Speaker 1: Welcome to the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. I'm Tom Keane. Along
Speaker 1: with Jonathan Ferrell and Lisa Brownwitz Jailey. We bring you
Speaker 1: insight from the best and economics, finance, investment, and international relations.
Speaker 1: Find Bloomberg Surveillance on Apple Podcast, Suncloud, Bloomberg dot Com,
Speaker 1: and of course on the Bloomberg Terminal. Always a joy
Speaker 1: to speak to William Dudley. He's a former president of
Speaker 1: the New York Fellow Reserve, the interesting mandate after New
Speaker 1: York fed Bloomberg opinion columnists and doing so much for
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Economics as a senior advisor. Bill Dudley a virtual
Speaker 1: Jackson Hole. You and I have been there. There's a
Speaker 1: you know, the central bankers go out, they wave at
Speaker 1: the moose, at the split rail fans. They're not going
Speaker 1: to do that this year. How does it change if
Speaker 1: Jackson Hall is virtual, Well, it eliminates all the side
Speaker 1: conversations at the luncheons on the hikes, So there isn't
Speaker 1: a kind of back channel kind of communication that you
Speaker 1: might get otherwise. I mean, there's a number of things
Speaker 1: that I would love to talk to that participants about
Speaker 1: that I have nothing to do with. Entrey policy. You know,
Speaker 1: what do they plan to do on payments and cydewere uh,
Speaker 1: cryptocurrencies and digital currencies? What's their add to about climate change?
Speaker 1: So there's a lot of things to talk about. And
Speaker 1: if you don't have those opportunities at lunch and dinner,
Speaker 1: you don't you can't talk about those things from the
Speaker 1: fractious FED development, you know, not to make it a
Speaker 1: history lesson, but the panic of OH seven out to
Speaker 1: mcchesley Martin in the early nineteen fifties out to now,
Speaker 1: where is the FED mandate to consider climate change? How
Speaker 1: do they do that? How do they affect that? I
Speaker 1: think they certainly have a mandate to consider climate change
Speaker 1: from a financial stability perspective, to the extent that climate
Speaker 1: change induces worst outcomes on the macro economy, it's the
Speaker 1: disasters defect This the extent that affects the value of
Speaker 1: assets that banks lend against that does threaten the individual,
Speaker 1: could potentially threatened individual institutions and the financial system. And
Speaker 1: the FED has responded to that. They've set up two committees,
Speaker 1: one to address the overall financials deblay risk and another
Speaker 1: to address risk at individual institutions and they're pushing these
Speaker 1: individual institutions to develop data uh and processes to evaluate
Speaker 1: climate risk and how they make their lending and other
Speaker 1: business banking decisions. I think it's completely appropriate. Entrey policy
Speaker 1: is a lot more difficult, right, because Entrey policy is
Speaker 1: really about what's going to happen in the next year
Speaker 1: or two, not what's gonna happen in the next one
Speaker 1: year thirty years. So even if you think climate change
Speaker 1: is an existential threat to the US global economy, which
Speaker 1: I think it is, it's not clear how you would
Speaker 1: incorporate climate change risk into the near term monetary policy decisions.
Speaker 1: And that's where the Fed's getting some criticism of from
Speaker 1: people who say that it's not doing enough on climate change.
Speaker 1: I just think it's difficult to take the Monterrey policy
Speaker 1: mandate and say, well, that really expands to the climate
Speaker 1: change issue and bill It also, though, goes to the
Speaker 1: question of policy drift. Has the FED gotten too far
Speaker 1: from their main goals of trying to control inflation and
Speaker 1: support the labor market? I mean, when their labor market
Speaker 1: goals are a lot less defined and perhaps and they
Speaker 1: have been in the past, and then you have also
Speaker 1: other goals like climate change and broader other goals and
Speaker 1: initiatives that feel more like policy. How much is the
Speaker 1: FED risking allowing some of their main goals, namely inflation,
Speaker 1: to get out of control as it focuses on some
Speaker 1: of these other goals. I think this is why Tripole
Speaker 1: hasn't gone that far in the climate change direction from
Speaker 1: the Monterrey policy perspective, compared to say, like the European
Speaker 1: Central Bank. The understands that there is a risk of
Speaker 1: being criticized and going too far. That said, the financial
Speaker 1: stability party is certainly part of the sense mandate because
Speaker 1: without financial stability, the FED can't achieve its goals on
Speaker 1: inflation on employment. So I think that the FED is
Speaker 1: taking the right course. That they're taking climate change seriously,
Speaker 1: but they're focusing on it from a financial stability and
Speaker 1: safety and soundness proposition. Well, you mentioned some of the
Speaker 1: criticism that the FED has not gotten has gotten for
Speaker 1: not acting on this in a more aggressive way. A
Speaker 1: lot of that comes from the progressives who may we
Speaker 1: would like to see someone else at the helm, but
Speaker 1: we had. Janet Yellen reportedly over the weekend telling White
Speaker 1: House advisors that she should supports Powell for a second term.
Speaker 1: Just how significant is that. I think Treasure Secretary Yellen's
Speaker 1: endorsement is important because she knows what is needed to
Speaker 1: be the chair of the Fed Reserve, and she's very
Speaker 1: well respected both inside the administration and outside the administration.
Speaker 1: So I think her endorsement is very, very important. I
Speaker 1: think also, when you think about it, Chair Pole really
Speaker 1: is the path of least resistance. He's already shown that
Speaker 1: he's very capable, and he has support on both sides
Speaker 1: of the political aisle. If you that progressives got their
Speaker 1: way and nominated someone someone that was consistent with what
Speaker 1: they want, then I think it'd be a lot higher
Speaker 1: to get that person confirmed because tony Republican voters, would
Speaker 1: you get you know? Tom asked a question earlier today,
Speaker 1: and given FED share, Powell is likely to remain at
Speaker 1: the HELM. What inflation is he looking at most closely?
Speaker 1: And is it changing in terms of the nature of
Speaker 1: price increases where it is occurring. In terms of how
Speaker 1: they evaluated at the FED, well, I think they've focused
Speaker 1: on the notion of is this transitory or is this
Speaker 1: going to be more persistent? For tamp persistent inflation, Really
Speaker 1: two things have to happen. One you have to have
Speaker 1: you have to run on labor and have pressure on wages,
Speaker 1: and that weight pressure on wages gets into prices, and
Speaker 1: too you have to have a rise in inflation expectations.
Speaker 1: So far it looks like there's still some slack in
Speaker 1: the labor market uh and and inflation expectations they've risen
Speaker 1: a little bit, really two levels more consistent with what
Speaker 1: the Fed wants rather than higher than we So at
Speaker 1: this point, the Fed view is that the inflation pressures
Speaker 1: that we're having our transitory probably they're gonna be uh
Speaker 1: more persistent than one would like for transitory pressures. In otherwise,
Speaker 1: the inflation rate will probably stay above the FEDS target
Speaker 1: for a while. But they're they're really focused on what's
Speaker 1: having the labor market and what's having the inflationations and
Speaker 1: all those things. As as long as those things are
Speaker 1: open in terms of their inflation signal, and the Federal
Speaker 1: Reserve will be pretty comfortable with with where inflation is
Speaker 1: right now. Dr Dudley, as did Secretary Yellen. Can you
Speaker 1: tell us this morning that you would actively support the
Speaker 1: renomination the reappointment of Chairman Powell. Absolutely absolutely, He's a
Speaker 1: done a terrific job. He has the whole EONC behind him.
Speaker 1: I think he's articulated what the feds of policy UH
Speaker 1: is in a very clear, inconsistent way. So I don't
Speaker 1: see any reason why you wouldn't be Really. Bill Dudley,
Speaker 1: thank you so much for joining us this morning, former
Speaker 1: president of the New York Federal Reserve and senior advisor
Speaker 1: to Bloomberg Economics. Right now, Laura Calvacino with us RBC
Speaker 1: Capital Markets. Laurie, it is a resilient market, is it
Speaker 1: a market that can break out to new highs? So
Speaker 1: thanks for having me, Tom, Thanks for having me, Lisa. Look,
Speaker 1: we're still in the camp that things will get a
Speaker 1: decent sized pull back before the end of the year.
Speaker 1: So we've got a target on the S and P
Speaker 1: and Look, I think what was interesting in the price
Speaker 1: action last week it felt like we had a bit
Speaker 1: of a growth skirmish to start the week. We saw
Speaker 1: the index faulter and we saw defensive sectors leading the charge.
Speaker 1: When that ends up happening, the market really can't sustain
Speaker 1: this move um to the upside. Now, what we saw
Speaker 1: towards the end of the week is that those jitters
Speaker 1: did calmed down a little bit, tech started working. We
Speaker 1: started to see just some stability in the index return.
Speaker 1: But when you have fear seep in markets really can't climb.
Speaker 1: When you have sort of that nervousness and that shift
Speaker 1: to high quality, markets can climb that wall of WORI,
Speaker 1: but it's a very delicate balance in front. Didn't work
Speaker 1: for most of last week. Well, but honestly, how big
Speaker 1: is this wall of Rory Laurie. If we have the
Speaker 1: FED that is backing the market, if we have the
Speaker 1: potential a greater potential frankly for federal fiscal stimulus, if
Speaker 1: the slowdown does persist, I mean, doesn't policy support sort
Speaker 1: of completely cancel out slowdowns that might otherwise come up.
Speaker 1: I think that's one of the reasons why over the
Speaker 1: last you know, sort of a few months, we've seen
Speaker 1: a lot of nervousness in the work in the market
Speaker 1: just sort of expressed through well, I'm in certain I'm
Speaker 1: going to go to high quality, I'm not going to
Speaker 1: go to defensives. I think that that, you know, has
Speaker 1: helped bolster that case for moving to the secular growers.
Speaker 1: But we do know that we're starting to wind down
Speaker 1: some of these programs or we can sort of see
Speaker 1: the light at the end of the tunnel. So I
Speaker 1: think the power of that to sort of bolster markets
Speaker 1: going forward at least has a diminished impact, even if
Speaker 1: you're not pulling the rug out from the market all
Speaker 1: at once. But we have seen also under performance of
Speaker 1: small caps. We have seen a rotation out of cyclicals.
Speaker 1: Can we glean any confidence in equity valuations based on
Speaker 1: this discretion that we're seeing on the part of fund managers? Look,
Speaker 1: I think that you know, there are a couple of
Speaker 1: different questions I think baked in there. I think it's
Speaker 1: a great question. But I think in terms of small cap,
Speaker 1: you know, I think that we've seen so many worries
Speaker 1: manifest and the dramatic underperformance of small cap since March.
Speaker 1: I think at first it was the impact of inflation
Speaker 1: on profit margins, which really didn't end up coming through um,
Speaker 1: but I think worries were expressed there. Investors have threaded
Speaker 1: about the negative feedback that you'll get on demand from inflation.
Speaker 1: That's also been expressed in small cap. And now I
Speaker 1: think sort of you mentioned the softening and the high
Speaker 1: frequency indicators. I think some of the short term you know,
Speaker 1: sort of economic damage from the delta variant. I think
Speaker 1: that's manifest in small cap UM. But small caps have
Speaker 1: you know, at the end of the day not completely collapsed.
Speaker 1: We haven't seen them go into bear market territory. So
Speaker 1: there's you know a little bit of that resilience that
Speaker 1: we will be able to turn the corner still showing
Speaker 1: up in that data set. Is it time to get
Speaker 1: more defensive within your equity allocation? Though, Lorie, you know
Speaker 1: we essentially did that, Kaylee. We actually have been aisling
Speaker 1: down the cyclicality. I don't make sector recommendation changes all
Speaker 1: that often, but a few weeks ago we actually did
Speaker 1: pull down materials, which was our least favorite of the cyclicals.
Speaker 1: Were sticking with financials and energy, UM, but we did
Speaker 1: actually boost the tech sector. The proper tech sector doesn't
Speaker 1: include the Internet stuff, UM, but we did pull that
Speaker 1: up to and overweight from a market weight, and we
Speaker 1: basically said, going forward, if we're thinking about the next
Speaker 1: twelve months or so, we want to be very balanced
Speaker 1: between sort of the defensiveness of secular growth and the
Speaker 1: cyclical oriented sectors. So we did actually make that that
Speaker 1: sort of shift on the dial. So you're looking out
Speaker 1: twelve months, I'm looking out the next you know, three
Speaker 1: months in change and wondering if in one we will
Speaker 1: see a five percent draw down at any point in
Speaker 1: this equity market, what would be the catalyst for that.
Speaker 1: So I think we got a little bit of a
Speaker 1: hint of it last week with concerns on the growth outlook.
Speaker 1: And look, I'm not saying that anybody is anticipating we're
Speaker 1: going to have a recession or anything like that, but
Speaker 1: I do think there have been some complacency on the
Speaker 1: economic data that investors had, or some deterioration on the
Speaker 1: economic data, and there have been frankly complacency about the
Speaker 1: impact of this delta variant from market participants. So I
Speaker 1: think that was a little bit of a wake up call,
Speaker 1: a little bit of period of digestion we had to have.
Speaker 1: And but let's just zoom out a little bit. What
Speaker 1: was that, you know, sort of reaction to the delta
Speaker 1: variant all about? It was an unanticipated bit of bad
Speaker 1: news that hit the market and really challenged investors assumptions
Speaker 1: of what they thought going forward. So I think the
Speaker 1: answer in their keylie, it's probably something that the market
Speaker 1: is not able to anticipate with valuations where they are.
Speaker 1: What sentiment is stretched as it is, This is not
Speaker 1: a market that has a lot of room to absorb
Speaker 1: bad news. When we do get it, thank you so much,
Speaker 1: greatly appreciate it. This is a joy. Let's get right
Speaker 1: to it with Michael Dardo with m KM Partners are
Speaker 1: chief economist and market strategy Mark. Michael, you go right
Speaker 1: at the media gloom crew. You just taram shreds in
Speaker 1: your note and you say, look, there's a lot of
Speaker 1: labor data which shows a more employed America. There is
Speaker 1: high frequency data that shows a pretty good, maybe not
Speaker 1: mint set of data as well. What's the gloom crew
Speaker 1: get wrong? Well, Tom, I think that the gloom crew
Speaker 1: is focused on the variant and and that news has
Speaker 1: been bad and there are risks. All of that said,
Speaker 1: if we do look at the highest frequency economic data,
Speaker 1: that should tell us if the economy is rolling over,
Speaker 1: that still looks good for the most part. So this
Speaker 1: past week with such jobless claims hit a new post
Speaker 1: pandemic blow. So at least so far, you know, the
Speaker 1: labor market looks fairly undisturbed and unperturbed um by this
Speaker 1: delta shock that could change in the future. But so far,
Speaker 1: you know, high frequency labor market data looking good. Also,
Speaker 1: your weekly confidence numbers that come out on on Thursday
Speaker 1: have actually held up pretty well. And it's a critical
Speaker 1: point because the University of Michigan data that totally fell
Speaker 1: out of bed in August. I think really scared along
Speaker 1: with people, and in the risk with the variant is
Speaker 1: really twofold. One would be if there are actually explicit
Speaker 1: directed shutdowns, which doesn't seem to be happening on a
Speaker 1: large scale. The other risk would be that households consumers
Speaker 1: just simply get scared and pulled back, and so that's
Speaker 1: why there was a lot of concern with that number.
Speaker 1: Yet the weekly confidence data over the last four weeks
Speaker 1: is increased each week and it's almost back at a
Speaker 1: you know, essentially is matching a post pandemic high. So
Speaker 1: if that continues, I think we're in in pretty good shape.
Speaker 1: If not, then we'll have to worry more. So that's
Speaker 1: my that's my right. Michael Darter SPX level four four
Speaker 1: or five two, DOWT thousand to nineteen. The markets share
Speaker 1: of the streets gloom, don't they? Why is there a bid?
Speaker 1: Two stocks free reasons? Tom Uh, we have high equity prices,
Speaker 1: earnings are very high and have been doing very well
Speaker 1: record sup by hundred earnings and expectations are high. Still
Speaker 1: low discount rates, so the tenure yield is moving up
Speaker 1: a little bit, but very low, lower than most people
Speaker 1: thought at the beginning of the year. And high liquidity,
Speaker 1: so you have to disturb one of those three supports
Speaker 1: or equity prices, high liquidity, high earnings, low discount rates.
Speaker 1: Our view with the strong recovery is that discount rates
Speaker 1: should be moving up over time and and that will
Speaker 1: be a headwind two pe ratios if it plays out.
Speaker 1: It's not really playing out, you know, we've had a
Speaker 1: little bit of a movement northward. Real rates do seem
Speaker 1: like they're starting to move up now, stir up about
Speaker 1: twenty basis points since early August. That will be something
Speaker 1: to keep an eye on, you know, as we move
Speaker 1: into Jackson Hold this week and potentially hear more plans
Speaker 1: about UH potential tapering from the feed mike. We talk
Speaker 1: about Jackson Hole, but we really ought to call it
Speaker 1: a zoom event. I don't know, a zoom fab. It's
Speaker 1: just really kind of an interesting UH shift to all
Speaker 1: remote for a second year. What is a bigger risk
Speaker 1: to markets coming out of the Jackson Hole remote con
Speaker 1: fab Is it the potential for a more hawkish FED
Speaker 1: chair Powell, someone who actually makes news, or perhaps somebody
Speaker 1: who holds the stance and raises the specter of higher
Speaker 1: than expected inflation down the line. Should the delta variant
Speaker 1: prove to be a passing a viral strain, yeah, I
Speaker 1: think you know, Paul is going to try not to
Speaker 1: make big waves on Friday. All of that said, it's
Speaker 1: pretty clear now based on recent speeches in the recent
Speaker 1: Seed minutes at the center of intellectual gravity on the
Speaker 1: Feed is definitely moving towards announcing a taper uh this here,
Speaker 1: and probably commencing the taper before year end provided the
Speaker 1: labor market bold stuff. So this is all going to
Speaker 1: be dated dependent. The BEDS operating assumption at this point
Speaker 1: is that the delta variant is not going to dramatically
Speaker 1: throw the recovery off course. If that proves to be false,
Speaker 1: then they're gonna end up waiting longer. UM. But as
Speaker 1: I mentioned before, with those high frequency indicators UM suggesting
Speaker 1: that we're still in pretty good shape. I think the FED,
Speaker 1: I think what how how will hint at is what
Speaker 1: we already know that you know that the taper will
Speaker 1: be announced likely this fall, and by the winter the
Speaker 1: Fed will be pulling the trigger on it. What high
Speaker 1: frequency data points are you paying the most attention to, Mike, Well,
Speaker 1: aside from claims and confidence to come out weekly, I'm
Speaker 1: really you know, watching the anatomy of this bond market.
Speaker 1: So is yields move up and down? You know, we're
Speaker 1: watching what is driving that? Is it real rates or
Speaker 1: inflation expectations. You also have the estimated term premium in
Speaker 1: there and against that foliage, what's happening in metals market
Speaker 1: and in markets and in risky credit right, So what
Speaker 1: we need to be on the lookout for is if
Speaker 1: real rates start to spike and you have inflation expectations crashing,
Speaker 1: credit spreads blowing out, you know, that would not be
Speaker 1: what we want to see. Uh. So far, that's you know,
Speaker 1: that's not really playing out. We've got a modest correction
Speaker 1: in commodities taking shape, credit spreads have lightened some, um
Speaker 1: but you know, but so far that really doesn't look
Speaker 1: like there's anything malignant taking place in in credit markets, Mike,
Speaker 1: Is this a market that has already positioned for the
Speaker 1: taper and therefore we will get no tantrum. Yeah. I
Speaker 1: think that's a good point. Um. You know, what's happening
Speaker 1: in the bond market doesn't look anything like two thousand
Speaker 1: thirteen so far. So in that episode, we had a
Speaker 1: really big surge in real rates, Inflation expectations fell pretty considerably,
Speaker 1: and at least temporarily, we you know, we had some
Speaker 1: serious upward pressure on credit risk spreads, the big commodity
Speaker 1: uh fall off as well. Um, and then you know,
Speaker 1: in the run up to the two thousand and fifteen
Speaker 1: rate even even more severe on the much more severe
Speaker 1: on the commodity side. UH. So this is not playing
Speaker 1: out in the same way at least so far, and
Speaker 1: it's been very very well telegraphed. And so maybe the
Speaker 1: focus on the potential taper tantrum means that it simply
Speaker 1: doesn't play out in the two thousands thirteen fashion this time.
Speaker 1: So if it's well telegraphed, it maybe doesn't present that
Speaker 1: large of a downside risk. So what could be the
Speaker 1: potential biggest downside catalyst for this market? I I do
Speaker 1: think that the downside catalyst for the market would probably
Speaker 1: be on the valuation side. I don't think we're going
Speaker 1: to see a big liquidity shock, and I think earnings
Speaker 1: are going to be okay as long as the economy
Speaker 1: stays relatively strong. But in a strong economy scenario where
Speaker 1: the Titans you still could have you know, upward pressures
Speaker 1: on on rates. It might not come as a sudden shock,
Speaker 1: but you know, over time, I think, you know, the
Speaker 1: tenure Deald is right, We're gonna be gravitating North word
Speaker 1: and you know, and that should put downward pressure on
Speaker 1: UH stock market multiples. Earnings could make for some of that,
Speaker 1: but you know, we're sort of overdue here with the
Speaker 1: broad into indicies for some kind of at least period. Michael,
Speaker 1: Let's go back to University of Wisconsin microeconomics. One O. One.
Speaker 1: Let's look at the supply curve dynamics. We have a
Speaker 1: supply shock folded into a labor market right now. All
Speaker 1: sorts of theories here shifts this that the other thing.
Speaker 1: Do you believe that there's a suppleness to the American
Speaker 1: economy where we will adapt and adjust and get back
Speaker 1: to normal supply dynamics. I think we are adjusting, h
Speaker 1: Tom It It doesn't happen overnight, UM, But the labor
Speaker 1: market is on the rebound now. Obviously, we still do
Speaker 1: have these supply side dislocations that are ahead wind. You know,
Speaker 1: we can certainly see that anyone that's and out there
Speaker 1: and dealing with the services industries knows that the labor
Speaker 1: shortage problems are still their services flow. And you know
Speaker 1: it's difficult to hold onto employees help wanted signs all
Speaker 1: over the place, UM, and the delta variant certainly does
Speaker 1: not help that. But you know, we're going to get
Speaker 1: to the delta variants and the economy is going to
Speaker 1: stay relatively open. Uh as school starts up. That should
Speaker 1: ease some of these concerns about childcare, the extended jobless benefits.
Speaker 1: I know there's a debate about the impact, but those
Speaker 1: are you going to wrap up this fall? Um? And
Speaker 1: you know that means the labor market is going to
Speaker 1: continue to be on the upswing here, both in terms
Speaker 1: of job games and labor force increases. What's your twelve
Speaker 1: lon's GDP call? I mean, we've got people coming down
Speaker 1: six and a half percent, maybe even some gloomy or
Speaker 1: the Fed obviously much more cautious. What is your call?
Speaker 1: On GDP twelve buns forward. Yeah, our our call is
Speaker 1: solidly above end for next year. So keep in mind that,
Speaker 1: you know, trend growth that the US is fully employed
Speaker 1: is only going to be about two real four nominal,
Speaker 1: So we're gonna we're gonna be at least a few
Speaker 1: inter faces points above that straight in the next year
Speaker 1: and maybe even beyond, depending on, you know, the timing
Speaker 1: magnitude of FED tightening. So above trend growth means the
Speaker 1: labor market continues to tighten, and it likely means some
Speaker 1: upward pressure on long term interest rates, at least from
Speaker 1: from where we are now. So that's that's the call
Speaker 1: without giving you a spastic pointy solidly above trend. Michael Darter,
Speaker 1: stay dry, Michael Darter caught in the rain this weekend?
Speaker 1: Really right in the heart? Is it? Henry or on release? Yeah? Okay,
Speaker 1: right now, she's not a vice ADMOI we'll talk with
Speaker 1: sober Klein. Michael biology us to JOHNS Hopkins in the
Speaker 1: course of the Bloomberg School of Public Health. So we're
Speaker 1: just we're thrilled to have you on today, and I
Speaker 1: need to go to your wheelhouse, which is the differences
Speaker 1: and all these things these bacteria and these viruses between
Speaker 1: male and female. You are world acclaimed on that does
Speaker 1: COVID treat women different than men? It does, so women
Speaker 1: tend to be less likely to be hospitalized and to
Speaker 1: die from COVID nineteen UM, at least among unvaccinated individuals.
Speaker 1: We also have growing bodies of literature showing us that
Speaker 1: women are mounting greater immune responses and may have more
Speaker 1: durable immunity to the COVID nineteen vaccines than men. How
Speaker 1: is delta variant change things? I mean, for everything we
Speaker 1: do in economics, financial investment, it's this huge overlay. But
Speaker 1: over the weekend, how did you settle out where the
Speaker 1: delta variant is is right now? I think where the
Speaker 1: delta variant right now it is spreading and I am
Speaker 1: probably most concerned about pregnant women and children. So if
Speaker 1: we start with pregnant women, there is definitely some vaccine
Speaker 1: hesitancy being reported around the country among women who are
Speaker 1: either trying to get pregnant or who are pregnant. And
Speaker 1: I think the CDC has come out quite clearly that
Speaker 1: all available data suggests that pregnant women are at increased
Speaker 1: risk of miscarriage and preterm birth if they become infected
Speaker 1: with COVID nineteen. There is absolutely no indication that the
Speaker 1: COVID nineteen vaccines, any of the platforms that are being
Speaker 1: approved or already are approved by the FDA in the
Speaker 1: United States, that these vaccines caught have posed any safety
Speaker 1: risk for a pregnant woman or her developing vit us.
Speaker 1: In the meantime, of course, we do have questions around
Speaker 1: the efficacy of the vaccines non presented preventing hospitalizations but
Speaker 1: preventing infection from the delta variant and transmission. Everything I
Speaker 1: read is so confusing. What's the latest on the likelihood
Speaker 1: of contracting the variant if you've been fully vaccinated? So
Speaker 1: we we the likelihood is still low, but there is
Speaker 1: an increased likelihood that we could become infected, meaning people
Speaker 1: who are fully vaccinated can become infected with this delta variant.
Speaker 1: It is more infectious, it's more readily transmissible. But the
Speaker 1: evidence so far suggests that we are still significantly less
Speaker 1: likely to be hospitalized or to die, and that includes
Speaker 1: people who are immunocompromised or ummuno sinest based on age.
Speaker 1: But but but Dr Kleinen and and forgive me for
Speaker 1: for interrupting. There is a question though, from a public
Speaker 1: public health standpoint, and even if you are not going
Speaker 1: to the hospital, you are a note of transmission, even
Speaker 1: as a vaccinating individual, if you contract the virus. And
Speaker 1: so there's a question about booster shots how much my
Speaker 1: public health perspective, do they lower the curve? Do they
Speaker 1: basically bring down the circulating viral load in the community
Speaker 1: and get us out of this pandemic faster. I think
Speaker 1: it's going to be a combination. I think it's gonna
Speaker 1: be a combination of the booster but also interventions like
Speaker 1: mask wearing, like social distancing, so we really can bring
Speaker 1: that number down to zero. As you suggest, I think
Speaker 1: we are asking vaccines to do something that we have
Speaker 1: never asked them to do before. You know, there is
Speaker 1: a distinction between vaccines preventing disease and and protecting us
Speaker 1: from being hospitalized and dying versus protecting us from becoming infected.
Speaker 1: And this this new level of scrutiny and and need
Speaker 1: for reducing infection is really I think what's driving all
Speaker 1: out of the discussion around boosters, which in the United
Speaker 1: States will begin more broadly in September Of course, the
Speaker 1: conversation around boosters really started because it seems at least
Speaker 1: there are in suggestions that you have waning immunity eight
Speaker 1: months out after you get your shot. But we have,
Speaker 1: but we have to consider the people who got their
Speaker 1: shots first, people who already were immuno compromised, the older population.
Speaker 1: Could that be a factor, and why the effect seems
Speaker 1: to be waning? Such a fantastic observation. Yes, that really
Speaker 1: could be. Um Our data thus far suggests that among younger,
Speaker 1: healthy adults, while there is some waning, it's not to
Speaker 1: the degree that we see in either older adults or
Speaker 1: compromised individuals. So yeah, I just want to you know,
Speaker 1: I just want to say, Kaylie, that the reason that
Speaker 1: was a fantastic question is she's playing a Southern card.
Speaker 1: She's out of the Georgia schools. You're out of the
Speaker 1: Virginia schools, and she's treating me in Lisa like garbage. Continue.
Speaker 1: That was not my incenton. Wow, but you had a
Speaker 1: fantastic question, Lisa. I get another fantastic question. Speak to
Speaker 1: the doctor from Georgia. All right, see the doctor from Georgia,
Speaker 1: doctor sopper Clin. My other question is if you have
Speaker 1: already had COVID nineteen if you tested positive, it doesn't
Speaker 1: matter or do the variants mean that you can continue
Speaker 1: to get it again and again and again. So it
Speaker 1: does appear that that this delta variant, we can get
Speaker 1: this delta variant even if we had been infected UM
Speaker 1: with that initial um stars covie too, that that started
Speaker 1: this pandemic. So again, I think even if you've been infected,
Speaker 1: there is some evidence that that immunity does wane UM
Speaker 1: and and much of that will depend on when you
Speaker 1: became infected. But I do think boosters are are going
Speaker 1: to be recommended regardless of whether you have been infected previously.
Speaker 1: Dr Cline, don't be a stranger. Thank you so much
Speaker 1: for joining us today, Superclin. You've got an A plus
Speaker 1: and a CREB cycle. Unlike some of us with Johns Hopkins,
Speaker 1: no I went I took the exam of the crab
Speaker 1: cycle and Lise I went down to the Franks. This
Speaker 1: is the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. Thanks for listening. Join us
Speaker 1: live weekdays from seven to ten am Eastern on Bloomberg
Speaker 1: Radio and on Bloomberg Television each day from six to
Speaker 1: nine am for insight from the best in economics, finance, investment,
Speaker 1: and international relations. And subscribe to the Surveillance podcast on
Speaker 1: Apple podcast, SoundCloud, Bloomberg dot com, and of course, on
Speaker 1: the terminal. I'm Tom Keene, and this is Bloomberg.