San Francisco, University Of California discussed on Ben Shapiro

Automatic TRANSCRIPT

Chair of the department medicine at the university of California San Francisco said I've walked around if you had a chance to them in any of the various models are being bandied about as to the death rate of crime virus and the possibility of of what the sort of exponential growth curve looks like the flattening of the curve is an imperial college study there's that study at the university of Washington is now being cited by folks from the White House that suggests going Dr Fauci in October it's that even if we engage in social distancing and this sort of locked down for a for a prolonged period of time we may see a hundred thousand two hundred thousand deaths what do you make of of the models and how effective do you think for how long can this can social distancing B. because well one of the questions here's what happens when people start to gradually be released into the economy it doesn't seem like we have sort of a a date certain as to when the medical resource are going to be available such that a surgeon cases is not an old woman system yeah I mean the the the models are as good as we can do now but they all have substantial uncertainty associated with them that the evidence is pretty clear though that that that social distancing and shelter home orders really work quite effectively there's there was a study out of Italy where to regions next to each other in the Monterey one went early social distancing in the other later and the cubs are just night and day one has a very big peak and the other is is much flatter so it's pretty clear that the recommendations of the infection experts are all right the problem with social distancing and with a shelter in place orders is is the outcome of what happened before them are kind of baked in so would happen in a week or two before people started separate themselves that's going to play itself out no matter what you do now now doesn't mean you shouldn't be incredibly aggressive now because he because it it keeps going unless you you separate people but it's not like it's magic in the day you do it you stop seeing new cases you will see the cases that got infected from from a week or two before I think what the models that seem like they're accurate that to me and to my colleagues that study this for a living it looks like we're on a trajectory for for as many tens of thousands of not hundred thousand or two hundred thousand deaths and whether that number gets any higher really depends on whether we can do the social distancing and stick with it for a for a period of time now what happens when we start coming out of it that's going to be a very tricky phase and Scott Gottlieb the former FDA secretary is put out a policy set of policy recommendations that I think are quite smart because it's going to it's going to die down it's probably gonna happen in different communities sooner and later but it seems like many of them it will peak in the middle of April and maybe begin dying down in may it's not going to be gone and so I liken this to a to a fire that you may have extinguished the main fire but they're still embers around and then we have to engage in really aggressive testing and and public health strategies to be sure that we catch any new cases early isolate them and keep this thing tamp down but it's not until we reach that point and that's likely to be in may that we can begin thinking about relaxing the kind of restrictions without using Robert Walker professor and chair of the department medicine at the university of California San Francisco speaking of those measures that are gonna have to be taken in South Korea had built up for these measures in the aftermath of the sars epidemic in two thousand three it took them literally years to build those sorts of resources so they can do what they've been doing in South Korea now we're talking about having to build not only testing resources but surveillance resources that can be activated in a matter of a couple months I'm not supremely optimistic that we're gonna have those measures in place given how long it's taken just to get basic testing approved via the via the FDA even now we're struggling to get those tests out so with that with that said it realistically speaking how long you think it'll be before most Americans can go back to work not just a few waves in people who've already maybe been tested for antibodies but but like actually most Americans able to go back to their offices you know Bennett so it's so hard to know but some of that depends on the adequacy of the public health response and that's everything from testing to other public health maneuvers it probably isn't a very by community so you know places that were hard hit may see a very early peak in search and then they may come down fairly quickly that's what we saw in China for example and some of it depends on something we don't quite know yet whether that whether this thing is seasonal so it may be that it's dying out on its own in in in mayor and or or thereabouts and that may change the tempo at which we can allow people to go back to to go back to work we go back to what resembles a normal life the problem of course is it seasonal there's a good part of and the bad part of that which means it might come roaring back in the fall as happened the Spanish flu epidemic but that will at least give us a little bit of time and bandwidth to continue to work on therapies to build the testing capacity to work on the other things we need to do to keep this thing tamp down and prepare ourselves for the possibility that we're gonna do do act two of this sometime in the fall that's what it isn't pretty wide consensus across the political spectrum this needs to happen there needs to be is tremendous lockdowns obviously the trump administration is on the same page as everybody else when it comes to that there are some critics who suggest that we should have been implementing measures like the Swedes or like another ones that are up a fair bit more loose why do you think that those wouldn't have worked in the United States and what it how do we sort of developed but I know hypothesis here given the fact that everyone is basically engaging in the same measures and so if we succeed in the deaths are down and that is accredited to the to the staying inside there will be some people say what we did too much and and actually we should have done any of this at all well I think it's very hard to see what's going on in New York and and and say that that we've done too much and and even in the places that have put out statewide or regional proclamations that people should stay inside the degree of adherence to that and it forced me to that there is a lot it's not just that you have to have the order it has to be everybody's gotta understand and it's gonna be message constantly that this is the right thing to do it's brutally hard I mean no that is the the impact on the economy is real and is devastating in its own way but to my mind this thing is that it is and it will never see anything quite like it in our lifetime and certainly my medical life time of thirty five years and we can't do anything including get the economy back on track in till we get this thing tamp down to a manageable level so I I have very little sympathy to to the argument that we should be doing doing less I think if you look at San Francisco versus New York you I think it really supports the hypothesis that being aggressive about this early not just from the public sector in the government sector but from the corporate sector pays a massive dividends and I suspect that we'll have a big impact on on the economy ultimately if we manage to keep this to a more manageable level so I think we got to be super aggressive about it we can't let our guard down anytime soon until the public health experts say that it's safe for us to do so and I think that's not only.

Coming up next