? Thank you? How are you? This has been
Speaker 1: an unprecedented time in our nation's history. The country, and
Speaker 1: in fact the world, was already losing faith in science.
Speaker 1: But Dr Faucci has been a much needed bomb, a
Speaker 1: sav of sorts for our wounded spirit, and he has
Speaker 1: helped emphasize the importance of science and facts. The nation's
Speaker 1: top infectious disease expert has also become something of a celebrity.
Speaker 1: You can buy Dr Fauci mugs, t shirt, socks, bobble heads,
Speaker 1: you name it. Brad Pitt even landed an Emmy nomination
Speaker 1: for playing him on SNL. And when I hear things
Speaker 1: like the virus can be cured if everyone takes the
Speaker 1: tide Pod challenge, I'll be there to say please don't.
Speaker 1: So far, the coronavirus has infected more than six million
Speaker 1: Americans and killed one hundred and eighty seven thousand, and
Speaker 1: As we head into the fall, health officials are bracing
Speaker 1: to battle what could be in fact a twin demic
Speaker 1: as the virus outbreak collides with blue season. I spoke
Speaker 1: with Dr Fauci about how we can best protect ourselves,
Speaker 1: where we are in the race to find a vaccine,
Speaker 1: what you should know about sending your kids to school,
Speaker 1: and whether the world has entered a pandemic era. But
Speaker 1: first he explained why our behavior through Labor Day weekend
Speaker 1: could have a real impact on how the coronavirus spreads
Speaker 1: throughout the next few months. We're approaching Labor Day, and
Speaker 1: I know you've urged people to continue to exercise caution
Speaker 1: and not to have sort of pandemic fatigue. We saw
Speaker 1: surge after Memorial Day and the Fourth of July holiday weekends.
Speaker 1: But you've also said, Dr Vauchi, the way we handle
Speaker 1: Labor Day will determine what the virus does over the
Speaker 1: fall months. What exactly did you mean by that? When
Speaker 1: you go into the fall, as the weather starts to
Speaker 1: chill and more people will be spending indoors, then that
Speaker 1: is a perfect setup for a resurgence of cases. The
Speaker 1: point that I was making, Katie is that right now
Speaker 1: we are at a baseline that in my mind is
Speaker 1: unacceptably high, where at about forty cases per day. If
Speaker 1: you look at some of the European countries and even
Speaker 1: some states and cities in the United States, when you
Speaker 1: peaked up and you come down to a very low baseline,
Speaker 1: when you get individual cases, you can much better control
Speaker 1: them then when you have twenty cases. So the point
Speaker 1: I was making about Labor Day is that if we
Speaker 1: can prevent the surge of Labor Day and keep the
Speaker 1: cases coming down and down, which if you look at
Speaker 1: the map of the country, for the most part, we've
Speaker 1: got hit badly, and then we turned it around. We
Speaker 1: got hit badly, and then the most recent one as
Speaker 1: you well know, we're in the southern states of Florida, Texas, California,
Speaker 1: and Arizona. We've now turned that around. What we do
Speaker 1: not need is another surge. So if we can get
Speaker 1: through the Labor Day weekend and not be up, but
Speaker 1: actually continue to go down, that would be momentum as
Speaker 1: we get into the full of going in the right direction.
Speaker 1: So that's really what I meant by that statement. And
Speaker 1: so you were worried that if people get complacent that
Speaker 1: the numbers will go up. Is that what happened in Europe,
Speaker 1: Dr Fauci, because they're reporting the highest numbers or the
Speaker 1: highest number of cases they've seen since March. Right, Yeah,
Speaker 1: that's true. And what happened is that they actually, interestingly,
Speaker 1: did a really good job of locking down much more
Speaker 1: thoroughly actually than we did, which may be the reason
Speaker 1: why when they went down to a baseline, they were
Speaker 1: way lower than we were. What we have to worry
Speaker 1: about and guard against is what's happening right now in
Speaker 1: some countries in Europe, and that is, you know, shut
Speaker 1: down fatigue. They just felt they were shut down so
Speaker 1: long that instead of prudently and carefully trying to open
Speaker 1: up their economy, they did what many of us in
Speaker 1: the United States did when you looked at the pictures
Speaker 1: of people crowding around bars, they went to the other extreme. So,
Speaker 1: getting back to what you just asked me a little
Speaker 1: while ago about the Labor Day weekend, we don't want
Speaker 1: people to lock themselves in a closet for Labor Day
Speaker 1: weekend at all. You want to get outside. You can
Speaker 1: have fun as long as you do some fundamental public
Speaker 1: health principles. Wearing a mask, physical distance, avoid crowd, and
Speaker 1: for goodness sakes, anything that you could possibly do outside
Speaker 1: as opposed to inside keep it outside. If you do that,
Speaker 1: we know from experience that you won't see surges, you
Speaker 1: will be able to contain any outbreak. The CDC has
Speaker 1: asked states to prepare for a coronavirus vaccine to be
Speaker 1: ready to distribute by November, and I'm wondering, Dr Faucer,
Speaker 1: are you concerned about fast tracking a vaccine before clinical
Speaker 1: trials are completed. I wouldn't say I'm concerned. I'm I'm
Speaker 1: I'm I'm fairly certain that that's not going to happen,
Speaker 1: because we know I mean, and I've made this statement,
Speaker 1: Katie multiple times over the months, that it is likely
Speaker 1: that we will know if we have a safe and
Speaker 1: effective vaccine by the end of this coundar year November
Speaker 1: or December, so that we could have vaccine doses by
Speaker 1: the end, and as we go into one, it is
Speaker 1: conceivable that we may do it earlier. I mean, there's
Speaker 1: no you can't rule that out, because if you have
Speaker 1: a lot of infections within an area where they're actually
Speaker 1: testing the vaccine, you could get an answer earlier than
Speaker 1: November and December. So I'm not ruling out the possibility
Speaker 1: that we might know at the end of October. But
Speaker 1: there's no guarantee. In fact, if I would predict, I
Speaker 1: would say that that is unlikely. It's not impossible, but unlikely.
Speaker 1: So the CDC saying they're preparing for that eventuality, I
Speaker 1: don't think that should be interpreted that anything is going
Speaker 1: to be rushed. I think it should be interpreted that
Speaker 1: just in case we're lucky enough to get an early answer,
Speaker 1: we want to be ready for it. That's really what
Speaker 1: they meant, even if it indicates so Dr Fauci, it
Speaker 1: might be effective. I mean, there's a reason there's a
Speaker 1: phase one, two, and three clinical trial right our process,
Speaker 1: and and shouldn't all those phases be completed? I mean,
Speaker 1: do you think it's okay to put a drug on
Speaker 1: the marketplace of phase three clinical trials have not been
Speaker 1: not taken place? Well, you know, there is a little
Speaker 1: bit of a nuance and a subtlety there that I
Speaker 1: think people need to understand. First of all, I completely
Speaker 1: agree with you, and I'll confirm what I've said before.
Speaker 1: I will not be satisfied until our vaccine that we
Speaker 1: allow to be distributed among the American public has to
Speaker 1: be both safe and effective. Both safe and effective, but
Speaker 1: A potential scenario would be is that as you're testing
Speaker 1: the vaccine, we have a data and safety Monitoring board,
Speaker 1: which is an independent board of people who incommittently look
Speaker 1: at the data to see if it is too bad
Speaker 1: or too good. Namely, you might want to interrupt the
Speaker 1: trial before you finished the actual um observation over the
Speaker 1: predetermined time. So what could happen is that you look
Speaker 1: at the data and the independent group may say, you know,
Speaker 1: we have enough data to know that this is actually
Speaker 1: an effective vaccine and it looks pretty safe, so let's
Speaker 1: get it to the American people by mechanism called by
Speaker 1: an emergency use authorization. That doesn't mean you stop the trial.
Speaker 1: It means that you could make the vaccine available to
Speaker 1: certain people who could benefit from it the most, like
Speaker 1: first line responders or healthcare workers or people at the
Speaker 1: same time as you're gathering additional safety information. So you
Speaker 1: don't have to call the trial off. But that would
Speaker 1: be a very special situation. I'd want to make sure
Speaker 1: that when that decision is made, it's made really on
Speaker 1: the basis of efficacy. A lot of people say they
Speaker 1: would not take the vaccine um that that they just
Speaker 1: don't feel comfortable, and I'm curious would you take it?
Speaker 1: And what about the people who say they're not interested
Speaker 1: in taking it? And are you worried this is going
Speaker 1: to fuel the anti vax movement? Dr Kalki. Okay, so
Speaker 1: let's start off with your first question, Katie, if if
Speaker 1: if the vaccine, which in my mind, it would have
Speaker 1: to be the following if we if we allow it
Speaker 1: to be given to the American public, it would have
Speaker 1: to be proven and scientifically sound study to be both
Speaker 1: safe and effective. If that occurs, and I'm cautiously optimistic
Speaker 1: that it will, I would readily take the vacccine, and
Speaker 1: I would recommend that my family takes the vaccine. The
Speaker 1: second question that you have is am I concerned about
Speaker 1: people not wanting to take the vaccine? I am, because
Speaker 1: you know there is an underlying current in this country
Speaker 1: that goes back to measles and other vaccines that people
Speaker 1: are skeptical about taking a vaccine. And I think the
Speaker 1: best way to get around that is to do good
Speaker 1: community outreach, be very transparent about the data, Let all
Speaker 1: the decision making process be open and easily discussed, so
Speaker 1: people can see that when we say it's safe and effective.
Speaker 1: It really is safe and effective. And what are you
Speaker 1: hearing about it? Dr Fauci. Obviously you're talking to some
Speaker 1: of these companies. Are you hearing that it's it's very promising?
Speaker 1: Are you hearing that it's going to work on everyone?
Speaker 1: Will there have to be a booster shot? Can you
Speaker 1: give us some insight into those questions? Yeah? No, Well
Speaker 1: I'm very heavily involved in that, Katie, because I mean,
Speaker 1: at least a couple of the vaccines, we were very
Speaker 1: much involved in developing and implementing the clinical trial. So
Speaker 1: if you, for example, the trials that are in phase
Speaker 1: three now, particularly the MODERNA trial and the trial from
Speaker 1: Fiser and to some extent the trial from from a
Speaker 1: Z that when you look at the phase one trial, now,
Speaker 1: phase one is a relatively small number of people. That's
Speaker 1: the reason why, as you said, correctly, you want to
Speaker 1: go to phase two and phase three. But in the
Speaker 1: phase one trial, I looked at the data very carefully,
Speaker 1: and it's published now in the medical literature that the
Speaker 1: induction of a response in the volunteers was really quite promising.
Speaker 1: It was a robust response, that it was at least
Speaker 1: as good or even better than the kind of response
Speaker 1: you get from natural infection, and one of the tenants
Speaker 1: of vaccine development is that you'd like to do as
Speaker 1: well as natural infection does in inducing a protective response. Still,
Speaker 1: at least with that limited amount of data, I would
Speaker 1: say that I'm cautiously optimistic that we're on a good
Speaker 1: path to getting to where we want to be. We'll
Speaker 1: have more with Dr Anthony Fauci right after this. You know,
Speaker 1: it seems that people of color are not being uh shown,
Speaker 1: are not being represented in the current US vaccine trials
Speaker 1: Black and Latino people, despite the fact that those communities,
Speaker 1: as you well know, Dr Fauci, have been hardest hit
Speaker 1: by this virus. Is there any way to remedy that
Speaker 1: late in the process. It's not too late. The trials
Speaker 1: are more than half enrolled. We know that they're close
Speaker 1: to twenty thousand out of the thirty thousand individuals in
Speaker 1: the trials. You know, for goodness sakes and the Lord
Speaker 1: knows that we're trying, we really do want to get
Speaker 1: African Americans and Latin X and other minorities in the trial.
Speaker 1: We're doing better with Latino X than we all with
Speaker 1: African Americans. I still want to get the percentage in
Speaker 1: the trial of African Americans higher than it is right now.
Speaker 1: You know, there's understandable skepticism on the part of that
Speaker 1: demographic group when it comes to vaccines. They have not
Speaker 1: historically been treated well by government research endeavors. We know
Speaker 1: that that's a sad part of our history. We have
Speaker 1: to get over that, and that's the reason why we're
Speaker 1: employing every manner of community outreach to get the African
Speaker 1: American population to appreciate that they need to get vaccinated
Speaker 1: for precisely the reasons you just mentioned. A. They have
Speaker 1: a greater chance of getting infected by the basis of
Speaker 1: the jobs that they find themselves in. It's much less
Speaker 1: likely they're going to be sitting in front of a computer.
Speaker 1: They likely will be in first line jobs where they're
Speaker 1: in physical contact with people. So they have a risk
Speaker 1: that's greater than the general population of getting infected. And importantly,
Speaker 1: when they do get infected, they have the underlying conditions
Speaker 1: to a greater extent than the rest of the population,
Speaker 1: which makes it more likely that they will have a
Speaker 1: severe outcome of infection, and that's hypertension, obesity, diabetes, chronic
Speaker 1: renal disease, chronic lung disease. It's very unfortunate. Those are
Speaker 1: social determinants of health that are decades in the making.
Speaker 1: We can't do anything about that. But what we can
Speaker 1: do apropos of what you just asked, is we can
Speaker 1: get them vaccinated to prevent that from happening to them.
Speaker 1: Stand Up to Cancer, which I founded twelve years ago,
Speaker 1: has a whole new health equity initiative where we're trying
Speaker 1: to get more people of color involved in clinical cancer
Speaker 1: clinical trials. And I think it's the medical community really
Speaker 1: is has just woken up, I think, to this disparity
Speaker 1: and how critically it important it is to have representation
Speaker 1: in these clinical trials. So if we can just make
Speaker 1: sure that people, let you know, people of color, know
Speaker 1: that these trials are happening and encourage them to participate,
Speaker 1: that would be a really positive thing for for everyone.
Speaker 1: Are you concerned that the US has decided not to
Speaker 1: not to cooperate with the WHO to equitably distribute this vaccine? Uh?
Speaker 1: You know, I mean, obviously I have been a proponent
Speaker 1: for decades of equitable distribution of vaccine. I think that
Speaker 1: is going to happen, and in fact, we will almost certainly, Katie,
Speaker 1: participate in that distribution to other countries, even though it
Speaker 1: isn't part of the official WHO effort, because if you
Speaker 1: look at the dosage is that we have pre purchased,
Speaker 1: it goes well beyond the number required for the United States.
Speaker 1: So the end of the day, what's going to functionally
Speaker 1: happen anyway, is that we're going to be participating in
Speaker 1: that type of distribution. You know, this has been such
Speaker 1: a stressful time, Dr Fauci. I know you've you've addressed
Speaker 1: this in other interviews for parents and for students, whether
Speaker 1: they're in kindergarten or headed off to college. And I
Speaker 1: know that your alma mater, Holy Cross, decided to go
Speaker 1: entirely online after previously creating an in person back to
Speaker 1: school plan, And I'm just curious, did you help advise
Speaker 1: the university and is that an indicator in your mind
Speaker 1: that other colleges and university should follow their lead. You
Speaker 1: know it's going to be but that's a great question,
Speaker 1: and it's really going to be different, and from university
Speaker 1: to university, depending upon the capability of a particularly institution
Speaker 1: to be able to handle students who ultimately get infected. So,
Speaker 1: for example, several of the universities, some of which I've
Speaker 1: actually had the opportunity to be an informal adviser, to
Speaker 1: have a system where they essentially test everybody before they
Speaker 1: come in. Then they do intermittent surveillance testing. The critical
Speaker 1: issue that we're emphasizing now that some universities have done it,
Speaker 1: not optimally and not I don't mean to blame them,
Speaker 1: but now we know what to do is that when
Speaker 1: the students at the university level get infected, you don't
Speaker 1: want to send them home, because when you send them home,
Speaker 1: they essentially go into a house, infect their family, go
Speaker 1: and infect their community. Because university students, as we all know,
Speaker 1: come from all different parts of the country. So if
Speaker 1: you bring them in they get infected, then you send
Speaker 1: them home, you're essentially spreading it. So what many of
Speaker 1: the universities they're doing now are providing for places either
Speaker 1: a dorm, an entire dorm, or a couple of fours
Speaker 1: for a dorm, so that when a student gets infected,
Speaker 1: you could safely and comfortably sequester them from the rest
Speaker 1: of the student body without necessarily sending them home. I mean,
Speaker 1: I just had a conversation a little while ago as
Speaker 1: did Dr Burghs with Tommy Thompson, who's the president of
Speaker 1: the University of Wisconsin and exactly my former boss for
Speaker 1: several years. And what Tommy has done is a really
Speaker 1: very interesting way of testing the students, having surveillance and
Speaker 1: if you get infected, putting them in a sequested way
Speaker 1: where you don't have to send them home. Many of
Speaker 1: the colleges are doing that. That's interesting. So the latter
Speaker 1: thing is actually as important as the testing protocol itself,
Speaker 1: to make sure you have a place to put infected
Speaker 1: students where they're not going to affect other students or
Speaker 1: return to their homes. That's exactly correct, and I think
Speaker 1: that's a really important point. You know, when it comes
Speaker 1: to K through twelve, Dr Fauci, it seems like there
Speaker 1: aren't clear procedures across the board for for returning to
Speaker 1: in person learning. And I just feel like through this
Speaker 1: whole pandemic there's been it's been so inconsistent, and I
Speaker 1: realized certain situations call for different measures, but without kind
Speaker 1: of these broad guidelines, it seems like that could be
Speaker 1: a recipe for disaster. No, uh, indeed, So let's try
Speaker 1: and see if you and I can be some consistent
Speaker 1: here and see if we could help out. So I
Speaker 1: think one of the reasons for this perception of inconsistency,
Speaker 1: if not reality of inconsistency, is that we live in
Speaker 1: a really big country and it's very heater a genious
Speaker 1: with regard to the level of infection activity. If you
Speaker 1: look at the map, we have these heat maps Katie,
Speaker 1: which you know, light up of its red, it's green,
Speaker 1: it's yellow. So if you're in a part of the
Speaker 1: country where you're what we call a green zone, which
Speaker 1: means the level of infection is really quite low, you
Speaker 1: can proceed with relative impunity and in person teaching in
Speaker 1: the elementary and middle schools with the children. You have
Speaker 1: to have a plan of what you're going to do
Speaker 1: when children get infected, because no matter where you are,
Speaker 1: they are going to get infected. So you don't want
Speaker 1: to open up and then have to close right down.
Speaker 1: You want to have a plan. When you get into
Speaker 1: the yellow zone, it becomes a little bit more problematic,
Speaker 1: which means that you may have to do some mitigation.
Speaker 1: You might have to alternate morning afternoon every other day,
Speaker 1: part online, part in person. When you get to a
Speaker 1: red zone, then that becomes really problematic for a number
Speaker 1: of reasons. The level of infection may be so high
Speaker 1: in the community that it would really be imprudent to
Speaker 1: just say, Okay, everybody go back to school. And what
Speaker 1: we're seeing, Katie is something really interesting is that the
Speaker 1: parents and the teachers are really talking with their feet.
Speaker 1: They're not showing up. They're saying, you know, I don't
Speaker 1: really want to go in to a school in a
Speaker 1: red zone. When I'm a teacher that might have an
Speaker 1: underlying condition, I'll do it by virtual, but I don't
Speaker 1: really want to come in. And that's what's actually happening.
Speaker 1: You can understand that though, right Dr Fauci, I totally
Speaker 1: empathize with them doing that. I mean, there's no doubt
Speaker 1: about that. You really got to respect teachers who are
Speaker 1: either in a certain age group or who have an
Speaker 1: underlying condition that would put them at risk if you
Speaker 1: want them to go to to teach in person in
Speaker 1: a place where you have a very high level of
Speaker 1: infection in that particular community, that is understandable. We'll have
Speaker 1: more with Dr Anthony Fauci right after this. So when
Speaker 1: it comes to testing, and I'm just curious, Dr Fauci.
Speaker 1: A lot of my followers and I wondered this as well.
Speaker 1: If if a lot of people are asymptomatic, what about
Speaker 1: does it make sense to take people's temperatures because they
Speaker 1: could be without a temperature right if there without a fever,
Speaker 1: if there is symptomatic. Well, this may have some people
Speaker 1: disagree with me, but I do not put much uh
Speaker 1: stock in temperature taking. I would much rather when someone
Speaker 1: walks into a place, asked them a few key questions.
Speaker 1: In fact, right here at the NIH where I'm sitting
Speaker 1: right now, and out right across like a hundred feet
Speaker 1: from where we are right now is the NIH Clinical
Speaker 1: Center hospital where I work, we got rid of temperature
Speaker 1: taking going in right now. We just asked questions to
Speaker 1: screen people for the simple reason of what you exactly
Speaker 1: said about asymptomatic, but also the inaccuracy sometimes of temperature.
Speaker 1: Where you put something next to somebody's head, particularly if
Speaker 1: they come out from outside when it's nine three degrees outside,
Speaker 1: you can get some of those positives. The government, as
Speaker 1: you know, is sending out and estimated a hundred and
Speaker 1: fifty million Abbot laboratory rapid COVID nineteen tests. But FDA
Speaker 1: experts say in some cases the results may need to
Speaker 1: be confirmed with the second test, like a nasal swab.
Speaker 1: So um, can you just give us some insight about
Speaker 1: the effectiveness of these fast COVID tests. They're good, Yeah,
Speaker 1: they are good, Katie, I mean, and in fact, it
Speaker 1: is a nasal swab, the new Abbott bin ax that
Speaker 1: you're referring to, the hundred and fifty million you're taking
Speaker 1: nasal swab. You stick it in a little well, you
Speaker 1: put the card down and it reads out with the band.
Speaker 1: It's not only quite specific like nine seven point two,
Speaker 1: it's sensitive. That's pretty good. That's good. Why did the
Speaker 1: FDA say that? Then? Dr falc know, you know, I
Speaker 1: can't address that, kid, because I'm not certain what they
Speaker 1: said and why they said it, So I better not comment.
Speaker 1: I'll get myself in trouble. You don't want to do that.
Speaker 1: How worried are you, by the way, about flu season
Speaker 1: and about handling both a flu epidemic and continuing to
Speaker 1: deal with COVID nineteen. Well, what I'm hoping for is
Speaker 1: two things. One extension of what you and I spoke
Speaker 1: about a few minutes ago about as we get into
Speaker 1: the full do it on a down slope of COVID
Speaker 1: as opposed to an upstill. But the other thing that
Speaker 1: I'm hoping for is that the very public health measures
Speaker 1: that have been targeted to COVID nineteen, I'm gonna mitigate
Speaker 1: the impact of a flu season, namely masks, distancing, avoiding crowds,
Speaker 1: staying outside to the extent possible, particularly as we get
Speaker 1: into the winter, and washing hands. An interesting fact, Katie,
Speaker 1: is that Australia, which is as you know, in the
Speaker 1: Southern Hemisphere and has their flu season during our summer,
Speaker 1: have had a very very light flu season and the
Speaker 1: Australian health authorities, many of whom are my friends and colleagues.
Speaker 1: I feel that the reason for that is that they
Speaker 1: were practicing public health measures to avoid the coronavirus and
Speaker 1: they had the secondary effect you bet, you know, just
Speaker 1: an unintended positive consequence. But haven't said that. I just
Speaker 1: want to make sure we're not discouraging people from getting
Speaker 1: flu shots. Dr Fauci, absolutely not. As soon as the
Speaker 1: flu vaccines become available right here on campus, I will
Speaker 1: be first in line to get one, and I encourage
Speaker 1: everyone six months of age or over to get a
Speaker 1: flu vaccine. I'm gonna get mine what as soon as
Speaker 1: I can, to believe in next week. What do you
Speaker 1: think when you look back at this whole unique chapter
Speaker 1: in our history, Dr Fauci, what do you think, uh,
Speaker 1: the government could have done better? What were the lessons learned?
Speaker 1: And what might have done been done faster and better
Speaker 1: to really keep the number of cases and saddling mortalities down. Well,
Speaker 1: you know, having been in the position I'm in now
Speaker 1: for the last thirty six years as the head of
Speaker 1: this institute, I had the opportunity to be involved in
Speaker 1: a number of outbreaks, from HIV in the eighties, you know,
Speaker 1: to pandemic flu in two thousand nine, to Zeka to Ebola.
Speaker 1: You could always say you could have done something better.
Speaker 1: So I mean the blanket answer to your question, and
Speaker 1: I don't even I don't mean to be facetious at all.
Speaker 1: Hetty is is we could have done everything better, you know,
Speaker 1: a little bit better. You could always do better. I
Speaker 1: mean we have shut down earlier, well retrospectively, of course,
Speaker 1: But if you turn the clock back and say when
Speaker 1: we had one infection in the United States at the
Speaker 1: time that underneath the radar screen it was spreading when
Speaker 1: we had one infection, if we had called to shut
Speaker 1: the country down, what kind of response do you think
Speaker 1: we could have had? Oftenmalia would have been great. If
Speaker 1: we shut it down, then we likely would have avoided
Speaker 1: a lot of infections. But it wasn't really feasible to
Speaker 1: do it. So in some respects we could have done
Speaker 1: better by doing that, but in some respects it likely
Speaker 1: would not have been feasible. So I mean, as as
Speaker 1: a health official being involved in this, you know, I'm
Speaker 1: humble enough to say we could have done a lot
Speaker 1: of things better, but it's just the way it is.
Speaker 1: We need to look ahead and maybe not closing down
Speaker 1: the country, Dr Fauci. And and you know early on
Speaker 1: when there was one case, but certainly you know in March,
Speaker 1: when the case cases were climbing traumatically and the month
Speaker 1: of February, perhaps more could have been done as you
Speaker 1: watched it, Yeah, I mean that must have been really,
Speaker 1: really worrisome for you as a public health expert. Of
Speaker 1: course it was. I was pained. I was paining. I mean, also,
Speaker 1: we could have done much better with testing, Katie. I
Speaker 1: mean testing situation early on was not optimal. What happened there.
Speaker 1: Did the CDC just come out with a lousy test initially? Well,
Speaker 1: it was just one of those unfortunate glitches that was
Speaker 1: technical that led to the having to recall a number
Speaker 1: of cases and losing the heads thought that we would
Speaker 1: have liked to have gotten. Well, I know that you've
Speaker 1: said that humanity has quote entered a pandemic era with
Speaker 1: the coronavirus outbreat likely just the first of accelerating epidemics
Speaker 1: to come. Just so we can end on a positive note,
Speaker 1: Dr Fauci, can you explain what is driving this new
Speaker 1: era and what we might expect in the coming years. Well,
Speaker 1: I'm pleased to see that you read my paper that
Speaker 1: I wrote in cell Stollowly Cave. Very good. I do,
Speaker 1: I knew do know a bit about medicine at this point. Dr,
Speaker 1: I'm very very pleased to see that that's a that's
Speaker 1: a scholarly paper. What what I What we said my
Speaker 1: colleague David Morris and I Mourns and I in that
Speaker 1: it really is a reflection of how we as the
Speaker 1: human species interact with our environment. Because if you look
Speaker 1: at the outbreaks of new infections, particularly new viruses, seventy
Speaker 1: of them are zoonotic or infections that have jumped species
Speaker 1: from an animal reservoir into humans, and the kinds of
Speaker 1: things that perturb the animal human interface a major drivers
Speaker 1: of outbreaks. You know, it was HIV from a chimpanzee
Speaker 1: bush meat slaughtering them, getting it into the American population.
Speaker 1: It was influenza where you have chickens and pigs and
Speaker 1: people in the agricultural situation that you usually see in
Speaker 1: the in the Far East, particularly now even with COVID,
Speaker 1: not only COVID now that we're seeing, but the original
Speaker 1: Stars in two thousand and two where the wet markets
Speaker 1: where people bring in animals from the wild, put them
Speaker 1: in a market and people come in shop, usually for
Speaker 1: festive meals during festivals. Things like civic cats and bats
Speaker 1: and other animals that have these viruses. You're almost asking
Speaker 1: for trouble when you do that. So what we said
Speaker 1: in the paper, we really need to rethink how we
Speaker 1: interact with the environment and how we interact with the
Speaker 1: animal species if we really want to avoid outbreaks in
Speaker 1: the future. And and it seems that when it comes
Speaker 1: to mitigating these pandemics, the Internet is not the friend
Speaker 1: of of the public health official. There's been so much
Speaker 1: misinformation coupled with polarization, it makes it very very difficult,
Speaker 1: Dr Fauci to get information to the public, not only that,
Speaker 1: but get them to believe that information. Yeah, it is true.
Speaker 1: It's become particularly difficult and problematic when you're trying to
Speaker 1: get a public health message across and you live right
Speaker 1: now in a time in our great country in which
Speaker 1: is very very divisive, and when you politicize and make
Speaker 1: divisive things that should be pure public health, it really
Speaker 1: makes it that much more difficult. Did you ever think
Speaker 1: about having your own daily briefings that would be completely
Speaker 1: devoid of politics, Dr Fauci, Yeah, that would be nice,
Speaker 1: wouldn't it. Would you not be allowed to do that?
Speaker 1: I don't have total control over those things. I don't.
Speaker 1: I guess if you need to keep your job, you
Speaker 1: wouldn't be able to do that. Yeah. Well, I don't
Speaker 1: think anybody is trying to get rid of me. But
Speaker 1: but what we're trying to do right now, which is
Speaker 1: the reason why I enthusiastically said yes to your request
Speaker 1: to talk to you, because they think things like our
Speaker 1: discussion that we just have now go a long way
Speaker 1: to really clarifying the real true public health message. Well,
Speaker 1: I really really appreciate your time, Dr Fauci, and again
Speaker 1: on behalf of all my followers, thank you very very
Speaker 1: much for your service, and thank you for all you do.
Speaker 1: To Katie, it's a pleasure and a privilege to be
Speaker 1: with you. Thank you for having me, Thanks for listening
Speaker 1: to the special edition of the Next Question, and I'm
Speaker 1: very excited in the upcoming weeks we'll be doing a
Speaker 1: special podcast series called Turnout focused on voting, why it's
Speaker 1: important to get out the vote, who isn't voting, and
Speaker 1: the systemic structures that have been in place that have
Speaker 1: suppressed so many American citizens. So stay tuned for that.
Speaker 1: In the meantime, thanks so much for listening. I'm Katie
Speaker 1: Curik and I'll talk to you next time. Next Question
Speaker 1: with Katie Couric is a production of I Heart Radio
Speaker 1: and Katie Kurik Media. The executive producers are Katie Curic,
Speaker 1: Courtney Litz, and Tyler Klang. The supervising producer is Lauren Hansen.
Speaker 1: Our show producer is Bethan Macaluso. The associate producers are
Speaker 1: Emily Pinto and Derek Clements. Editing by Derrek Clements, Dylan
Speaker 1: Fagan and Lowell Berlante, mixing by Dylan Fagan. Our researcher
Speaker 1: is Gabriel Loser. For more information on today's episode, go
Speaker 1: to Katie curik dot com and follow us on Twitter
Speaker 1: and Instagram at Katie Kurik. For more podcasts for my
Speaker 1: heart Radio, visit the I Heart Radio app, Apple podcast,
Speaker 1: or wherever you listen to your favorite shows,