COVID-19 Q&A with Dr. Fauci and Stephen Curry (Official Video)

Can y'all hear me? Dr. Fauci.

Hey, Steph.

How you doing?

I'm good, how are you?

Very good. Sorry for the technical difficulties, but I'm glad I got connected with you. And I like that background too. Oh man, I appreciate you coming on. I know you're a busy man and obviously this time, there's a sense of urgency with everything that you're doing. So one, I appreciate your commitment to protecting the masses and bringing all your expertise and knowledge of, you know, how this virus spreads and informing the people how we should take this seriously. And I just want to thank you for, you know, your commitment to that because we all know how important it is for all of us to be in the know, to have the right information, to be able to, you know, act accordingly. So thank you for your time, you know, hopping on with me.

Thank you. My pleasure.

All right, so what we did, I put out the request yesterday. Everybody knew that I was going to be, uh, talking to you, so I try to compile as many questions as possible from all of my followers, everybody who, uh, wanted to ask you questions directly, and we'll kind of just see how the conversation goes. And, and, uh, just would love your sound advice. So I'll start with a pretty simple one, I think, but just in terms of You know, how is COVID-19 different from the flu in terms of, you know, how it interacts with the body and just how it spreads?

Well, it's similar in some respects, Stephen, that it's a respiratory illness that's transmitted by the respiratory route. It gives a degree of pathology that's mostly pneumonia. The reason it's different is that it's very, very much more transmissible than flu, and more importantly, it's significantly more serious. Let me give you some very quick numbers.

Okay.

The overall mortality of seasonal flu that you and I confront every year is about 0.1%. The overall mortality of coronavirus is about 1%. Sometimes, like in China, it was up to 2 to 3%. Which means it's at least 10 times more serious than the typical influenza. So when people kind of compare it, in some respects it has some similarities, but it's really, really different in its degree of seriousness.

And is that— I know we've been hearing a lot of kind of rumors around or numbers around from, you know, when it showed up in China to other different countries, you know, the disparity or discrepancy amongst ages.— and, you know, how it affects, uh, obviously, we have underlying health conditions, or, you know, if you're, uh, a little older, that it affects you a little bit more seriously. But has that shown differently here in the States in terms of, you know, different age brackets and, uh, just the severity of how, you know, the cases of death versus in intensive care units and, uh, and all those type of things?

Yeah, mostly the same, but with some interesting maybe disturbing differences. If you look at China, you look at Europe, you look at South Korea, it predominantly is reasonably benign, if you want to call it that. You get sick, but you don't get into serious trouble if you're young. Very heavily weighted towards the elderly and those with underlying conditions— heart disease, lung disease, diabetes, kidney disease. Mm-hmm. Those are the people who have a higher degree of mortality. We know that for sure. We're seeing that a lot now in the United States. But what we are starting to see is that there are some people who are younger, people your age, young, healthy, vigorous, who don't have any underlying conditions, who are getting seriously ill. It's still a very, very small minority, but it doesn't mean that young people like yourself should say I'm completely exempt from any risk of getting seriously ill. And that's the reason why when we talk about being careful, about physical distancing, doing the kind of social separation, it means not only for the elderly, but the young people have to do it too, for two reasons. One, you need to protect yourself, 'cause you're not completely exempt from serious illness. But two—

Mm-hmm.

You can become the vector or the carrier of infection where you get infected, you feel well, and then you inadvertently and innocently pass it on to your grandfather, your grandmother, or your uncle who's on chemotherapy for cancer. That's what we got to be careful of.

And that's really one of the reasons that I wanted to have this Q&A and hopefully reach, um, you know, different demographic or people that, you know, are interested in, in the facts of what's going on, because you see all the different, uh visuals of people at the beach, at parks, like in crazy public gatherings and not really adhering to that social distancing kind of concept. And like the sense of urgency of what you just said of how that can continue the spread of the virus, but affect people that unknowingly even in their own families that it might show up a little different or lead to some, you know, [FOREIGN LANGUAGE] drastic and dire situation that they don't want to find themselves or anybody in their family in.

You're absolutely correct. We really do have a responsibility to protect the vulnerable ones, and the vulnerable are the elderly and those with underlying conditions. We've got to make sure they are clearly protected from this, which could be very serious for them.

And so, you know, like, I guess probably this— we're on week Going into week 3 of— since the NBA has been shut down in terms of postponing the season, obviously the Olympics just announced, you know, moving to next year to do their part in terms of, you know, keeping large gatherings from happening and just being smart and precautious. My question is, like, what needs to happen in terms of, you know, the numbers or— What metric are you looking at to be able to then determine at mass that large gatherings, sporting events, those type of things are okay to revisit as not a threat to continue the spread of the virus?

That's a great question, Steph, and that's what we deal with on a daily basis when we sit down in the Situation Room with the White House every day to go over that. What you need is you need to see the the trajectory of the curve starts to come down. We've seen that in China. They went up and down. They're starting to get back to some normal life. They gotta be careful they don't reintroduce the virus into China, but they're on the other end of the curve. Korea is doing that. They're starting to come back down.

Uh-huh.

Europe, particularly Italy, is in a terrible situation. They're still going way up. The United States is a big country. We have so many different regions, like New York City right now is having a terrible time, and yet there are places in the country that are doing really quite well. You could probably identify people, contact trace, and get them out of circulation. Whereas in New York City, it's doing what's called mitigation, trying to spread— trying to prevent as best you can the spread. So in direct answer to your question, we can start thinking about getting back to some degree of normality when the country as a whole has turned that corner and start coming down. Then you could pinpoint cases much more easily than getting overwhelmed by cases, which is what's going on in New York City.

Part of that, right, in terms of testing, so, like, the numbers are going through the roof, and I know, I think I just checked, You know, we're, in terms of number of cases, I think we're approaching or even maybe close to surpassing Italy. Obviously we're a bigger country, so you got to take that into account. But like testing is becoming more accessible than it was 3 weeks ago. And I think, I know that there's different efforts in different parts of the country that are trying to address that issue. I myself, I had flu-like symptoms about 3 weeks ago, or 2 weeks, or sorry, 2 days before.

Hi.

The NBA shut down, and I got a test, you know, pretty much right away. And I know that there's a conversation now about just the overall accessibility of tests and how those are starting to roll out in different parts of the country. Like, what's your assessment of that process? How important is that process, whether you have symptoms or whether you don't? And when it comes to dealing with each individual case, like, how are we addressing the testing?

Issue? Okay, great question. That's been a real issue early on. Several weeks ago, we were not in a place where we needed to be or wanted to be. We did not have as much accessibility of testing as we now have and that we will have going forward. Right now, there are literally hundreds of thousands of tests that are out there now, mostly because we got the private sector involved, of the companies who know how to make it and make it well. Make large amounts. So we're going very much in the right direction. In specific answer to your question, you did the right thing. I mean, if someone right now gets flu-like symptoms— a fever, aches, and a bit of a cough— the first thing you do is stay at home. Don't go to an emergency room because then you might be infecting others. [FOREIGN LANGUAGE] Get on the phone with a physician, a nurse, or a healthcare provider. Get instructions from them what to do, and if available, you can get a test. But the critical issue is don't flood the emergency rooms. Stay at home. If you really are obviously seriously ill, then you've gotta go quickly there. But if you just have aches, pains, and a fever, stay where you are, but contact your physician.

So if you have those symptoms, right? Now we have, this is one of the most popular questions that I received yesterday and up until, you know, our interview started where, People really want to know, if you contract the virus, you quarantine yourself, you go through the recovery process, and then, you know, the symptoms either wane or sometimes you might not have symptoms and, you know, the virus kind of passes through. What does it mean to be recovered, and can you get the virus a second time? And if yes or no, does that influence, you know, how testing kind of goes in the future in terms of trying to detect an antibody? [SPEAKING SPANISH] or even address like that conversation around herd immunity and how to really not let this be a cyclical thing that, or is it a cyclical thing in terms of what to expect in the future?

Okay, Steph, you had 3 or 4 or 5 questions.

I know, sorry.

No, go ahead.

Let's start with the first one. Can you get the virus a second time? Let's keep it real.

Okay, well, but let me get to the first one, which was also important.

All right.

So, if you're infected and you recover, the question is, when can you go out and be safe to not infect others? The general rule is you have to have 2 cultures 24 hours apart that are negative. That's what the rule is now. As more people get infected, that likely is not gonna be feasible. So we're gonna have to set some guidelines of days following the diminution of symptoms. We're not there yet. 'cause we don't know as much about how far out you could be shedding virus. First thing. Second thing, your main question. Once you get infected, can you get reinfected? We haven't done the specific testing to determine that, but if this acts like every virus similar to it that we know, the chances are overwhelming that if you get infected, recover from infection, that you are not gonna get infected with the same virus.

Right.

Which means that you can then safely go out into the community and feel immune so that you can not only protect yourself, get back to work, get back to your job, but you'll be able to have what you refer to as herd immunity. Enough people who've recovered in the community, that gives the virus very little chance to spread rapidly. That's what's referred to as herd immunity.

Okay. And in terms of the timeline that we're in right now, I heard this, I guess, rumor and/or belief that kind of with like the flu, that in warmer weather or warmer months through over the summer, that that diminishes the ability for the virus to spread or to act as it's doing right now. Is there any truth to that?

Well, with other viruses like seasonal influenza, that we get confronted with every year and other coronaviruses that are more benign, typical common cold. What you said is true. As the weather gets warmer, viruses tend to do poorly in warm, moist weather and do quite well in cold, dry weather.

Yeah.

And that's one of the reasons why, in addition to the fact that in the warm weather you're more outside and not confined in a room, that these kind of respiratory viruses tend to go down as you get into the summer months. The only issue is, Steph, we don't know whether this is gonna happen with this virus because this is the first time we've ever dealt with this virus. So it's not an unreasonable assumption to think that it's gonna go down, but you don't wanna count on it.

Right. That's what I'm just thinking about from the general population standpoint in terms of how important, you know, that social distancing effort is Obviously there's people that are in tough situations, having to make tough decisions, trying to earn, you know, their income, whether they're in the essential services category in their industry and they need to go to work, those type of things. Like, what's the risk of lifting those— you know, each city, each state is kind of dealing with that on a case-by-case basis, but what is the serious risk of lifting those—

I'm sorry.

Social distancing or shelter-in-place or stay-at-home initiatives too early, and that balance of where we're at with, you know, shutting down the entire economy?

Well, you know, Stephen, it is not an all-or-none process. I mean, when you're locking down the way they— the way Governor Newsom did in California and the way Governor Cuomo's doing in New York City, that's the extreme. That's a heavy hammer on something. Even if you kind of lessen those restrictions, everybody until this is over should practice some degree of physical distancing and care. Not big crowds, wash your hands a lot, be careful. You can do that and still get back to somewhat of a normal life. There's a big difference between the extreme of locking a city down—

Right.

Opening it up a bit, but being more careful than you normally would be. And I think there are places in the country now where you want to look at carefully and say, you know, maybe you want to pull back a little bit on the restriction, so long as you just don't let it rip and say, I don't care what happens. So you treat New York City a little bit different the way you treat Nebraska.

That's kind of in the spirit of what America is in terms of we're not overreacting, right? That's the— I've heard that term in terms of people feeling threatened by the change in the reality, but there's no overreaction to this. This is a serious thing.

You're absolutely right. We need to make that point. This is serious business. We are not overreacting.

Can I go back to testing right quick?

Sure.

Because I'm watching some of the comments come in as we go. In terms of like just specifics on like the access to testing, Like currently, just why I guess is it so challenging to get a test if, you know, you do have the symptoms or to your point earlier about, you know, they're at a level where you feel like you need medical attention immediately versus, you know, your common flu-like symptoms. But if you want to go get a test, like what are the things that are inhibiting those being accessible to the masses?

Well, there should be nothing now that's inhibiting it, but originally, the system, the way it was set up, Steph, was not geared to this kind of massive capability of instantaneously, safely getting a test, getting it done in a really good period of time. Not days and days, but hours. Right now, the system is changed predominantly because it's being handed over to the commercial firms who know how to do it.

Okay.

It starts off as a public health measure from the CDC. It now needs to be, and is being, handed over to the commercial group.

And so you're, forgive my ignorance in terms of like, you're testing, the test to understand if you have the virus or not, and that's being rolled out. Is there another process of tests that are, um, being developed to test the ant— like, the development of antibodies. And, and so we know if you've gone through the process or not, like you said, you've built up that immunity, that you can start to understand the numbers of how many people have gone through that to get back to kind of normal life quicker.

Uh, Steph, that's not a stupid question, that's a smart question, because that's exactly what we are doing and what you need to do. There's two types of tests, and you described it as well as anybody. One, to determine if you are actually now infected. That's the test that people need to get screened. Another test determines if at some time you were infected. It's an antibody test. It's much quicker, it's much easier, it's much cheaper. Those are the kind of tests where you can determine out there how many people actually did get infected and recovered. A very important piece of information that we need to get.

And on that, I know there's a timeline for developing a vaccine, right? And that, I know there's certain tests and trials have started in different areas, but I heard it's a 12 to 18 month timeline really to be able to even roll that out in any kind of form, but What does that process look like and what is the likelihood that we get to a success in a vaccine in that time frame? And how does that affect, I guess, follow-up with how that would affect the cyclical nature and possibly of the corona?

Okay, another great question. Well, the vaccine development, we have started on the development of vaccine faster than ever in the history of any virus. From the time it was discovered to the time we actually made it and put it into a trial. But when you test the vaccine, it's multiple phases. The first thing you gotta do is make sure it's safe. We started that a couple of weeks ago. When you find out it's safe and that it induces the kind of response you want it to, then you do it in a lot of people.

Right.

The first safe trial, to be careful, is like 45 people. Then you go into hundreds. Hundreds, if not thousands of people in what's called a Phase 2, 3 trial to determine if it works. That's the thing that's gonna take an additional 8 months or so. So when you add up the 3 or 4 months for the Phase 1, plus the 7 or 8 months, you get about a year to a year and a half. If we really push, we hope that we will know by the time we get into next winter whether or not we have something that works. Thank you. A vaccine is gonna be totally relevant for if it cycles into another season, which, Steph, quite frankly, I think it's gonna do.

Right.

This virus is very, very transmissible, and we're seeing it throughout the world. I cannot imagine it's just gonna disappear. So vaccines are gonna be important for the next time around, not for what we're dealing with now.

So on that front, Like right now we're dealing with the first wave, right? So there's a potential in terms of what you just said that there could be multiple periods of, you know, whether it's New York, whether it's California, and you're kind of tracking, you know, where the hotspots are, but that there could be more responsibility for social distancing or shelter in place, different directions that, you know, cities and states are taking right now that could happen, you know, down the road, next flu— or next season, I should say. That could be a possibility, right?

You know, Steph, it's a possibility, but I think and I hope— and it's not just hope, because I think if we do it right, it will happen this way— that we will get enough experience so that when it does come back, we'll be able to immediately identify isolate, and contact trace. And if you do that effectively, you don't have an outbreak. You contain it at a very low level, which would mean we won't have to lock down again. We could treat individual ones and prevent the outbreak. Prevent what we're seeing in New York City. Prevent what we're starting to see right now in Los— in New Orleans. Those are the kind of things that if we go around that cycle, I think we can avoid that. It will be much different than what we're doing right now.

Absolutely. So in terms of masks, right? So there's a conversation around the N95 respirator mask or your kind of standard surgical mask, or whether you're sick or healthy, whether you should wear one or not, if you're going out in public or— Can you speak on just the effectiveness of, you know, masks in this kind of— to address the problem, you know, and how that's— the access to those N95 masks around the country, like, are we in short supply? We need more? Like, how's that process going?

Okay, we certainly need more. We have much more supply now than we had just literally a week or two ago. You have to prioritize who needs the mask and who should wear it.

Okay.

First and foremost, healthcare providers, doctors, nurses, and health providers who are taking care of a person with coronavirus disease to protect them from getting infected. 'Cause what's happened in Italy and what happened in China is you can knock out your healthcare force and then you're really in trouble. So protect, the person. The other one is if you are infected, to put a mask on to prevent you from spreading it to someone else. The third priority is the general population, who if they wear a mask, they may assume that it's 100% protective. It's just not. It's probably, you can guess a number, maybe 50%. So when we say you don't need to wear a mask, what we're really saying is that make sure you prioritize it first to the people who need the mask. In a perfect world, if you had all the masks you wanted, then somebody walking in the street with a mask doesn't bother me. You can get some degree of protection. But make sure you prioritize it well.

And I was just thinking about all the different ways to address that issue. Obviously, there's, you know, the federal government down to, you know, your state governments trying to— I heard that a lot of state governments are having to go buy them on their own and try to, you know, supply those to, like you said, where it's needed. Are we going about that the right way in terms of, you know, that process and getting that access and just—

Yeah, you know, there's a stockpile—

We got to put a lot of visibility, yeah.

No, Steph, there's a stockpile of, you know, tens and tens of millions of masks But, you know, we live in a country that we can do things pretty efficiently. Once you get the private sector, these companies involved, they could whip out millions and millions of masks. So, I mean, literally at the last meeting we had, say, "Okay, enough is enough. Let's get them in flooded. Let's get those companies to make them." And they're willing to do it. You know, it's very interesting. You would think that the federal government would almost have to force them to do it.

Right.

We're not seeing that. We're seeing they're stepping forward, wanting to do it themselves.

I appreciate that. Just from your vantage point, you've been front and center from the start, again, spreading, you know, accurate, truthful information and trying to— I know things change on the daily and you're following that trend, but what's the biggest piece of, I guess, misinformation and that you know that's kind of been out, you know, for public consumption, and what would you kind of say to correct that, whatever issue that is?

You know, I think you brought it up in one of the questions that you asked me. This dichotomy between people who are being frightened to death of it versus people who don't even believe it and think it's something trivial that you don't have to worry about. I'd like to get the people in the country to realize that we are dealing with a serious problem. It's something that we've modified our lives. It's not convenient to lock yourself in. It's not convenient to not do the kinds of things. It's not convenient for you not to be playing basketball. But we're going through a period of time now where we've gotta, as a country, pull together. Don't get frightened. Don't get intimidated. Use the energy to be able to confront it and do the kinds of things that'll put an end to it. [FOREIGN LANGUAGE] Either the world is gonna end, or we don't wanna do anything. It isn't that. It's somewhere in the middle.

I appreciate it. I think that's what we all needed to hear. It's what, you know, the reason I wanted to do this and be able to have this FaceTime with you, just because from when anybody's life is interrupted, and whether you've been affected personally by COVID or not, from somebody contracting the virus, or, or what have you, that level of comfort that what we're doing, you know, what we're doing is in the right spirit of trying to stop the spread as fast as possible, return people to their normal lives, but, you know, taking this seriously and understand that there is a strategy to doing that and that we all kind of have to adhere to it. So just in that respect, like, where would you send, you know, your everyday person to, find that information if we can't get on an IG Live and ask these questions? Like, where would you send them to, uh, to stay in the know?

Yeah, well, there's, there's a couple of websites. There's one called coronavirus.gov. It's part of the CDC website. You can either go into cdc.gov and get into it or go right to coronavirus.gov. All the information you want's right there. Perfect.

We're gonna save this, uh, this Q&A and hopefully people can go back to it and, uh, and get all that pertinent information. I appreciate you so much for, uh, being available and being selfless enough to, to have this conversation with me. And thank you again for you and your entire team, uh, protecting, protecting all of us. And, uh, can't thank you enough.

Thank you very much, Steph. It's a pleasure being with you. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to be with you.

Absolutely. All the best.

Thank you.