the headlines: india's federal government has announced new plans to deal with a surge in coronavirus infections in delhi as the country struggles to contain its covid—19 infection rate. india's total number of confirmed cases puts it fourth in the world in the pandemic with 12,000 new cases registered in a single day on saturday. the shooting of another african—american man during a us arrest has prompted fresh condemnation of the use of deadly force by police. rayshard brooks was shot dead as he fled from officers in atlanta late on friday. the city's police chief has quit and the officer involved has been fired. people joined together in a virtual memorial to mark the third anniversary of the grenfell tower fire. church bells rang out 72 times across london to remember the victims of the disaster.

now on bbc news, hardtalk. welcome to hardtalk. i am stephen sackur. we all want to believe that the worst of the coronavirus pandemic is over. governments are easing their lockdowns, focused on economic recovery. but the infection rate is still on the rise. in latin america, in parts of the us and africa as well. my guest today is internationally renowned epidemiologist by one. he was the scientific advisor on the hollywood movie contagion, which predicted a scenario uncannily like today nine yea rs scenario uncannily like today nine years ago. in real life, are we today getting our response right?

ian lipkin in new york, welcome to hardtalk. good to be with you. let me start with something you said just a few weeks ago. you said, it would not surprise me if a substantial proportion of the entire world population becomes infected with covid—i9. you still feel that way today? i do. it will take some time, but this virus is spreading across the world at enormous speed, and the only thing really between us and the only thing really between us and modified infection of the entire world really is a vaccine, and that is several months away. the knowledge base upon which we develop oui’ knowledge base upon which we develop our efforts to combat covid—i9, is it still quite narrow or has it expanded massively over the past

three months? there has been a dramatic amount of collaboration worldwide. the speed at which you have seen publications and press releases on the development of drugs, diagnostics, insights into the way in which this virus causes the way in which this virus causes the disease is absolutely unprecedented. and yet the implication of what you first said to me is that none of that expanded knowledge and more effective response is going to make much difference. and if we figure the world polymer population is, what, close to 7 billion, and only looking at the latest figures, 7.5 million have been infected thus far, the implication of everything you are saying is that we are still at the beginning of the beginning of this. yes, but it could be, believe it or not, much worse. so diagnostics have been extraordinarily helpful in allowing us to contain the outbreak, the use of face masks and other

kinds of personal protective equipment has moved dramatically in terms of helping us control the spread of infectious diseases, and the rate at which we are beginning to look at drugs and vaccines is also in precedented. to look at drugs and vaccines is also in precedentedlj to look at drugs and vaccines is also in precedented. i know you have made great efforts to develop international collaborations, in particular with china. how much does it matter that we fully understand the origins of this novel current —— novel covid—i9 virus? the origins of this novel current —— novel covid-19 virus? there are several reasons this is important. some people think this is really an intellectual curiosity and i disagree. first, if we understand where this virus came from and how it transition into humans, there may have been intermediate animals, we will be able to survey for those threats to reduce the risk that not only this virus, but similar viruses might emerge in the future. in

addition, if you believe, as i do in most of my colleagues believe, that this virus originated in nature, if we can identify the origin of this virus, then it could put an end to the finger—pointing that i think is very disruptive to global science and addressing the challenge of covid—i9. so it doesn't help when the chinese say that the united states is responsible or the united states is responsible or the united states that the chinese is responsible. this is a virus that arose in nature and threatens us all. irrespective of nationality. professor lipkin, listen to these words from vice president mike pence. he said, china covered up how dangerous the disease is, it didn't respond sustained human to human transition for a month, tens of those tried to were in the world and it destroyed samples. that is quite a charge sheet. that is quite a charge sheet. i have some insight into this because i have worked with

china. ifirst heard into this because i have worked with china. i first heard about it in to late december, and i was aware that it was a coronavirus at the end of december, and this information was transmitted by my colleagues in australia, in shanghai, i communicated this information myself to international institute of health. i don't think that the chinese new as early as early december how the virus was being transmitted. it is very easy to look back on a monday morning and ask what might have been played differently on saturday or sunday, because you have the advantage of hindsight. were there things that could have been done differently? absolutely. there is no question about that. and i think that it would have been helpful if the virus, for example, samples that had been released at an earlier time points, and that people had been invited in to help with understanding... how can you be so

sure, as you have expressed to me, that this was a virus that crossed over from the animal population? there are significant numbers of people in the united states, some of them close to the trump administration who still insist there is evidence that it came from a chinese laboratory, perhaps inadvertently released into the human population. i am happy to look at whatever date anyone has that they think supports this point of view, but i have not seen it. the data that i have seen, which we have reported a few months ago, reviewed the sequences of the virus that had been identified in china compared with sequences that had been recovered in in china, as well as in penguins and others, and we concluded that this was a virus that originated in nature. you cannot say incontrovertibly that this virus which was found in back or some intermediate host could not have been inadvertently, and i emphasise

that, inadvertently released in some fashion by some human. i can't rule that out. but what i can say is that there is zero evidence that that occurred and there is certainly no evidence to suggest that this virus was deliberately created to cause harm. itjust doesn't... itjust doesn't have any signatures that we typically see to illustrate that sort of a link. the other thing, let mejust finish with sort of a link. the other thing, let me just finish with this, because this is critical. i mean, i think this is critical. i mean, i think this is critical. i mean, i think this is not a constructive line of enquiry anyway because it is here, it is all over the world at this point. we have seen many examples where there have been viruses that emerged in the wild that move into the human population. are we going to blame any country in africa for the emergence of hiv? are we going to blame uganda for the appearance

of the car? it doesn't make any sense. professor lipton, as you say, it is here and we have to do with it. i wonder whether it has struck you so forcefully as well in recent months, there are so many uncanny echoes and residences from the movie contagion that you were the science advisor on alongside the writer scott burns and the director steven soderbergh made in believe 2011, we are talking almost a decade ago, and ijust are talking almost a decade ago, and i just rewatch it are talking almost a decade ago, and ijust rewatch it as many people have on their streaming services, and it is an the degree to which info in different ways as that story unfolds it mirrors what is happening in real life. do you take any pleasure in that? i don't take any pleasure in that? i don't take any pleasure in that? i don't take any pleasure in it. it is ironic. the reason we made this film was in fact to prevent something like this happening. so in fact although the film was released in 2011, we began talking about this back into

thousand eight and 2009. and it took us thousand eight and 2009. and it took usa thousand eight and 2009. and it took us a long time to try to get all of the details as accurate as we could possibly make them within the constraints of the fact that we wa nted constraints of the fact that we wanted people to actually pay to go and see the movie. 0therwise wanted people to actually pay to go and see the movie. otherwise it was not going to be of any practical value. now, one criticism really out of the movie, and this is ironic, in retrospect, was around the time frame for creating the vaccine, and i remember showing it to the director, anthony felty, at one point in new york. he came in from aprilia —— fauci. he said he likes various things, lacks the transmissibility and various things, lacks the tra nsmissibility and the various things, lacks the transmissibility and the characters we have, but the timeframe for the creation of the vaccine is com pletely creation of the vaccine is completely unrealistic. i said, tony, he is a good friend of mine, i said, tony, it may be unrealistic

now, but it has to become realistic, and infact now, but it has to become realistic, and in fact you now see that the timeframe for creation of a vaccine has moved now from several years to approximately a year. so we were not far off approximately a year. so we were not faroff in approximately a year. so we were not far off in terms of what we thought would be needed. professor lipkin, i just want us both to watch a short clip from the movie stop it involved kate winslet, who is one of the key scientific investigators responding to first news of the virus. let's just have a look together. for every person who gets sick, how many other people are they likely to infect? so for seasonal flu, that is usually about one. small box on the other hand... it is over three. about one. small box on the other hand... it is overthree. before about one. small box on the other hand... it is over three. before we had a vaccine, polio spread at a rate between four and six. now, we call that number... the r naught.

there is kate winslet playing a scientist who came to a bad end as she tried to wrestle with this outbreak. i am just intrigued by real—life mirroring fiction. you, as we have said, went to china in january when we know that the virus was spreading. he came back to new york, new then found quite soon afterwards that you had covid—19. do you believe that you caught it in china as a result of your scientific exchange? no, this time, so when i went to china in 2003 during sars, i delivered a respiratory tract infection shortly after i return. there i think i became in china. this time i did not become ill in china because i came back, i was isolated for two weeks, i was fine, and then while i was travelling around new york, primarily doing media, i became infected. so this was, and the strain that infected me was, and the strain that infected me

was one that came from europe. so there were two major waves of virus that came in. one from china, which was primarily focused on the west coast, and another one that came from europe. there is another twist, which in a sense, is a mirror to fiction. in the movie, there is a sort of radical conspiracy theorist blogger who is convinced that there isa blogger who is convinced that there is a sort of homoeopathic remedy or a treatment for that particular virus in the movie, and he peddles it on his blog and online and it becomes a huge thing and the american public is desperate to get it. now, there is no scientific evidence for this product for scythia in the movie. in real life, the president of the united states has been peddling the notion that this drug that is use of an antimalarial treatment, hydroxychloroquine, could be affected as a treatment and it amazes me that is one of the most

senior epidemiologist scientist in the united states, you chose to use is unproven hydroxychloroquine yourself. why on earth did you do that? i am glad you have given me an opportunity to answer this question. so when i became ill, representatives of the chinese government offered to send me convalescent plasma. i couldn't actually find a way to accept it so that i could be treated. that was actually my first choice. i realised that i was not in a position to make any sort of decisions, and the point that i consulted with infectious disease physicians that columbia university, they said to me, we want you to take hydroxychloroquine. this is the dosage, i then consulted with a cardiologist because i have had some hard problems in the past, and he told me that i was cleared to use it. i don't think it made any difference whatsoever, but i have felt for a long time that any doctor who treats themselves has a full fly

patient. so i just who treats themselves has a full fly patient. so ijust go with the recommendations of my physicians. as i have said just a moment ago, i don't think it made one difference in terms of my recovery or lack thereof. let's stick with the theme of president trump... i'd rather not! well, we need to. the complex relationship between science and politics has been best illustrated by the confusions we have seen in the united states over whether to lockdown, and then how to run the lockdown, and then how to run the lockdown, went to ease the lockdown, what are your conclusions from what you have seen about the efficacy of the current relationship, communication between science and politics? well, let's talk about lockdown first. i think there is no question that lockdown has had a dramatic impact and if you look at the various countries that have

implemented lockdowns and testing and tracking and tracing, you see a very strong correlation between that early response and containment. the best example i can provide you is what happens and, if you look at scandinavia, when you compare norway and denmark versus sweden. so, lockdown works. i don't understand why it took so long in this country to get lockdown into position, but we had discussions like that in new york state, and new york city, where i reside, and i think there were delays there that made a huge difference, so unfortunately i think that both our democratic and republican leaders were slow to appreciate the importance of this. may hope, of course is that having learned from this experience, if we ever have something similar in the future, we will respond more rapidly stopping now, i can't account at all for the way in which we have gotten

signalling from the white house that has been confusing. i was going to say, it isn't really about the next pandemic, it is about what happens nextin pandemic, it is about what happens next in this one, isn't it? because if one looks at the figures, there are 18 american state where the infection rate is currently rising, including some of the most populous states in the south of the united states. there are doctors, i am going to quote you, director of the harvard global health institute who says that what the easing of lockdown and most of these dates now means is that between 801,000 americans are going to die every single day. we are likely to get another 100,000 deaths by september. it could be catastrophic. do you agree with that? i don't have a crystal ball but i do think that there will be additional morbidity and mortality as a result of easing

these restrictions. i am very happy to report that i am not a politician because these guys, women, are being pulled in two different directions by those individuals who feel that the economic pain and poverty and so forth associated with the lockdown is crippling. i don't agree, i think in fact we need to be cautious, and that until such time as we have a vaccine that is effective and prevents disease, and or a drug that can be given orally, our best methods for containment are in fact classical epidemiological lockdown and contact tracing. the most effective thing we have at present right now is the facemask, and that is something that should have been implemented earlier as well. when i left china on february four, eve ryo ne left china on february four, everyone i've encountered was wearing a facemask. when i came back to the us, with the exception of the

jet bridge, nobody was wearing a facemask. so in terms of adaptation then, long—term adaptation, so that we can live with the reality that covid—19 is still going to be among us, and as you say until there is a vaccine there is no way that we can have this sort of complete herd immunity to it, what are the most important mitigation things we can do? you have mentioned facemasks, there is a big bait across europe and the world about whether one metre or two metres is the safe physical distance that people should stay apart from each other. there is also a debate about whether it is safe or not safe to reopen places of entertainment including bars, restau ra nts, entertainment including bars, restaurants, that sort of thing. where do you stand on these practical issues that faith societies across the world? well, the further you are away from another individual, the less likely you are to be exposed to this virus. there is no question about that. the

question is, what can you do? at columbia university where we have begun to talk about bringing people back to work, and in the classes, we are looking at two metres. that is what trying to do. is the amount of virus in the community begins to drop asa virus in the community begins to drop as a result of these kinds of effo rts drop as a result of these kinds of efforts towards containment, i think you will see people beginning to move closer together. there are, however, some things that i am very concerned about and one of them is bars because what happens, first of all, buyers tend to be small places a nyway all, buyers tend to be small places anyway so people are forced in close proximity to one another, in addition, as they begin to drink and they lose their sense ofjudgement, they lose their sense ofjudgement, they get closer still. so i think restau ra nts they get closer still. so i think restaurants are safer for that reason than bars. in new york state, now, we have restaurants that are beginning to open but they are all opening with the concept of tables that are separated from one another

by six feet, and many of these are associated with outdoor dining, because then you have more air exchange. fortunately, as we are coming now to the point where we are opening, we are, at least in the northern hemisphere, in the time of year when people can be outside. now, when we move back into fall, and we have had protests and other sorts of things where people are pushed together but as we move back into fall, people move indoors, many of us anticipate that there will be a dramatic increase in infection again. well, that is depressing but may be even more depressing is the degree to which right now, the highest rates of rising infection are not in the developed world where at least there is the public health infrastructure to ensure treatment for people who are affected, but also there is now the building of a real test and trace infrastructure as well, but now the rising infections are seen and, for

example, many countries across latin america, notjust brazil but peru and chill a and mexico and others and chill a and mexico and others and also africa, south africa, is badly affected already. nigeria has some alarming statistics and then you look at the conflict zones in the middle east. yemen, syria, does it seem to you that when we look back at covid—19 in 2020, at the end of the day, the most depressing statistics in terms of death and damage are going to be in the poorest and most vulnerable parts of the world? it's heartbreaking. and the world? it's heartbreaking. and the other thing that we should discuss is the fact that in the developed world as well, there is a disproportionate burden that is placed on people who are poor, who are of colour, so anyway you look at it, this is an awful outcome, and again, when you talked about contagion, the whole idea of putting

that movie out was to alert people to the possibility that this could occur, and it's chilling, we meant it to be so, and as you saw at the very end, we tied it all again into the idea of bats. not saying that bats should be exterminated because we need them for many purposes, but the fact remains that this is not the fact remains that this is not the last, and i don't even know that it is going to be the worst health threat of our time. i hope we learn from this. to be clear, you are saying that because of the way in which animal transfer to humans works, the potential for which animal transfer to humans works, the potentialfor pandemics worse than covid—19 is very real and very immediate? it is, and to that point, we have been trying for several years to get off the ground a programme called the global infectious disease epidemiologists network which is designed to provide capacity building support in the developing world, so that people can

contain threats within their own borders. they can rapidly recognise them, they can respond and reduce them, they can respond and reduce the burden of morbidity, mortality and economic destruction. so we need to learn from this. it is notjust a question of responding to covid—19, we need to see what we can do to make sure that nothing like this ever happens again. but you say that and your government has just withdrawn completely from cooperation with the world health 0rganization. cooperation with the world health organization. i have absolutely no explanation for that. or, organization. i have absolutely no explanation forthat. 0r, many organization. i have absolutely no explanation for that. or, many other things that have happened in my country. but in terms of being realistic about international collaboration, commitment, to not only meet the challenge of covid—19 but ensure that the next pandemic isn't as disastrous, the outlook does not look good. isn't as disastrous, the outlook does not look goodlj isn't as disastrous, the outlook does not look good. i and others are doing our best. i work in west africa, brazil, mexico, indonesia,

saudi arabia, israel, i go wherever anybody invites me to go. india. because this is a global problem. we are one race and we need to support one another. ian lipkin, we have to end there but i thank you very much indeed forjoining me on hardtalk. thank you. hello there. the broad weather pattern is going to change very little over the week ahead. it will be a week of contrasts in the uk, as it was over the weekend. many places in the south of england having a warm and sunny day on sunday. a dramatic skyline, though, in the north—west of england following those late in the day thundery showers, and an area of low pressure is keeping this very unstable

airacross the uk, so more showers to come. a lot of low cloud is streaming in from off the north sea at the moment so a grey start in some places. but over the weekend, we keep this mixture of warm sunshine, but some heavy and thundery downpours. many places starting dry on monday. grey start for much of scotland and the north—east of england, down to lincolnshire and east anglia, burning back to coastal areas, sunshine develops more widely. as it warms up we develop those showers, particularly in the afternoon. some of them heavy and thundery. not many showers across southern england. probably more chance of picking up some downpours as you move northwards across the midlands, wales, into the north—west of england and perhaps northern ireland. again a few sharp showers though are possible in western scotland, where it is going to be an awful lot warmer than it will be for eastern scotland, where we are struggling with that low cloud, the haar that's coming in off the north sea. now, many places will end monday dry and probably quite sunny as well, but there will be a few sharp showers still around in the evening.

those will then fade away overnight, but we have still got this flabby area of low pressure. not a great deal to see on the pressure chart but enough low pressure and enough instability in the air to bring us more showers. and many places will start the day dry on tuesday again. a grey start for the north—east of the uk. should brighten up in most areas, some sunshine but, again, we trigger those showers. probably more widely those showers developing during the day on tuesday. again some slow—moving, heavy, perhaps thundery downpours and temperatures again typically into the low 20s, as they will be again probably on wednesday. not a great deal is changing. those showers developing, perhaps this time more towards the west and the south of the uk. so for eastern scotland, north—east of england, whilst it may be a bit grey at times, it should be largely dry, and there may be some sunshine at times as well. temperatures not changing a great deal over the week ahead. we keep those heavy thundery showers going through thursday and friday, particularly across more southern parts of the uk as it dries

up further north.

this is bbc news with the latest headlines for viewers in the uk and around the world. i'm aaron safir. railway carriages in india are being turned into makeshift hospital wards as coronavirus cases surge. the daily number of confirmed new cases has reached almost 12,000. france's president says his country has scored a first victory against coronavirus as he announces a significant lifting of the remaining lockdown restrictions. the killing of another african american man during an arrest in atlanta prompts fresh condemnation and despair. the london protest image of one man carrying another