state of washington. we've been in touch with the governor. today i spoke with a man i happened to like. i spoke with phil in new jersey and we're going to be doing something very meaningful in new jersey. we're doing something i spoke with -- jp called me today. we're doing a lot of things in florida. we're doing a lot of things. between fema and the army corps of engineers and the admiral in your group in terms of purchasing -- that's what he does. he's supposed to be great. i'll tell you in about two days. we have an incredibly group of people. while at the same time, though, we're going to be watching very closely the hot spots. we're going to be taking care and watching closely our senior citizens, especially those with a problem or illness. we're going to be watching them

very, very closely. and we can do that and have an open economy, have an open country. and we have to do that because that causes other problems, and maybe it causes much bigger problems than the problem we're talking about now. >> mr. president, following up on that same topic and on your tweet, do you think the cure so far has been worse than the problem in. >> i think the cure has been very tough. this has been very tough. this was an operation. this was somebody going to a doctor and saying you need an operation, and you've had an operation and we've learned a lot. and we've fixed a lot of problems. one of the things we fixed if you look at the obsolete system this administration inherited it wasn't meant for this. it was meant for a small group of people and even for that it was not very good and very obsolete. we have a testing program now that will hopefully be able to be used for many years into the future should we have another

event like this. i don't think you'll have another event like this. this is very unique. you look back into time and decades and decades, we can name them all even if you go back 10 years. you go back to '09, but that wasn't like this as it turned out, but they lost a lot of people. we were early. we were early, jeff, because of the fact we closed early. that was a big move. please. yeah, go ahead. >> you had said previously i think from this podium that the virus could still be with us through july or august. by suggesting now that you might or that the government might change these standards or these recommendations here -- >> it's not change. we're doing things -- this was a learning experience in the country -- >> the july, august time frame of when you think the virus will be under control? >> i think we've learned a lot. i think there's so much

discipline now we never had. nobody ever said don't shake hands. i did actually before i became a politician. once i became a politician then i started getting used to not doing it because you do it with everybody. literally thousands of people a week, you're shaking hands with big groups of people. and, you know, there's a lot of -- we've learned a lot. there's a great discipline this whole country has learned having to do with discipline, with shaking hands. i think a lot of it is going to stay long after the virus is gone. i think it's probably good practice anyway but i think it's going to stay long after the virus is gone. but we have to open our country, because that causes problems that in my opinion could be far bigger problems. look, this is medical -- a severe medical situation that could cause problems far beyond the medical and then increase the medical problems to things that have nothing to do with this original medical problem. we can't let that happen to our

country. we have the greatest country in the world. i'm not going to let that happen. but these two weeks we have spent has been an incredible learning period and process. >> you said it was going to be weeks not months when you suggest using these guidelines you put out. have any of the doctors on your team told you that's the right path to pursue? >> we spoke to them today and i was telling them we have two things to look forward -- don't forget if it were up to the doctors they'd say let's shutdown the entire world because again you're up to 150 countries. and when we shut it down that would be wonderful and let's keep it shut for a couple of years. you can't do that to a country especially the number one economy in the world by far. number one economy in the world, can't do that. well, it causes bigger problems than the original. that's why i talk about the cure being worse than the problem. we can't have the cure be worse than the problem.

but what we have done -- so this is not retracing. this isn't anything. we've done it really well. because this two-week period has been good. and i'm not saying it ends at that time. we have another seven days or so. i'm not saying it ends at that time. but it's been like this incredible learning process. that's going to go into the future. that's going to go even as we open up our country. and we're going to be watching new york and we're going to be watching california, the state of washington and other places. illinois is becoming a hotspot. and we can do both. now, we may quarantine -- i mean we will be quarantining many people in these areas. there are other areas that just aren't affected or they're affected very little. and why would we close down 100% of the country? there are areas in new york where new york will be open, but there are areas in new york.

remember this new york has the new york stock exchange. it has nasdaq, it has the exchanges -- to close the new york stock exchange and nasdaq and with all the great work they're doing. i mean, they've gone largely to computer. if you look at the floor it's incredible what they can do but it's fully open. but we don't want to be doing that. what i'm saying basically is we can do two things simultaneously and we've had this incredible learning period. and plus people are in a period and they won't be calling og because i've had many people come to me and say we get it, we think we can do it now and do it while we're open. so at some point we'll be setting some guidelines, some datelines and we will be announcing them in the not-too-distant future. >> have any of the doctors on your team endorsed the guidelines? >> i'm okay with it, but this

could create a much bigger problem than the problem that you start off with. now, other nations are going to have to do what have to do but they'll probably do something very similar. but in our case much more so than anyone else because of the magnitude of our economy, the tremendous size of what we've built and what we have the jobs involved. you have almost 160 million jobs in this country now, by far the most ever. the number of jobs, almost 160 million, so we can't turn that off and think it's going to be wonderful. there'll be tremendous repercussions. there will be tremendous death from that. you're talking about death. probably more death from that than anything we're talking about with respect to the virus. >> -- more death if we continue with these strict guidelines than if we ease them? >> that's what i'm saying i think we can do both. we haven't announced a date, but we're getting very close to

coming up with a date, and it's a shorter period of time than i've been hearing the news report. and i think everybody should be happy with that. but great knowledge was gained. please. >> i have two questions for you, mr. president. my second one is on what your economic advisor larry kudlow said today. he was talking about this and he was saying there are going to have to be some difficult tradeoffs if you do use these guidelines -- >> you mean what the democrats were talking about? >> no, he was talking about how you said the cure should be worse than the problem, and he was talking about reopening the business, getting the economy back and going again -- >> well, i didn't hear him say that but if he said difficult tradeoff, sure it's less veept. before you walk and you hop on the subway and you grab the handle and go down to wherever you're going on wall street and you do all sorts of thing and you go in. and you open the doors going into your great buildings or exchanges and now you're going to have maybe think about doing that or you're going to think

about doing it different way. no, no, there are many tradeoffs. it's a different life, and maybe it'll remain that way frankly after the invisible scourge is gone. not a bad thing to stay that way, but there are tradeoffs, there's no question about that. but i actually think in the end we're going to end up being bigger, better and stronger. we have learned a lot. please. >> we're seeing an increase of cases in latin america, in the middle east -- >> that's true. >> in some places in asia. are you considering a new round of travel ban? >> no, we're not really. something like that could happen, i guess. but we're not really. they thought we were going to have bans within the united states. we didn't do that. we're not going to have that. hopefully that will take care of itself. in latin america there's been an uptick. yeah, please. >> mr. president, second question. what prompted you to say at the beginning of your comments that you're going to take care of the

asian-americans. has there been something in particular -- >> yeah, because it seems there could be a little bit of nasty language towards the asian-americans in our country, and i don't like that at all. these are incredible people. they love our country, and i'm not going to let it happen, so i just wanted to make that point. because they're blaming china and they are making statements to great american citizens that happen to be of asian heritage, and i'm not going to let that happen. please. >> mr. president, you say you want to reopen the country but most schools across the country are closed. two states now are closed for the rest of the school year. how are parents supposed to go back to work and educate their children right now? >> the governors of various states will have a lot of leeway. the governors in certain states -- frains, you go to some of the states i just mentioned, those schools are going to be open. in many cases they're open now, but the schools are going to be

open. in other cases governor cuomo, gavin newsom of california, certain governors are going to maybe have a decision to make. now, they may make a decision to keep them open in a certain part of new york or maybe westchester county or wherever it may be, they'll keep them closed. but they're going to have leeway. we're giving governors a lot of l leeway. >> governors are saying they're expecting a peak in the nexthat. and they're very capable to make those decisions. >> sir, will you explain why a $2 trillion economic stimulus is needed if you are going to reopen the country in a period of weeks not months? >> because the virus has had a big impact on our country, so we're going to give a stimulus so that the workers can live their life. it was not their fault. it wasn't the workers' fault. and we're going to give a kick

so that -- it's a kick. and this way we think the workers can get a fair start. the small businesses we're taking very good country. a lot of people don't know that. everyone thinks of these great big beautiful businesses, who by the way have been very badly hurt also. but the small businesses have historically been the engine and they still are the engine of the country. and you'd be amazed. the workers love those businesses and the workers contact us and they happen us to help those businesses, because that's where they've made their living. that's where they've been paid a lot of money over the years. you've seen what's happening over the last few years where wages and salaries have gone up substantially by those workers and we got caught by this sudden craziness coming into our country and all over the world. so we need to make sure the companies are strong and the

workers are strong, and that's what we're doing. and, you know, hopefully the republican and democrats are going to be able to make a deal. and they're actually fairly close, but we'll see what happens. >> but does it still need to be $2 trillion is my question? >> one of the things you're going to have to save companies that have been shattered. you're going to have to save various -- you know a lot of companies yourself. we have a big company in the world named boeing. boeing is going to have some help. we had other companies that didn't have a problem coming in. boeing had the obvious problem that everybody knows about from a little more than a year ago, a double problem and it was a big one. and then on top of it as they're getting ready to really show their stuff, on top of it we all get hit by this. and obviously the airlines are going to have a problem. but the airlines are going to be buying from boeing or from anybody else right now because

of this difficulty. so we have to work with the airlines. we have to work with the cruise lines. we have to work with the companies like boeing because boeing is potential again a great company and had a very rough period of 13 months -- a very rough period, a horrible period. an unbelievable period. if you would have told me this would happen to boeing i wouldn't have believed it because this is one of the truly great -- probably almost 1 point of gdp if you can think of that, it's hard to believe a company can have that kind of impact. i. but boeing we have to work with it for two reasons. it's a great company we have to save. and number wo it produces an unbelievable number of jobs. so the numbers have to be reflective of that kind of a thing. you know what i'm going to do? we have wonderful people behind us that are working very hard, and we want bill to get back to the department of justice, and we want the admiral to start going and doing their job and

same thing with debra. if anybody with would have any questions for the group but otherwise i'll let them go back to work. >> we seem to be talking about different geographical slopes on this. the curve would be changing and yet you just said the 20% numbers coming out of new york we don't know the seeds to use your wording. so how confident are you for each start of the geographical areas? >> so that's a very good question. what we do know is now we can backtrack from people who get very seriously ill to when they probably got infected. this is when they were exposed. and so when you start backing out each of those pieces, when you start seeing hospitalized patients you know the virus has probably been there for 3 to 4 weeks substantially circulating within the population. so that's what we're looking

for. now, as all of our testing has improved and we want to really applaud the group that has worked on it. you know, if you look at the pandemic flu preparedness, all of this was built on a flu platform. it was never, ever thought that you'd have a simultaneous respiratory disease hitting exactly at the same time as your flu hits in the country. so when you're doing all your flu surveillance you could have small cases of these pneumonias and flu-like illnesses characterized as a flu-like illness for the last 4 to 6 weeks. so that's really a caution to all of us. so when we get through all of this, we'll be looking at each of the pandemic preparedness plans. a long way of saying we know washington state is a little bit ahead of new york because of the hospitalization records. what we will get to as a availa

everything into mitigation. yet if we geographically get specific data by zip codes and counties we'll be able to approach this in a very laser focused way, making sure what we're doing in each of those areas is absolutely appropriate for where they are in their own littleshrve. >> when will the government rollout the anti-body test so people can know possibly they've been exposed? >> so several of them have come to the fda i believe. obviously that's something i'm very interested in for two reasons. one, it will give us a retrospective on where these infections were, who was actually infected, and how really asymptomatic versus mild versus all of that comes into the spectrum. secondly, by people who have

high antibodies those can become our solution for those in need and the making of hyperimmune globulin. so knowing who they are becomes critical, but i think we're still a couple of weeks out. i have to go back and talk to the fda because this is what saved us when you do flu swabs and strep throat swabs and now where you can do an hiv test. so these are the kind of tests we know will be critical in the future. you see a lot of numbers out there, about 70% of the population is going to get infected or 60% of the population based on those models. understand that the way you get to that number is you do nothing, and it goes through three cycles. so they're talking about this cycle that we're currently in, another cycle in 2021, and a third cycle in 2122 in order to get that level of population infected. and you know we will have vaccines likely by the '21, 22

season. if the virus comes back we'll have much more facility both for diagnosis, testing, antibodies, treatments and then the vaccine. >> so a question about the serology of blood tests where some people said holds some real promise here. and good evening, i'm erin burnett. you've pin watching the press conference here with the president and the coronavirus team for the white house. president trump moments ago making it clear he wants this shutdown to end he says as soon as possible. his quote, our country wasn't meant to be shutdown and he wept onto say we're not going to let the cure be worse than the problem. trump indicating the shutdown could be over as soon as early as next week which would be the end of the 15-day period. obviously last week he had

indicated this could go through july or august, so a shift there. the president also touting the possibility of existing drugs which could be used to treat coronavirus, drugs which many pharmacists and drug companies are warning could become scarce for people who need them for other treatments because of hoardings. and the latest numbers we have right now on coronavirus in the united states today, 100 deaths reported today in america. it is the first time a single day death toll has climbed that high. right now more than 42,000 americans are detected to have been infected. i want to go out front now to dr. sanjay gupta, gloria borger, and the chief economist for the economic advisory recovery board. sanjay, let me start with you. there's a lot to talk about here. but let's just start with this timing. he wants this to end as soon as next week. last week he said the time frame was july or august, and when he was pressed on that there did not give a reason as to why his

opinion had changed so drukm dramatically. what do you say, really next week? >> i don't think it's going to be next week. look, the public health officials have been clear about this. maybe you have to listen to them closely to sort of get at this point. but even within this press briefing ambassador burkes is saying look at places where they've had some success, where they've been able to slow down the rate of growth. how long were those curves, how long did they keep some of these practices in place. and what you heard there it was really like 8 weeks, so a couple of months. there are models to sort of look at around the country. clearly you saw on the stage this grappling with the public health remations acommendations trying to deal with the economy. i think it's clear from what you hear from public health officials that doing this now is not only good for health but possibly good for the economy

later on. that i think in so many ways is what dr. fauci has been saying. >> gloria, it's interesting here when you think about the president trying to say there are two things trying to be done at the same time. his exact words, we can do two things at the same time. when he was pressed on what the doctors are telling him, did any of them support this idea of this ending as soon as next week from a medical perspective, he did not have the answer for that. and there was one person notably not on that stage today who's been there at the other briefings and that is dr. fauci who has been the face of the administration's response and was critical of the president this weekend in a press interview saying, you know, i can't jump in front of the microphone and push him down, referring to how he had to correct the president. he was not there. >> right. right, and look there are some people temming us he has better things to do than to stand behind the president for over an hour every day. but it's very clear just to follow up on what sanjay is

saying that what we're seeing the conflict here between the health care professionals and the president and his economic team who are trying to figure out a way to walk and chew gum at the same time which is the way governor cuomo called it this morning. and i think the president said very bluntly that if it were up to the doctors we would never open the world i think is the word he used. so i think you see he's struggling. and my own reporting is that he's been very indecisive inside the white house going back and forth between health care professionals and economists who were telling him you've got to do something. >> right. and that indecisiveness, austin, sort of swings one way or the other. last week july or august. today it's early next week. when he says this economy is not built to be shutdown, we can do two things at the same time, can that happen? he's talking about having some regions open and others open

even as they're acknowledging the biggest problem, of course, in is the biggest states, the most economically vital states. can you do two things at the same time? >> well, look, you can't -- in a nation where people travel you can't open up some states and shutdown other states because people drive from one place to the other place and the virus spreads. so there are three things, and you can only pick two. you can do two things at once but not three. if you want to reopen the economy and you want to slow the spread of the virus, then you have to have comprehensive universal testing. that's what they do in south korea. they're not in lock down in south korea because everybody gets tested, so the only people that have to go into isolation are the people who have the disease. but we're not having that kind of rampant testing of everyone partly because they don't want the numbers to look too big and scare people. and then you can't do two things

at once. you cannot simultaneously slow the spread of the disease and tell everybody to go back outside. >> right. and you're looking at, gloria, as this comes today they're talking about new york. most of those tests are going to people sick and have a lot of symptoms. it doesn't address the asymptomatic issue. but nonetheless it is clear you have a serious issue. there was another question asked a moment ago. a reporter asked the president directly why do you need to a $2 trillion stimulus if you're going to reopen the economy in a week? and i'm sure austin has a point of view on that. look, the damage that has been done in one week is not insignificant. it's a shocking proportion. however, it is a fair question, gloria, and he didn't really have an answer to that either. >> no, he didn't have an answer to it. but the point is they're going to have to reevaluate, and i know sanjay can talk more about

this. this is what the president wants to do. it's clear. but they're going to have to reevaluate this as the end of these two weeks and figure out what they are going to do. and in the meantime you cannot let people suffer. you cannot let people get laid off with the kind of unemployment insurance they need. you cannot let small businesses fail. and so i think that is kind of the obvious answer that you have to go in for the long haul. and if you're not in for the long haul, okay, great. but i do think that it behooves the government to do some advanced planning. >> well, austin, you also have the issue here of the fact that, you know, there's an issue of what the federal government can really do. right, what we've seen happy in this which pence was clear to establish at the beginning, the states have led -- virginia says they're keeping their schools closed for the rest of the year. the states are doing what the states want to do, so the federal government can't really control what california is going to do or new york's going to do.

>> i think that's a tremendously important point. i think the reason they're struggling is they're not in control. the president could come out tonight and say i order everyone to go back out, but the states are under orders not to. the public health officials are saying that would be a very bad idea because more people would get infected, and so i think this is shortsighted approach that's not going to help the economy. the number one rule of virus economics is that the only way to restore the economics is to slow the spread of the virus. and even things which in the short run seem like they're harming the economy like getting people to go in and shelter in place actually are helping the economy. because if you let the virus start to spread again then we're going to go back into the same wave where fear drives everyone out of the economy, and in the long run you're going to actually be in a worse position. >> gloria, to this point and i know we lost sanjay for a

moment. i want to ask him from a medical perspective. but from a political perspective, you know, ambassador burkes was making an important point which is there's a lot they don't know. you don't know if you're treating the full problem or not. but one of the things she said they're not sure about is what exactly is driving the spread of it more. is it respiratory, through someone's cough or is it hard surfaces? where again we just found out today on that diamond princess cruise ship they found staterooms where people were staying that the virus lived up to 17 days on those surfaces. so if you can't tell the general public exactly where their risks are on getting this to the point they made about getting on the subway, it is about confidence and peoples willingness to go back. if you don't have answers to those questions you can say go back and people may not do it. >> well, they may decide they won't do it, or may decide they actually need to keep their jobs. again, this may not become a federal issue. this may become a state by state

issue. and i think in many ways the president would probably like to have it done that way. and maybe that's one of the reasons he hasn't invoked a defense production act. i think that it would be very confusing to people in this country if their governors are telling them to do one thing and the federal government is saying something else. how do you reconcile those two things? we understand where the hot spots are. we know that new york state is a hotspot. we know new york city is hotspot. we know california is having problem, washington state is having problems. should there be different rules there than for spreads? as the president said we have had an incredible learning curve, but it's up to the scientists really to say how can we keep people safe, and figure out a way with the economists to figure out how to run the

economy at the same time. >> yeah, it is. and to that point as i said it was just days ago, austin, when he said this was going to go as far as july or august. and i as probably with many americans felt the fear that creates with just the state of our country. but that's what he said just then. here he is. >> it seems to me that if we do a really good job we'll not only the death down to a level that is much lower than the other way had we not done a good job, but people are talking about july, august, something like that. so it could be right in that period of time. >> and austin, so that was exactly one week ago today. now today he says it could be just a week from now, which on one level is supposed to make people feel good but perhaps make people feel deeply uncertain that they know what

they're talking about. >> look, you don't want to blow your credibility in a crisis. it's the number one rule of the crisis. so don't get up and say it's going to be july and say, no, it might be in two weeks. i think the white house, the president and his staff in a way i think they're kidding themselves. if they think that they can sort of delegate this to the states, if the hospitals fill up the way they have in italy and in other countries where they've had these outbreaks everyone is going to turn to the federal government and say we've got thousands of people dying, no one can go to the hospital because all the hospitals are full. all the ventilators are taken, there are people out in the halls. i just think they need to think more than two days ahead. they need to be thinking two weeks from now where's it going to be. and if in two weeks it explodes like that nobody is going to be happy that they announced, well in two weeks we're going to go

back to doing what we were doing before. >> you keep talking about the importance of testing, and part of the reason for testing is something ambassador burkes raised which is estimates of 80% of the population having it. half the people that had on that ship never knew they had it and no symptoms at all. so it's possible it's much more prevalent and many more people have already had than know it and over time that will create confidence. but you can't get that answer right now because there's no antibody test. they referenced there are some now going through the fda. how significant do you think that could be, austan? >> i think tremendously significant. if you've had knowledge of whether you have had or will get it, whether the people you're interacting with, whether they know they had, or if you had a treatment or if you had a vaccine, all of those things could help a great deal. i mean, if you look ati korea

like i say they've had extensive testing and they've had lock down so their economy can recover. i don't understand why washington is not putting more of a focus on this health side. if you slow the rate of spread of the virus and you get the testing and 20%, 40% some of the population realize they already had it so there's not a risk, you can go back to doing your job. and that's where we got to get. >> gloria, obviously there's been this, you know, political fight going on in washington, right, of who's getting the aid. the president making it declared tonight that he worries about boeing, and by the way just purely on the facts of it boeing is the largest exporter in the united states. it's a major employer and a lot of people rely on the largest exporter. he has a point. and a lot of people brought up their the engine of america and that's true. when this passess in whatever form it takes, when are these

checks going to go out to people, to individuals? >> very quickly. i can't give you a day on it, but i'm telling you these checks are going to go out very quickly. they understand the people are suffering, and i think congress needs to pass it. i think we can all agree on that, that congress needs to get this done either tonight or tomorrow morning. and one thing i want to add, erin, is that what i was told from a source close to the white house is that the president is truly very preoccupied with what's going on in the stock market. and that as we know from covering donald trump that is one yardstick he uses to judge himself. and that i know you heard him in his press conference just now wax almost nostalgic about the

economy and he's saying i'm going to get back to that and by giving us this shortened deadline i think he thinks in a way he may be giving americans hope, but the question is whether that is the right thing to do right now. and by the way, i don't think any of us have the answers to this. governor cuomo was saying it this morning, there aren't any clear answers right now. and he said, look, maybe we have to think about different ways of doing things given what is going on right now. again, the walking and chewing gum at the same time. >> all right, thank you both very much. and the trump administration now says it will crack down on anyone hoarding crucial medical supplies. it's shocking to think people are doing this, but they are. here's the attorney general bill barr just moments ago. >> we're talking about people hoarding these goods and materials on an industrial scale for the purpose of manipulating the market and ultimately driving windfall profits.

>> this as medical workers across the country warn of hospitals being overwhelmed by coronavirus cases, and a major shortage of supplies that frankly could be a matter of life and death for the people who are taking care of them. drew griffon is out front. >> reporter: from the front lines, the lack of ventilators, personal protection equipment, and face masks is at a critical stage. where medical workers from across the country say they're being asked to do something that weeks ago would have brought reprimand or termination, reuse supplies. >> after that you actually have to use the mask, the same one for five more patients. >> we have probably 3 to 5 days of n-95 masks left. >> i am down to my last n-95 mask and i'm reusing it. >> it's unacceptable that we are sending medical professionals like lambs to the

slaughterhouse. >> reporter: dr. patrice harris, president of the medical association says what she is hearing from her physicians is just unprecedented. >> they're saying they're having to reuse masks, and they're saying they're being asked to resterilize masks, all things which in normal times we would certainly not do may even be grounds for discipline or a dismissal for violating routine infection control policies and practices. >> reporter: new york has now topped washington state as the new epicenter and the epicenter of critically short supplies and staffing. the mayor issuing dire warnings to federal officials. >> if we don't get more ventilators in the next ten days people will die. >> reporter: dr. nisha meadow runs two closed facebook groups with about 6 0,000 physicians across the country. he compared it to third world health care. >> he said this is worst than anything i've seen in third

world countries i've been in. i feel if there's such a world as a fourth world country i feel that's what our hospital system is already. >> reporter: supplies are increasing but not enough to fill demand ipstate after state. in san diego the ucsd system posted this guide requiring good stewardship of masks. the memo warning staff inappropriate use of n-95 respirators could easily end up with minimal supplies during the peak of this pandemic. the bigger threat is running out of health care workers because of the lack of protection. in new jersey 35 physicians and nurses are no longer working at holy name medical center because they're either confirmed or suspected of having covid-19. those supplies and staffing are holding up he's not sure for how long. >> i'm very concerned if things

don't slow down, if supplies don't open up, if we don't figure out a way to get nurses in here from the federal government, from the military that i in a week or so i may not be able to feel the same way about the fact i've not had to compromise care. >> reporter: one question being asked how long will doctors and nurses stay on the job risking their own lives if asked to do so without proper protection. >> we are all scared as health care providers that we're going to bring it home to our families. >> reporter: erin, we've already heard of health care workers becoming sick. if that continues, if doctors and nurses can't go to work because they're getting sick or quite frankly because they're too frightened to go to work because of this proper protection, that is only going to deepen this crisis. erin? >> all right, drew. thank you very much. and i want to go out front now to a leading voice on how to respond to this epidemic. and doctor, i appreciate your time. when you hear that piece and

look at some some of the statistics we've seen in other country. 10% of the people infected being medical workers in some european countries, and you have the shortage it's sort of stunning for americans to imagine that we're in a position like this where our doctors and nurses cannot get what they need. how big of an issue is this if this is not resolved in the next few day snz. >> i think this is quite an issue and we need to make sure we protect our medical personnel in every way possible, and there's a battle to be fought here. we don't know the exact magnitude of the attack by the epidemic, and it could be some of our hospitals might be overwhelmed. we just need to be prepared. we cannot afford to lose physicians and personnel that would be indispensable to fight that battle. >> we're just -- we're learning -- ambassador burkes was talking in that press conference about they still don't know how this spreads. they understand how it spreads but they don't know what is driving the majority of the

spread. she was specifically saying how much of it is coming off hard surfaces where again we found out otthan that cruise ship the diamond princess it was still on surfaces 17 days after people had vacated those staterooms or how much is spreading in respiratory manner, from being around someone who may be coughing. how big of an issue at some point we still don't know which of those is a big driver and by what magnitude? >> i think what i worry about is we don't know the final product of that spread. we just don't know exactly what is the number of cases in our country and in different states. the numbers that we have are based just on people who have symptoms and get tested, but this is just the tip of the iceberg. it's very likely that the numbers of people who are infected is much larger, and we need to do some random population testing to see where we stand and where we're heading. it makes a complete difference if 0.1% of the population is

already infected. if 1%, if 20% is already infected i'm sure that there will be differences across locations. the strategy how to deal with that is completely different. the strategy on how to protect, whom to protect, what to do would be different depending on what part of the curve where we are. it would be different if we go without knowing what is the best recipe for each situation. >> so we have found out that in new york city right now 28% of the tests in greater new york city are now positive. there's much broader availability of tests. i know in new york people have been tested but they've had symptoms or contact, it's not just walk in and get one if you feel like it. on that diamond princess 700 of them got the virus, about 40% of them were asymptomatic, never had symptoms at all.

so that gives us the magnitude at all. does that affect where you look at population like new york where clearly more people seem to have it than other places, when you're looking at that crucial is it 0.1% or 10% or what? >> absolutely. and probably the best data we have on that approach, a random sampling of the population is in iceland where they have been sampling on their general population based on a volunteer basis they've found 1% of the population being infected. 50% of these people have absolutely no symptoms. another 50% have very mild or moderate symptoms that may probably wouldn't have noticed. they thought they had a bit of a common cold and nothing serious. bottom line a very large number of people probably out there do have that infection. does this sound like bad news? in one way maybe it does. in another fashion it's probably good news because it means that our estimates of how many people

are going to get severe disease and how many people are going to die among those who are infected are probably pretty inflated. initially w.h.o. released estimates of 3.4% of the cases dying. and if there's far more people who are infected but just never realize that's the case, the true infection fatality rate is likely to be far, far less. it could be in the range of seasonal influenza or in that ballpark. we just need to test because we need to know the strategy of how to deal with the problem is entirely different if we're talking about a pathogen that's in the same ballpark as influenza. in that case we just try to protect those who are susceptible, the elderly, those who have severe diseases make sure we do our best for them. but in many cases we can get rid of many of the measures or some it's something that has hahigh fatality which is different

story. >> you say that 1% showed they ended up having it. we're hearing numbers gavin newsom said out of california 60% of the population today. governor cuomo said 80% of new yorkers could get it. obviously there's a big difference between 1% and 80%. do you think that's possible? and if that's the case no matter what the fatality rate, do you think we're doing the right thing right now by doing these shutdowns and lock downs? >> so i am personally right now in a shelter in place condition, and i'm perfectly fine with that because we just don't have data. so if we don't have data it makes sense to just act, act swiftly and make sure that you protect people in a blind fashion, you just do your best. however, it's true we cannot remain in that condition forever, and we do have the capacity to get this type of information that will tell us what will be the next best steps, when to implement them,

to relieve the restricts and shelter in place and lockdown type of situations. we need the data. we cannot do it blindly. if we do it blindly maybe it backfires, it comes back in a couple of weeks and we're back to square one -- >> so when the president says he wants to open early next week, that does not sound reasonable? >> i think it's reasonable provided we have data. so combined with data sewing it is the right thing, it may well be the right thing. about the 80% quote, all of these are very speculative. the 80% is based on some mathematical modeling of course it's useful, but it makes a lot of assumptions, and these assumptions are very difficult to test. you just need to see what happens in the field. and very often these can be off by a scale of magnitude. it's possible many people will be infected. if i had to judge on the data that is accruing today i would

think depending on what measures were taken and what were the characteri charactericisti characteristics, it could be communities end up containing the virus pretty well and others end up with high percentages. i believe 80% is a high outlier. i don't want to think that high but 20% could definitely be reasonable. i've been talking to people from italy who are leading the response there and they believe they have some preliminary data suggesting that in laombardy its about 0% of the population being infected. >> a huge range and still all in the north of the country. doctor, thank you very much. i appreciate your time and the breaking news, dr. debra burkes saying tonight based on the data they're getting the mortality rate for millennials and

generation z is less than 1%. more people are getting the virus compared to their counter parts in other countries. >> are young people more at risk than previously thought? >> so far the demography definitely seems to be very different in the united states versus other countries that saw this hit earlier and we're looking into that. >> so more getting it, the mortality rate, though, very low. out front now valerie wilson, 34 years old, travel expert. valerie, i know you have coronavirus so obviously you fall into that young group. when did you suspect you might have the virus, and what were your symptoms? >> certainly -- thanks for having me, erin. it certainly crossed my mind right off the bat. but having had lyme disease in the past i'm sort of a paranoid person so i brushed it off. i got sick on march 7th and my

symptoms were very strange. i had sort of a wave of this short strickening feeling going through my body and it kept coming. and i thought i was maybe a little bit overtired so i went to bed and the next night the same feeling. and a got a fever of about 99 degrees for about an hour. so i just kind of brushed it off and didn't really think of anything. and finally that next day it was monday and i lost my sense of taste completely and that's what sent me to the gp the first time, and we went in and he checked me out and said you definitely have a virus. and i said do you think i have coronavirus, and he listened to my lungs and said i sounded good and he sent me on my way. it was after that that my symptoms started to develop a little bit more. i started to get a stronger cough that i really started to become nervous. and that was friday 13th i drove to his office first thing in the morning with no appointment, and

i just broke down in with no hesitation they tested me right off the bat. >> well, that's fantastic that they did that. it's really interesting, though, i want to say to emphasize to viewers, too, when you mention the loss of taste and smell, we've been hearing from other countries that that is a sign. that happened to you, and that you explicitly now looking back noticed that's such a significant thing that happened. you're in the travel business. you obviously travel quite a bit. but you still don't know where you actually, you know, contracted the virus, right? >> exactly. so, my best guess is i did -- so, i've been in the country pretty much most of the year, so i did not contract it outside of the united states. but i was speaking in denver the last weekend in february, so it's highly likely being on a plane and knowing that it's such an airborne illness, it's likely that i did get it on my flight

to denver. >> i want to emphasize, as people are obviously anxious and worried about this, that you fall in the underlying condition, right. you have lyme disease, which you just mentioned. had your doctor talked to you at all about how that may have impacted? obviously you're doing well and thank goodness you're good here. but how significant was that underlying condition? >> so, i did talk to my doctor about lyme disease, and i also have an underlying autoimmune issue that we haven't gotten to the bottom of yet. so that was very scary knowing that those are some of the things that are really sending people to the e.r.. and we did have that conversation, but unfortunate, like many of the other answers that i've received from, you know, it wasn't just him. i called every doctor that i've seen in the last year or so, and they just say, we just don't know. we just don't have answers. and that's really hard. it's one of the scariest things

about having coronavirus is not only knowing that that big scary thing that we keep seeing on tv is in your body, but also knowing that you can't get any answers from the people that we really trust and rely on. >> so, you know, when you talk about that, i think there is a lot of that. that there is, you know this, scary thing we're hearing about. then when you have it, that anxiety before that has got to be very significant. when we hear a lot about older people, the dangers of this virus and certainly we've all heard that, valerie, what do young people need to understand about it? >> young people need to understand -- first of all, by the age of 30, i'd say there is a good portion of us that do have some sort of underlying condition so we all need to be aware that, you know, we could have something that could make us a little bit weaker to this virus. but we need to -- young people need to understand that not only are we staying home to protect ourselves, but we're staying home to protect those that we love. i was more worried about my parents than i was about myself, even after i contracted it. my main concern is like, mom,

dad, are you guys staying home? but, you know, we need to realize you can be in that small percentage point -- i believe right now we're saying 20% of the people in the united states that are being hospitalized for covid-19 are in that 20 to 44 range, and that is scary. that is kind of a large chunk. >> absolutely. and i know that a lot of them will, you know, take hopefully comfort and also understand how seriously to take it from watching you. valerie, thank you so very much. >> thank you so much. >> and tonight president trump just moments ago, again, praising that malaria drug as a game changer. the fda has not approved that drug to treat coronavirus. it is under investigation as scientists in the united states and abroad are rushing to find an effective treatment. and you just heard dr. burkes saying they hope these therapies will be online as soon as this fall and obviously are being tested now.

issa suarez is out front. >> reporter: in the fight against coronavirus, speed is everything. and scientists around the world hold high hopes that a treatment can be found while we wait for a vaccine. that means testing existing drugs. in geneva, the world health organization launched an unprecedented trial that will compare treatments and identify the most successful. the study will test four different drugs from an anti-malarial medication to an antiviral to a combination of two hiv drugs. the unprecedented effort to eventually include thousands of patients across dozens of countries. a europe-wide drug trial was launch in france sunday with at least 800 patients who have a severe form of the disease. in the united states, new york governor andrew cuomo said drug trials will begin in the state on tuesday. " cuomo also announced the testing of antibodies from recovering coronavirus patients. >> there have been tests that show when a person is injected

with the antibodies that then stimulates their immune system. it's a trial for people who are in serious condition. >> reporter: in one trial here in the u.k., researchers are taking a different tactic. an inhale respiratory drug. sng 001 will be tried on 100 coronavirus patients. the aim, to treat one of the virus's most debilitating symptoms. explain to us how this would work in practice. >> so, the device is a hand held nebulizer. there is a chamber on top that is going to contain the study drug. this is going to be administered directly to the patients by mist. so the patients are going to be able to breathe in -- this is the mouth piece. it clicks in and then the patients can use it. >> reporter: the coronavirus attacks the lungs, infecting and hijacking the cells. the makers of this drug synergen

believe it will kick start the immune system. what hospitals could face is a health care crisis. a shortage of beds, a shortage of respirators, as well as a shortage of staff. what this drug could do if it works is really ease the pressure on the health care system with patients being able to administer the drug at home. richard masden is the c.e.o. of synergen. while he tells us this is not the miracle the world is waiting for. >> this is not a cure. it is designed to help the lungs during a difficult episode. if we can keep people out of hospital, if we can stop people needing more intensive treatment when they first get to hospital, then that's a major success. >> reporter: now, erin, despite the speed of these trials, what doctors and experts are telling us around the world is none of this is guaranteed if successful, any of these trials, it could potentially take

months. we heard a similar warning from the world health organization today basically saying, and i'm quoting him, that using untested drugs could raise false hope and actually be more damaging -- do more harm than good because you're basically taking away drugs that could potentially be needed for other illnesses. so while the medical community are racing to try and combat the virus, they are asking you, i, everyone, everyone at home to do all they can to try to slow the pandemic. erin? >> all right, issa, thank you very much. from london tonight. and now, you know, some classic songs are getting the coronavirus treatment. here is jeannie. >> reporter: given what's going on, better to have a sing along than a cry along. what better to sing along to than -- ♪ sweet caroline ♪ >> reporter: or to make it

sweeter or bitter/sweet, neil diamond updated the lyrics. instead of >> touching hands. >> reporter: it's now. >> washing hands. >> reporter: the 79-year-old singer posted the video with his dog, making a cameo. other dogs seemed to like t. remember how neil diamond used to be reaching out? ♪ touching me >> reporter: the revised lyrics go. ♪ don't touch me, i won't touch you ♪ >> reporter: fans were touched calling diamond a national treasure. neil diamond delivers a gem, inspiring other suggestions. coming up next, the knack sings "my corona" based on -- wait, that parody already exists. ♪ ♪ >> reporter: done by a podcaster who happens to be a real doctor. someone imagined a conversation between the who and the world

health organization, the w.h.o.. the group the who, see me, feel me, touch me. the w.h.o., knock that off. one neil diamond fan even changed the title of his 1969 anthem. >> sweet quarantine. >> reporter: where the audience usually chimes in. ♪ sweet caroline >> reporter: someone else suggested, cough, cough, cough. in no time neil's new lyrics hands washing hands, were icing on the cake even if by the end of the song -- >> we love you. >> reporter: neil's dog had been lulled to sleep. put your hands together, folks, for neil diamond. jeanne moos, cnn, new york. ♪ don't touch me >> and thanks so much for joining us. a. c-360 with anderson begins right now.

>> and good evening. the president today signalled that he is looking for a way to, quote, get our country open again. he said he was talking in terms of weeks, not months. and he said it at the end of the biggest single-day rise in coronavirus deaths up more than 100 since this morning. now stands at 541 people. he asked as he did in the tweet last night if the cure, which involves shutting down large chunks of the economy, is worse than the disease. we'll play you some of his remarks in a moment ask debate that question tonight. some context to it, the number of deaths and cases has more than doubled, nearly 43,000 cases of the disease, about half of them in one state, new york. here in new york city, more than 12,000 people are infected and the mayor today said hospital supplies could run out in a