Speaker 1: Hi everyone, I'm Katie Couric, and welcome to next Question.
Speaker 1: In this unprecedented time of the coronavirus pandemic, many of
Speaker 1: us are cooped up on edge, full of anxiety about
Speaker 1: our upturned worlds and fearful that family, friends, are ourselves
Speaker 1: could succumb to this virulent bug. And yet a lot
Speaker 1: of people are finding comfort in a surprising source, Steven
Speaker 1: Soderbergh's two thousand and eleventh thriller Contagion. A mysterious and
Speaker 1: highly contagious virus crosses continents in a matter of days
Speaker 1: and kills Gwyneth Paltrow within the first eight minutes of
Speaker 1: the movie. What happened to her? What happened to her?
Speaker 1: The result citywide lockdowns, panic driven looting, spreeze, and mass graves.
Speaker 1: And without a vaccine, we can anticipate that approximately one
Speaker 1: in people on the planet will contract the disease. When
Speaker 1: I recently rewatched the movie, like thousands of you according
Speaker 1: to social media and the iTunes charts, I was struck
Speaker 1: by how familiar it all seemed, from the rapid spread,
Speaker 1: to the government's controlled messaging, to the social distancing and
Speaker 1: a public growing more frightened by the day. I do
Speaker 1: think in times of you know, anxiety and panic, people
Speaker 1: turn to popular culture to enhance their understanding of what's
Speaker 1: going on. Scott Burns is a filmmaker and the screenwriter
Speaker 1: of Contagion, and he said, though the movie seems prescient now,
Speaker 1: if you talked to any one of the experts he
Speaker 1: consulted with ten or twelve years ago, they would have
Speaker 1: told you the very same thing, that it was a
Speaker 1: matter of when and not if we would encounter exactly
Speaker 1: what we're encountering. So I believe in science, and I
Speaker 1: think of people who I worked with are extraordinarily dedicated scientists.
Speaker 1: So um, I'm not surprised, which leads me to my
Speaker 1: next question. What kind of movie about a pandemic teach
Speaker 1: us about the real thing? I was lucky enough to
Speaker 1: spend a little bit of time, from the comfort of
Speaker 1: our own homes, of course, with not only Scott Burns,
Speaker 1: but also one of the lead consultants on the film,
Speaker 1: Dr Ian Lipkin, a k a. The Virus Hunter. Yes,
Speaker 1: I'm me a loopcoun my professor at Columbia University, and
Speaker 1: I worked closely with Scott in developing the concept of
Speaker 1: the film. Before we talked to Dr Lipkin about his
Speaker 1: reaction when you approached him to be a consultant on
Speaker 1: this film. What piqued your interest initially, Scott in tackling
Speaker 1: this in the form of a feature film. Steven Soderberg
Speaker 1: and I had just completed doing another film with Matt
Speaker 1: Damon called The Informant and we were actually um on
Speaker 1: our way home and he said, what do you think
Speaker 1: you want to do next? And I said that I
Speaker 1: want to do a pandemic movie that is entirely science based.
Speaker 1: I had seen Outbreak when I was growing up, like
Speaker 1: a lot of people, um, but I wanted to do
Speaker 1: one that was, you know, more of the moment and
Speaker 1: really looked at a pandemic as sort of a tracer
Speaker 1: bullet through our society. So you decide you want to
Speaker 1: put your lens on this topic and you want to
Speaker 1: do as much research as possible. How were you led
Speaker 1: to Dr Ian in terms of his knowledge on the topic, Well,
Speaker 1: The informant Um and a movie I had done before that.
Speaker 1: I had done with a company in l A called
Speaker 1: participant Um, which is owned by Jeff Skoll, and Jeff
Speaker 1: Um has a philanthropical arm to his company and they
Speaker 1: focus on a variety of threats to the world. One
Speaker 1: of them was pandemic illness. And because Jeff and I
Speaker 1: knew each other, when he found out, I wanted to,
Speaker 1: you know, to write that as my next movie. He
Speaker 1: insisted that he be involved in his company and be
Speaker 1: involved because it was so central to their mission. And uh,
Speaker 1: Jeff introduced me to Dr Larry Brilliant, who was an
Speaker 1: epidemiologist in the Bay area. Um and and Larry was
Speaker 1: my first point of contact, and he was part of
Speaker 1: a team, you know, along with d. A. Henderson, that
Speaker 1: helped eradicate smallpox in the sixties. Um and I had
Speaker 1: lunch with Larry, and like I said, he was one
Speaker 1: of the people who said, it's really a matter of
Speaker 1: when and not if. And he told me that he
Speaker 1: thought the best barologists in the world was was Ian Lipkin.
Speaker 1: And he helped me get a meeting with Ian. And
Speaker 1: when I sat in the end's office, the agreement that
Speaker 1: we made was that this was only worth doing if
Speaker 1: the science was authentic. Um and we began to talk
Speaker 1: about the limitations of what that might mean to a story,
Speaker 1: and it became clear to me in talking to Ian
Speaker 1: that when you look at the complexity of nature, and
Speaker 1: when you begin to understand what viruses are um, you know,
Speaker 1: sadly there really are no limitations. Dr Lipkin, when you
Speaker 1: were approached by Scott, what did you think of the
Speaker 1: notion of turning this into a movie. Ironically, there were
Speaker 1: two independent filmmakers who approached me one day after the
Speaker 1: next in the same location to talk about making a
Speaker 1: pandemic movie, and Scott was the first. I met the
Speaker 1: second individual who wanted to make something that was going
Speaker 1: to look like Outbreak, which was an unrealistic, a very
Speaker 1: entertaining film, and I came back to Scott and I said,
Speaker 1: let's do this. From the very beginning was clear that
Speaker 1: what Scott wanted to do was to educate as well
Speaker 1: as entertain, so that this would have an impact. So
Speaker 1: we had a great deal of fun deciding what the
Speaker 1: virus would look like, what the various components would be
Speaker 1: of storyline. He understands obviously narrative, and what I was
Speaker 1: trying to do is to provide the scientific underpinning for
Speaker 1: what he wanted to do, and then periodically to provide
Speaker 1: a sort of a list of things that I thought
Speaker 1: were critical to convey, which he would then weave into
Speaker 1: the story. So it was a very, very interactive process
Speaker 1: and a great deal of fun. I was going to
Speaker 1: say only a virologists would describe that as a great
Speaker 1: deal of fun, Doctor Lipkin. And when when you talked
Speaker 1: about what was critical to include in the plot, and
Speaker 1: then Scott, I want to ask you about how you
Speaker 1: did this monumental research because you did it, I understand
Speaker 1: for three over three years. But were some of the
Speaker 1: things that you wanted to ensure would be featured in
Speaker 1: the movie, Dr Lipkin. From the very beginning, we want
Speaker 1: to emphasize the point of one health, the idea that
Speaker 1: infectious agents emerge in wildlife and then move into humans.
Speaker 1: We wanted to understand the factors that contribute to that
Speaker 1: and what can be done for risk reduction, and the
Speaker 1: sorts of things we identified then I have played out here.
Speaker 1: We wanted to talk about the challenges and finding ways
Speaker 1: to identify an infectious agent, the political interactions which can
Speaker 1: interfere with progress and sign it's which he covered extremely well.
Speaker 1: The social unrest that was associated with people who come
Speaker 1: out of the woodwork promising various false panases. We'd begun
Speaker 1: to see those here too. And then the implications of
Speaker 1: such an outbreak for social structure, loss of life, how
Speaker 1: we respond, and ultimately how it all resolves. One positive
Speaker 1: thing emanating from this, Dr Lipkin is, in recent years
Speaker 1: science has been treated with skepticism and even hostility by
Speaker 1: many people, not only in this country but around the world.
Speaker 1: Do you think this will win back some of the
Speaker 1: I think much needed and much an appropriate respect for
Speaker 1: the scientific community. I hope so. UM. When the movie
Speaker 1: first came out, there was a big uptick and applications
Speaker 1: for training at the CDC in the Epidemiology Intelligence Service.
Speaker 1: We think, you know, as I look right now at
Speaker 1: the number of applications we're receiving at the School of
Speaker 1: Public Health of Columbia, despite the fact that we're shut down,
Speaker 1: there are people are writing asking how can they join,
Speaker 1: how can they be helpful, what can they do? So
Speaker 1: it is having an impact in that respect. This trend
Speaker 1: to not believe science or to dismiss it, uh, must
Speaker 1: be disconcerting to you. It is one of the large
Speaker 1: challenges we have is that people think that their ways
Speaker 1: to shortcut, for example, with clinical trials, and it's very
Speaker 1: important that we have appropriately controlled trials otherwise we get
Speaker 1: to the end of a trial and we don't know
Speaker 1: what works and what doesn't, and we subject people to
Speaker 1: expense and risk that's really unjustified. Um. So another example
Speaker 1: of that is vaccines. People have this notion who don't
Speaker 1: understand how vaccines are trialed and proven, that we can
Speaker 1: just roll out of vaccine in a few months time,
Speaker 1: and it's just not true. It's critical that the leadership
Speaker 1: on which we rely at the very top of the
Speaker 1: regional and state and federal governments respect the people who
Speaker 1: are trying to give them the best information that they can.
Speaker 1: So the President has excellent people in the director of
Speaker 1: n I I D. Tony Fauci and and um, you
Speaker 1: know in the new head of the of the Task Force,
Speaker 1: Deborah Burkeleum. But sometimes they appear to be sidelined. And
Speaker 1: this is unfortunate because some of the drugs that are
Speaker 1: proposed haven't really been proven to be a use. Maybe
Speaker 1: they will be, and maybe they want um. So it's
Speaker 1: important that we do this in the stepwise and the
Speaker 1: logical fashion so that we minimize the risk of people
Speaker 1: when we come back will isolate the moments in the
Speaker 1: movie that nine years later seems so real contagion, of course,
Speaker 1: isn't just about the spread of a new virus. It's
Speaker 1: about the spread of information about how narratives around public
Speaker 1: health are created, who creates them, and how they're disseminated.
Speaker 1: And it's this behind the scenes element of the movie
Speaker 1: that's so uncanny to watch today. Pretty early in the film,
Speaker 1: we're introduced to Kate Winslett's character, an epidemic intelligence officer
Speaker 1: with the CDC who's been dispatched to Minnesota where there's
Speaker 1: been a cluster of an infections and deaths. She meets
Speaker 1: with the heads of the Minnesota Department of Health to
Speaker 1: evaluate the situation and determine the public response and how's
Speaker 1: the public going to react to that. It's hard to
Speaker 1: say plastic shark in a movie will keep people from
Speaker 1: getting in the ocean, But a warning on the side
Speaker 1: of a pack of cigarettes when we're going to need
Speaker 1: to walk the government through this before we start to
Speaker 1: freak everybody out. I mean, we can't even tell people
Speaker 1: right now what they should be afraid of. We tried
Speaker 1: that with swine food, and all we did was get
Speaker 1: healthy people scared. That's really eerie, Scott listening to that dialogue. Yeah, well, um,
Speaker 1: you know, when I went to CDC, you know, one
Speaker 1: of the things that I learned early on is that
Speaker 1: we have fifty different state health departments and you know,
Speaker 1: within those states, they all operate differently. And one of
Speaker 1: the tricky parts of this, and we're certainly seeing it,
Speaker 1: is you need a coherent sort of program because without that,
Speaker 1: you know, you get this patchwork going, and a virus
Speaker 1: doesn't really care about a state border, um, and so
Speaker 1: much of you know, there's so much interstate travel and
Speaker 1: commerce in this country, and then you know there's the
Speaker 1: entire globe, and so until you have a consistent federal
Speaker 1: program that tells the states how to act, and that
Speaker 1: it's embraced by the state's governors, regardless of their political orientation,
Speaker 1: we're very, very vulnerable. And it's tricky to explain to
Speaker 1: people who don't have a background in these things how
Speaker 1: how they proliferate. And that's what I was trying to
Speaker 1: do in that scene, is is think about if you're
Speaker 1: someone who is sent to a state to tell them,
Speaker 1: you know what's going on, Um, you know what the
Speaker 1: resistance is. You're going to meet just from the officials,
Speaker 1: not to mention from the general public. So at this point,
Speaker 1: I think we have to believe this is respiratory maybe
Speaker 1: fall mights too. What's that it refers to transmission from surfaces.
Speaker 1: The average person touches their face two or three thousand
Speaker 1: times a day, two or three thousand times a day,
Speaker 1: three to five times every waking minute. In between, we're
Speaker 1: touching door knobs, water fountains, elevator buttons, and each other.
Speaker 1: Those things become mights. The only pushback we had from
Speaker 1: the Minnesota Department of Health was that they said, nobody
Speaker 1: needs to explain to us what a foam might is.
Speaker 1: And my defense of that was, well, we needed a
Speaker 1: teachable moment and we had to do this, unfortunately at
Speaker 1: your expense, but somebody had to be Somebody had to
Speaker 1: explain what an or not was. That wasn't part of
Speaker 1: what you were talking about there, but which is the
Speaker 1: transmissibility in text and what full mights are, so that
Speaker 1: we could get that point across that said, this is
Speaker 1: a um. This is a harbinger of what came to
Speaker 1: be recently because it turns out that FOAMT transmission is
Speaker 1: extremely important with this infection. This virus persists on surfaces
Speaker 1: for up to three days, and so the opportunities for
Speaker 1: transmission are much greater, and they are with many respiratory
Speaker 1: tract infections. So we have say, as you said at
Speaker 1: the very beginning, Katie, this is eerily prophetic. But so
Speaker 1: many things in the film are, which I think is
Speaker 1: really a testament to Scott's imagination and somehow managing put
Speaker 1: it all in there. What about the battle that we
Speaker 1: heard unfolding between Kate Winslet's character and all the considerations
Speaker 1: about how transparent you should be. It's the biggest shopping
Speaker 1: weekend of the year. I think we need to consider
Speaker 1: closing schools and who stays home with the kids, people
Speaker 1: that work at stores, government work as people that work
Speaker 1: at hospitals. When will we know what this is? Have
Speaker 1: you seen those factors being brought to bear, Dr Lipkin
Speaker 1: in the current pandemic. Three weeks ago, I had a
Speaker 1: conversation with a very high level official, elected official where
Speaker 1: we talked about closing schools, and I said that I
Speaker 1: thought this was something that we should do. And the
Speaker 1: response that came back from not only this elected official,
Speaker 1: but also the individuals who were advising this official, was
Speaker 1: that there was going to be no way to feed
Speaker 1: the children who depended on schools for their breakfasts and
Speaker 1: for their lunch. And then when these children went home,
Speaker 1: their parents were going to have no way to take
Speaker 1: care of them, and the grandparents who frequently assigned to
Speaker 1: take care of these children might become infected because these
Speaker 1: kids would carry back this virus from the community into
Speaker 1: their houses. And I said, I understand all of things things,
Speaker 1: but if we don't do it now, it's going to
Speaker 1: get worse. And ultimately, of course, this is what we've done.
Speaker 1: We've had to close all of these schools. We need
Speaker 1: a national policy, we actually need an international policy. But
Speaker 1: if we just stick naturally for a moment, we need
Speaker 1: to have a way in which everybody understands that this
Speaker 1: is what we're going to need to do for some
Speaker 1: period of time. And I think that period of time
Speaker 1: is probably six weeks, maybe eight weeks. But we have
Speaker 1: to enforce it rigorously if we're going to get out
Speaker 1: of this. Were you disappointed with the both the response
Speaker 1: at the federal, state and local level to this pandemic?
Speaker 1: Very much so? Um I came back from China the
Speaker 1: first week of February, and it was clear to me
Speaker 1: that we were headed for a very difficult situation. I
Speaker 1: managed to speak with a number of people I know
Speaker 1: quite well. One of them is the mayor of Chicago,
Speaker 1: who's an old family friend, and she took things very seriously,
Speaker 1: but she was unable to do much of what she
Speaker 1: wanted to do. And here in New York, as you know, UM,
Speaker 1: there's been a struggle between the city and the state,
Speaker 1: upstate and downstate in terms of kinds of responses that
Speaker 1: we're willing to entertain. I think that we should have
Speaker 1: closed things earlier, and I think that that would have
Speaker 1: made a difference, But we'll never know. What about the
Speaker 1: federal response. Dr Lipkin, Well, the problem in talking about
Speaker 1: the response at the federal level is that I don't
Speaker 1: want to discourage cooperation. I think there are many things
Speaker 1: that the President has done that I think I've been
Speaker 1: extremely helpful. I think that some decisions about closing borders,
Speaker 1: for example, uh two people who are coming in from
Speaker 1: areas where they were concerns, we're very very useful. I
Speaker 1: was very concerned when I heard that he was proposing
Speaker 1: that we opened everything up. I he's served because I
Speaker 1: think that would be too soon. But he's now back
Speaker 1: off and and I'm very appreciative that he's done that.
Speaker 1: I think that's important. Why do you think people did
Speaker 1: not take the potential threat seriously? In this kind of work,
Speaker 1: you're a victim of your own success. If you're proactive,
Speaker 1: if you prevent an outbreak from taking hold, then nobody
Speaker 1: really knows about it. You've been successful, but there's no
Speaker 1: you know, it's not like you store up goodwill and
Speaker 1: resources so that you'd be ready for the next one.
Speaker 1: The feeling therefore is that it's really not going to happen,
Speaker 1: and people become somewhat complacent. After nine eleven with the
Speaker 1: anthrax attacks, there was a lot of interest in jump
Speaker 1: starting the biological research that we do into emerging infectious
Speaker 1: agents and bio defense in general, and there was a
Speaker 1: program set up which is one of the first places
Speaker 1: I worked with Larry Brilliant closely. It's something called the
Speaker 1: National bio Surveillance Advisory Subcommittee's a very long name, but
Speaker 1: our objective was to try to figure out how prepared
Speaker 1: we were to get the information needed so that we
Speaker 1: would be able to respond in real time in the
Speaker 1: event or emergency. One of the things we learned and
Speaker 1: that was established under under George Bush was that UM,
Speaker 1: there was a lot of duplication within the government, we
Speaker 1: could become more efficient and more effective if we were
Speaker 1: to synchronize the integrated efforts. And then the second version
Speaker 1: of that which was under Obama, I shared with the
Speaker 1: Jeffrey Engel from North Carolina who was in the Department
Speaker 1: of Health. There that group came out with a very
Speaker 1: similar set of recommendations to the first group and UM
Speaker 1: and then that committee was disbanded and to my knowledge
Speaker 1: it's not been reconvened, and I don't know that ever
Speaker 1: will be convened. So without that committee in place in
Speaker 1: the White House providing real time advice to the people
Speaker 1: who need to make decisions, it's very difficult to see
Speaker 1: how we're going to get out of this. When we
Speaker 1: have financial crisis, we have a fit right which responds
Speaker 1: and tries to make decisions and has some autonomy. We
Speaker 1: don't have that. In public health. We have very very
Speaker 1: good people like UM, you know at n A h
Speaker 1: h h S and I think the Secretary of h
Speaker 1: h S is also excellent, but they are purely advisory
Speaker 1: and if people don't listen to them, UH, then there
Speaker 1: is a there's a risk and in this case, a
Speaker 1: price to be paid. Scott, I thought we might explore
Speaker 1: the behavior of this virus through your film. Matt Damon,
Speaker 1: who is the protagonist, is immune to this. If I'm immune,
Speaker 1: can't you use my blood to cure this? Blood serums
Speaker 1: can take a long time to make and are very expensive.
Speaker 1: But the good news here is that you're not going
Speaker 1: to get sick. Tell me how you were able to
Speaker 1: establish him as a character and why that was so
Speaker 1: important to the plot of the film. Um. Well, he's
Speaker 1: Matt Damon and nobody wants to see him die. Um,
Speaker 1: So that part was easy. No, there you go. You're
Speaker 1: going all Hollywood on us, Scott. One of the things
Speaker 1: that he and I discussed is that humans are all
Speaker 1: very different, and we're seeing it with this virus as well,
Speaker 1: and that people you know who have underlying conditions may
Speaker 1: have one experience, people who are of a certain age
Speaker 1: may have another. UM, And that you know in the film,
Speaker 1: Matt's character is exposed um, but doesn't get sick. Um.
Speaker 1: And I think that that's an important thing for us
Speaker 1: to remember at this moment in in time, is that
Speaker 1: you know that humans have seen pandemics before and that,
Speaker 1: you know, we survive and we have remarkable immune systems. Um.
Speaker 1: You know, I think that that that's something that people
Speaker 1: should celebrate. We're we're pretty you know, incredible animals. Everyone
Speaker 1: has a different experience, and just as in history there's
Speaker 1: a typhoid mary um who can spread a disease, there
Speaker 1: are also individuals who seem to be resistant and we
Speaker 1: can learn quite a bit from them. Dr Lipkoln there
Speaker 1: are Matt Damon's running around who are seemed to be
Speaker 1: immune to this virus UM. I think that as we
Speaker 1: learn more about this pandemic, we're going to find that
Speaker 1: the majority of people who are infected have only mild
Speaker 1: disease or no apparent disease whatsoever, and there are ways
Speaker 1: in which we can sort this out. It's not going
Speaker 1: to help us in the short term, but in the
Speaker 1: longer term I think it will. I think what we're
Speaker 1: going to find is that the majority of people who
Speaker 1: are infected with a virus don't have symptoms or have
Speaker 1: only mild symptoms of the disease. They are nonetheless capable
Speaker 1: of infecting other people, particularly people who are vulnerable because
Speaker 1: they have underlying medical conditions. Obesity, hypertension, diabetes, or they
Speaker 1: simply happen to be older. Right, and if you're a smoker,
Speaker 1: very good time to stop. Well. I've heard of cases
Speaker 1: where seemingly healthy people who haven't smoked for decades are
Speaker 1: succumbing to this disease, or people who have never smoked
Speaker 1: in the first place. Um, have you been able to
Speaker 1: understand why somebody healthy in their thirties or forties seems
Speaker 1: to be affected? Is that the level of virus they're
Speaker 1: coming into contact with or could it be an underlying
Speaker 1: condition they just don't know about. I think either of
Speaker 1: those is possible. I mean, there aren't people who probably
Speaker 1: do get a larger dose of virus than others. Uh,
Speaker 1: And they're probably people who are even a compromised but
Speaker 1: don't realize it, either because they're not getting sufficient sleep,
Speaker 1: or because they're malnourished, or there's something about which they're
Speaker 1: not aware. There may also be genetic factors that we
Speaker 1: don't yet understand. All of this is understudy now in
Speaker 1: many institutions. We should say it's somewhat of a cruel
Speaker 1: irony that you yourself dr lipkin as you stifle yet
Speaker 1: another cough has been you've been diagnosed with COVID nineteen.
Speaker 1: How do you think you got it? And how are
Speaker 1: you doing well? There? There is a concern initially because
Speaker 1: we do work with the virus in our laboratory, that
Speaker 1: I might have become infected there, but in fact the
Speaker 1: virus work is not something I had been anywhere near
Speaker 1: UH for several weeks, and we didn't even open the
Speaker 1: virus that we're using as a sample to grow the
Speaker 1: stocks or using for our work now until after I
Speaker 1: had already left the LAMB. So my case was a
Speaker 1: community acquired I traveled through China without any difficulty, never
Speaker 1: never got infected there, and I got infected here in
Speaker 1: the community. This is now a community acquired disease and
Speaker 1: it's very easy for anyone to get it. And one
Speaker 1: of the reasons why I talked about the fact that
Speaker 1: I was infected was to make the point that if
Speaker 1: I can get infected, knowing what I do, know, anybody
Speaker 1: can get infected. This is a disease that there's a
Speaker 1: risk to us all. Can you tell us what the
Speaker 1: symptoms have been for you with coronavirus. Yes, I had
Speaker 1: an upper respiratory attract infection that was not COVID that
Speaker 1: proceeded this UH, and I was recovering from that. I
Speaker 1: felt like I was doing quite well, and then suddenly
Speaker 1: I developed a sort of a nonproductive cough and a
Speaker 1: fever and then a splitting headache. And I never got headaches,
Speaker 1: and I had that, and I knew that something was different.
Speaker 1: So I went into my UH, not into the laboratory,
Speaker 1: but I drove to the laboratory and I took swabs
Speaker 1: and I handed them off to my team because we
Speaker 1: have tests for all of these things. And they called
Speaker 1: me up and they said, you have an enormous amount
Speaker 1: of virus and so far one of the highest viral
Speaker 1: loads we've seen. So I've been recovering from that, and
Speaker 1: I wish everybody, well, this is not something that you're
Speaker 1: gonna want to get. It's tough, particularly in my UH
Speaker 1: people my vintage. You're older, but you are you are
Speaker 1: on the men because some people say they feel better
Speaker 1: and then they their health sort of goes down downward,
Speaker 1: and then they feel better again. So where are you
Speaker 1: on this side of day eleven? So I'm I feel
Speaker 1: like I'm truly on the mend at this point. It's
Speaker 1: it's a slow process. But yesterday I walked. Two days ago,
Speaker 1: I walked a mile, yesterday a mile and a half.
Speaker 1: Today I'm going to do two. And I'm going to
Speaker 1: get back into get back into shape as quickly as
Speaker 1: I can. There's an enormous amount of work to do
Speaker 1: coming up. How our pandemic nightmare might end. That's right
Speaker 1: after this spoiler alert everyone. By the end of Contagion,
Speaker 1: the heroic scientists working against the clock are able to
Speaker 1: develop a vaccine for the movie's fictional pathogen called M
Speaker 1: e v one. And let me tell you, by the
Speaker 1: end you'll need a little good news. This vaccine as
Speaker 1: a result of the courage and perseverance of a remarkable few,
Speaker 1: we shall now begin the drawing. John. Yeah, first, M
Speaker 1: e v one vaccination. Are those people born on March
Speaker 1: I almost cried at the end for my appreciation of
Speaker 1: the public health system, but of science and medicine in general.
Speaker 1: When you see those people standing in line waiting for
Speaker 1: the vaccine, it reminded me of when I was, I think,
Speaker 1: in kindergarten and they used those little sugar cubes. Um
Speaker 1: I think was it was that a polio vaccine I
Speaker 1: was getting at the time. Well, I remember that very well,
Speaker 1: these little pink sugar cubes that they gave to all
Speaker 1: the kids. Do you think this will end with the vaccine?
Speaker 1: Do you think it will end with these drugs that
Speaker 1: help people once they've been infected. How do you see
Speaker 1: this whole saga ending. The vaccine is going to be
Speaker 1: the definitive end for this challenge to public health. During
Speaker 1: the interim, we're going to be able to chip away
Speaker 1: it's some of the morbidding mortality using plasma therapy and
Speaker 1: drugs that are in the process of being discovered and developed.
Speaker 1: In the short term, the key is going to be
Speaker 1: the social distancing and testing that allow us to ensure
Speaker 1: that that the isolation is working. And that's really where
Speaker 1: I think the folks, the folks I need to be
Speaker 1: now on the social distancing and and the use of
Speaker 1: plasma therapy to treat people who are sick or exposed
Speaker 1: while we continue to work on the vaccine. And I
Speaker 1: want to just recap what Tony Fauci continually says, which
Speaker 1: is that the vaccine is not around the corner. It's
Speaker 1: six eighteen months. So this is going to be a marathon,
Speaker 1: and the American people need to be prepared for that
Speaker 1: and rise to it like they have for every other
Speaker 1: challenge we've had since our inception. Do you believe that
Speaker 1: once people are infected, they will have immunity to the
Speaker 1: virus or is that a big question mark still? I
Speaker 1: think it's a I think it is a question mark there.
Speaker 1: The evidence that we have from very small animal studies
Speaker 1: with non in primates, with Reese's monkeys is that there
Speaker 1: is at least part at least there's immunity in the
Speaker 1: short term for a few months. We don't know how
Speaker 1: long it's gonna last. And because it's a very small study,
Speaker 1: I wouldn't speculate beyond that point except to say that
Speaker 1: I believe that there will be immunity to this particular virus,
Speaker 1: but it's never going to leave us completely. We're gonna
Speaker 1: have to deal with it on an annual basis. It's
Speaker 1: going to be like measles, and we need to think about,
Speaker 1: you know, getting people ready for the idea that we
Speaker 1: are going to have to do vaccinations, because, as you know,
Speaker 1: there's been a there's a population which is not insubstantial
Speaker 1: in this country that doesn't believe in vaccinations. Scott, what
Speaker 1: about you, how do you hope this will end, and
Speaker 1: any final thoughts from you from a screenwriter's point of
Speaker 1: view were still very much in the first act of
Speaker 1: this of this particular story, you know, the next two acts. Um.
Speaker 1: You know, I'm not I'm not going to write anymore
Speaker 1: than any other person in our society. We're all going
Speaker 1: to write the rest of this movie together. And if
Speaker 1: we listen to experts and if we really can overcome
Speaker 1: our tribalism and understand our obligation to each other, it
Speaker 1: can be an incredibly unifying moment, you know. I mean
Speaker 1: it may sound very corny, but you know, our love
Speaker 1: for each other is one of the things that we
Speaker 1: can do to help beat this um. And if people
Speaker 1: take their responsibility to their fellow citizens seriously, the movie
Speaker 1: has one kind of an ending um And I think
Speaker 1: you know, we're going to have to turn our society
Speaker 1: on slowly. It's not going to be a light switch
Speaker 1: change at the end of April, and people are going
Speaker 1: to have to listen again about what sectors can slowly
Speaker 1: come back um and get more robust than others. Are
Speaker 1: going to need to spend time figuring out ways, and
Speaker 1: with those ways, there will be other you know, there'll
Speaker 1: be responsibilities and things we have to do. Um. So
Speaker 1: that's that's the version of the story, UM, that I
Speaker 1: really hope happens. Um. You know, we have everything we
Speaker 1: need to make that story happen. You know. The other
Speaker 1: the other version I really don't want to contemplate. One
Speaker 1: of the things that Scott has done is a project
Speaker 1: that um we talked about that's just coming on, it's
Speaker 1: just going online, was a series of vignettes because we're
Speaker 1: trying to educate people using contagion as a tool as
Speaker 1: our way of flattening the curve. Well tell us about that, Scott.
Speaker 1: One of the things that um, we all felt that
Speaker 1: the heat at the at the end of the movie,
Speaker 1: you know, both myself and Stephen and the cast, was
Speaker 1: we really really understood what public health meant and that
Speaker 1: you know, it's our responsibility to each other and we
Speaker 1: don't really ever talk about that that this is actually
Speaker 1: one of the opportunities we have as citizens to work
Speaker 1: on a problem together and to express our concern, our compassion,
Speaker 1: and our love for each other. And it's really simple.
Speaker 1: It means, you know, when you take care of yourself
Speaker 1: and when you're responsible, you're taking care of the people
Speaker 1: around you. Um. So. I had had a conversation with
Speaker 1: Larry Brilliant a couple of weeks ago, and he said
Speaker 1: to me, do you think there's any way you could
Speaker 1: get the cast together and and maybe right um some
Speaker 1: public service announcements because the movie, you know, has had
Speaker 1: a lot of traction lately. And everybody in the cast
Speaker 1: who I've reached out to so far, um has been
Speaker 1: eager to film themselves at home. Nobody has any makeup
Speaker 1: on um. Everybody is sheltering in place. Hi, everybody, Uh,
Speaker 1: this is Matt Damon. Um. So. A few years ago,
Speaker 1: a bunch of us did this movie called Contagion, which
Speaker 1: we've noticed is creeping its way back up on the
Speaker 1: charts on iTunes for obvious reasons, given what we're all
Speaker 1: living through right now. Um and So, the Mailment school
Speaker 1: of things as fundamental as washing your hands. The way
Speaker 1: so it works is that one end of the so
Speaker 1: molecule finds with the water and the other end finds
Speaker 1: to the grease on your hands. What social distancing really means.
Speaker 1: It means stay six ft away from another person. It
Speaker 1: means not gathering in groups, and it means staying home
Speaker 1: or sheltering in place, if that's what government officials are
Speaker 1: telling you to do. About how a pandemic um is everywhere,
Speaker 1: but it's not everywhere once. So if it's not where
Speaker 1: you live today, you can bet that that's going to change.
Speaker 1: And if you don't know anyone who's sick yet, you
Speaker 1: can also bet that that will change as well. So, uh,
Speaker 1: we all self record, you know, they self recorded these
Speaker 1: scripts that I wrote, and they are online at UM
Speaker 1: the Mailman School of Public Health at Columbia University. You know,
Speaker 1: every day, because you know, some people know that that
Speaker 1: I wrote this film, I get emails with question marks,
Speaker 1: and I get sent theories of where this came from
Speaker 1: and conspiracy theories and theories of cures, and you know,
Speaker 1: it becomes something for everyone to utilize for a host
Speaker 1: of other agendas. UM that you know, I think most
Speaker 1: of the time my inclination in the world is to say,
Speaker 1: you know, people are allowed to believe whatever they want
Speaker 1: to believe. It's not that simple, right now. You know,
Speaker 1: when people don't believe in science and they question, um,
Speaker 1: you know, the the expertise of people like like Anthony
Speaker 1: Fauci and Ian or Larry brilliant, and they cast dispersions
Speaker 1: on them. It isn't it isn't a small problem. You know,
Speaker 1: these are the people who know the most about it,
Speaker 1: and because it is a novel virus, there's information that
Speaker 1: they don't yet have that takes time. And it scares
Speaker 1: me um beyond almost anything if we start to lose
Speaker 1: our respect and our confidence in in the empirical method
Speaker 1: and in science, because it is the best tool we
Speaker 1: have right now to get us through this. You know,
Speaker 1: science scientists and experts in these moments are our heroes.
Speaker 1: You can check out all of those contagion inspired p
Speaker 1: s a s by the way, by going to Control
Speaker 1: the Contagion dot org. Those p s a s were
Speaker 1: written by Scott Burns and created by the Columbia Mailman
Speaker 1: School of Public Health, and we encourage you to spread
Speaker 1: the word on your social media channels. You can use
Speaker 1: the hashtag control the Contagion. I'll be doing the same,
Speaker 1: so make sure you follow me on Instagram, Twitter, Facebook
Speaker 1: and all the rest. Before we go, I wanted to
Speaker 1: leave you with a moment of kindness. This one comes
Speaker 1: from a listener named Suzanne Curry, who shares how the St.
Speaker 1: John's church and Barrington, Rhode Island is connecting with his
Speaker 1: congregants during this time of social distancing. They had a
Speaker 1: virtual happy hour last Thursday at five o'clock and that
Speaker 1: was my mom's first Zoom call. She's eighty one years
Speaker 1: old and I helped her with it. And then they
Speaker 1: have had church virtually on days at nine am. They
Speaker 1: were broadcasting it live on Facebook. And then they did
Speaker 1: a zoom last Sunday and it was very helpful. Thank
Speaker 1: you so much, Susanne, and good for your mom for
Speaker 1: getting on Zoom. And you guys can keep sending your
Speaker 1: moments of kindness or connection, the ones that you've witnessed
Speaker 1: or experienced. Just leave your name and a detailed message
Speaker 1: at eight four four four seven nine seven eight eight three.
Speaker 1: That's eight four four four seven nine seven eight eight three.
Speaker 1: You can also email me at info at Katie Currect
Speaker 1: dot com. Just put kindness in the subject line and
Speaker 1: that does it for this episode of Next Question. To
Speaker 1: get the most accurate and up to date information on
Speaker 1: the coronavirus and how to keep you and your family
Speaker 1: say during this pandemic, make sure you go to the
Speaker 1: CDC and the World Health Organization websites. You can also
Speaker 1: check out my morning newsletter, Wake Up Hall, where we're
Speaker 1: diligently reporting on the day's most pressing news. You can
Speaker 1: subscribe to that at Katie currek dot com. The next
Speaker 1: few weeks maybe the hardest, as the number of infections
Speaker 1: are expected to peak. You can do your part by
Speaker 1: staying home, keep washing those hands, check in with neighbors
Speaker 1: and loved ones from a safe distance or virtually, of course,
Speaker 1: and and stop touching your face days. I know we
Speaker 1: can get through this together. Until next time and my
Speaker 1: Next Question, I'm Katie Couric. Thanks so much for listening,
Speaker 1: and stay safe everyone, Next Question with Katie Kurik is
Speaker 1: a production of I Heart Radio and Katie Curreic Media.
Speaker 1: The executive producers are Katie Kurik, Courtney Litz, and Tyler Klang.
Speaker 1: The supervising producer is Lauren Hansen. Our show producer is
Speaker 1: Bethan Macaluso. The associate producers are Emily Pinto and Derek Clements.
Speaker 1: Editing by Eric Clements, Dylan Fagin and Lowell Berlante, mixing
Speaker 1: by Dylan Fagan. Our researcher is Gabriel Loser. For more
Speaker 1: information on today's episode, go to Katie currek dot com
Speaker 1: and follow us on Twitter and Instagram at Katie Currek.
Speaker 1: For more podcasts for My heart Radio, visit the I
Speaker 1: heart Radio app, Apple podcast, or wherever you listen to
Speaker 1: your favorite shows,