we are approaching the end of a week that senior health officials said would be the worst on record for the coronavirus pandemic. new numbers back up that prediction. total deaths in the united states, 18,586. last week, at this time, 7,087 deaths total in the u.s. tonight, a report from "the new york times" suggests that if shelter in place orders were lifted after 30 days, as president trump has suggested he may do, we could see a substantial spike in deaths and infections this summer. "the times" obtained the projection from the department of health and human services. says lifting the current orders after only 30 days could mean as many as 200,000 deaths. now, we should point out that while the report is dated

yesterday, april 9th, one of the slides "the times" shared says the models are from march 31st. there is another model coming out tonight, and we will talk to the man behind that model in a moment. with that as the backdrop, president trump confirmed this afternoon he will announce a new council next week to look into reopening the country. >> the number of new cases per day is flattening substantially. suggesting that we are near the peak. >> it's really about the encouraging signs that we see. but, as encouraging as they are, we have not reached the peak. >> president trump said he would listen to his scientific advisers, like dr. birx there, about whether to reopen the country at the end of the month. saying the facts are going to determine what i do. but he also indicated it's not just the scientists he'd be listening to. we should point out it's not the president who determines what state and local officials may do regarding people getting back to work. the president can issue guidelines, that, however, does not seem to be the opinion of the president.

>> the states can do things, if they want. i can override it, if i want. i would use it. i would rather have the states use it. and this is so shocking for me. a lot of people say, wow, he's really very reasoned, isn't he? a lot of people are shocked. i have absolute authority to do it. >> let's go to nic watt in los angeles. >> hey, anderson. so we had a strange afternoon here in california. we had the governor of the state saying that the peak is not going to be as high as feared. and then we heard from l.a. county, and they extended the so-called safer at home order through may 15th. that's another five weeks from now. and to say may 15th is not some magic date. they are not promising to lift all the restrictions when that rolls around. and, of course, meanwhile, anderson, there are still so many people fighting a daily life-and-death battle with this virus. >> there are triumphs, tears for

the recovery. 6 numbers numbers in new york's icus are actually down for the first time. some encouraging signs. >> we are starting to level on the logarithmic phase like italy did about a week ago. because of the impact of what the citizens of new york and new jersey and across connecticut and, now rhode island, are doing to really change the course of this pandemic. >> but, still, so much pain. tara gabriel's mom, now gone, but more than just a statistic. >> my mother was a real person. she was loving and selfless and kind. >> in new york, now the bodies of unclaimed covid-19 victims, being taken to hart island for burial. the official death count of more than 5,000 in the city could be undercounted with people dying, untested, at home, according to "the new york times." that state now has more

confirmed reported cases than any country on earth, according to data from johns hopkins university. in l.a., now, you have to wear a mask in the store. >> if you are not covering your face by friday morning, an essential business can refuse you service. >> but, in florida, they are thinking about reopening schools. >> if we get to the point where people think that we're on the other side of this and we could get kids back in, even if it's for a couple weeks, we think that there would be value in that. this particular pandemic is one where i don't think nationwide there's been a single fatality under 25. >> yes, people under 25 have died of coronavirus disease in the united states of america. >> florida's governor has now walked that last part back. a little. >> so, in florida, we've had no fatalities under 25. >> and starting tomorrow, in michigan, if you own more than one home in the state, you got to pick one and stay there. in illinois, they're warning all big events could be cancelled until there is a vaccine, months, perhaps even a year or

more away. they are also discouraging church services. >> today's good friday. easter sunday. we have to stay inside. >> but, in kansas, the governor is still in a legal battle. hoping to limit church services to ten people. >> the need to congregate is important. but not during a pandemic. >> and testing remains an issue, even weeks into this pandemic. in one study of 51 coronavirus patients, the current test missed 16 of them. an antibody test is said to be days away to identify those recovered and, therefore, potentially immune. and able to return to work. but can the country start to reopen may 1, as the president hopes? and what might be the toll? >> don't let anyone get any false ideas that when we decide, at a proper time, whether we are going to be relaxing some of the restrictions, there's no doubt you're going to see cases.

>> so this -- i mean, may 1st, which has been floated by some people in the white house. how much is that, at this point, just an aspirational goal? to begin some sort of opening up. and -- and how much of that is any basis in reality? >> well, the first issue, anderson, is what governors of individual states want to do. but putting that aside, the president is clearly aiming for that date. but dr. fauci said, today, you know, the virus kind of decide. and he says that he, and the white house task force team, look at all the data, every day. then they take that information to the vice president and the president. and any decision on opening will be made at that level. and, you know, today, the president was asked, you know, will you listen to your medical advisers? and he came back with this. he said, i listen to them about everything. i think they're actually surprised.

anderson. >> he also went on to say that -- that he listens to them, but he also sees two sides. and, clearly, is going to be listening to, you know, members of the business community and the business folks around him. he has this -- he said that they'd announce a council, sort of a business council, looking at reopening the country. he'd probably announce that next week. nick watt, thanks very much. coronavirus model cited by the white house suggests that today is the peak for deaths. it also increased projections for total deaths to 61,545. joining me now is the director of the institute that published those numbers. dr. chris murray at the university of washington. also, joining us chief medical correspondent dr. sanjay gupta. cnn medical analyst, dr. jennifer lee, as well a clinical soci associa associate professor.

can you come to a conclusion how the united states reached peak daily death toll? >> that's what the model is saying. we rerun the model, basically, almost every night. and the new returns from different states are suggesting different peaks in different states. but, overall, at the national level, we seem to be pretty much close to the peak. our model has pretty even numbers for the next four days or so. so it's not as if we are going to see an abrupt peak and decline. but we do see it leveling off. >> overall projected deaths in the united states, the model now projects about 61,500 people dying from coronavirus by august. yesterday, i think it was about 60,000. or earlier this week. what -- if -- if the peak is now, is there a reason that the number is a little bit larger than it was previously? >> yeah, it is, because some states still haven't fully implemented social distancing.

so we are seeing their peaks shifting out in time. and we're seeing a peak now. but the decline is going to be very slow, as some other states reach their peak later in april, and even extending into may. >> when -- from the research and the data gathering, at this point, when you look back at the white house that had modeling, you know, between 100,000 and 240,000 dying, at one point not too long ago, does that make sense? because, at that time, i think your model was still in the 80,000 range. >> yeah. our model estimates have moved around as we get more data. we get the size of our -- our different states going to be more like new york? are they going to be more like washington in terms of their trajectory? and that early returns tell us a lot. remember, also, that, in our model, we assume that the social distancing is going to stay in place until the end of may. and we've now started to run

some scenarios about what happens if you took them off on may 1st. and that's -- the early returns on that analysis don't look good. >> do you have numbers on that yet? >> well, we're going to release numbers, you know, complete scenarios, by state, next week. but enough to say that, if we were to stop at the national level may 1st, we are seeing a return to almost where we are now sometime in july. so a real -- a rebound. that rebound doesn't happen in every state because some states are much farther along. but, definitely, there's a very substantial risk of rebound, if we don't wait to the point where most transmission is near zero in each state. >> wow. so i just want to drill down on that a second. i know you're releasing this next week. but from what you're -- what you know now, if the model, if the

social distancing that currently exists, as it currently exists, if it does not go till the beginning of june, then there will be a rebound, in some states, akin to what we are seeing right now with this high number of deaths, for instance, in new york. >> that's what our first round of modeling on that suggests, and we'll feel -- we'll with able to give more precise information next week. but, clearly, the risk of rebound is very great with early release from closures. and i think the big issue is when. when can some states transition to something that gets people back to school and work? and it's going to be states like washington that, you know, have got the epidemic peaked and starting to come down, it seems, are going to be able to think about that transition sooner than states that are -- you know, the peak is -- is -- yet to come. >> dr. lee, what do you make -- i mean -- of the idea of, again, the president doesn't

necessarily have the power that he is saying he has to -- he can issue guidelines about when he would like to see states coming back online or the economy coming back online. but a lot of it is up to the governors and local officials in each state. but given what you are seeing, do you think it's at all reasonable to think early may, you could start getting -- you could start giving up some of these stay-at-home orders? >> anderson, i think that would be extremely dangerous. you know, in the d.c. metro area, for instance, we do not think that the peak is going to happen this week or next week. but, potentially, even into june. you know, we are seeing the social distancing is absolutely helping. but we are seeing this slow and steady continual uptick in numbers of confirmed cases and numbers of deaths. and just as dr. murray said, it's going to be a different situation in different regions across the country. i think it'd be extremely

dangerous to lift the social distancing and the mitigation strategies that we're doing right now. especially, when we don't have the widespread testing and contact tracing strategies implemented yet. >> sanjay, where do you come down on this? >> yeah. i mean, it's interesting that, you know, we think of the united states as a -- as a country, obviously. but it's many different sort of scenarios in different places. but, you know, i'm wondering, for professor murray, if i could -- if i could ask a question. you know, one of the things that's struck me, and i, anderson, you, too. is that obviously it's good news that we see these projection numbers come down, professor murray. but i'm just wondering, is -- is -- is it that the -- the social distancing mechanisms have worked better than you thought they were going to work? or are you surprised by how well people have actually abided by it? what do you think is driving the number downs? >> you know, i think the -- two

factors. i think we -- when we -- even just two weeks ago, there was only wuhan city in china that had a widespread epidemic. peaked. and come right down. now, we have another 18 places in italy and spain that have peaked and come down. and that's telling us a lot of information about time from implementing social distancing to getting to the peak. and so that's feeding into the models. and that's sort of making us much more confident about when the peak's likely to occur. and, then, the other thing, is there are sits like california and washington where the trajectory of cases has been very different than new york. it's been a much more gradual increase, lower peak. and we believe that's because people started to social distance even before mandates from state government were put in place. >> so, dr. murray, the -- the -- i mean, it's -- i'm just really

not surprised. but it's -- it's fascinating to me how clear to you or based on this -- the modeling that you're doing now about the implications of getting back to work, you know, nationwide, too quickly. i mean, that -- that will -- that will, clearly -- i mean, dr. fauci, earlier today, said, well, you know, you'd expect to see a rise. but the idea that, in some places, returning back to the levels we're currently at. i mean, that would be devastating just in terms of people's confidence getting back to work. >> i think, you know, we put such a investment as a nation in trying to get this pandemic under control. it makes sense to stay the course because even those extra few weeks is going to make a huge difference. now, even when you get to the end of may and you've gotten most communities with very low levels of transition, we're going to have to do something after that point. not the closures that we have now. but we're going to have to have

the capability to test, to contact trace, to quarantine, control, you know, infection coming in from other places. but there is a huge difference, at least in the way we see this unfolding may 1st and getting to the end of may. >> we should also say, dr. murray, that there seems to be a disagreement. you know, certainly from the president and scientists, about what getting back to work, what it actually means in terms of testing and contact tracing. and i mentioned that will affect the model significantly because if you are relying on significant contact tracing and testing, if there -- if that is not the case, the president today, earlier the coronavirus task force saying, look, some states you don't need to do that stuff because they don't have a problem. i mean, that's going to affect the model in a lot of different ways. >> i think there's a really important set of issues for every state, and for the nation,

to grapple with about scaling up testing capacity. making sure the public health system is able to do the contact tracing. and make sure we minimize the risk to avoid a resurgence and even contemplate a repeat like we're going through now. >> dr. murray as always, sanjay gupta, jennifer lee. up next, a live report from the white house on the factors that may determine whether the president continues to support stay at home orders past this month. later, my discussion with california governor gavin newsom about his new initiative to share much-needed hospital supplies and equipment with states in need. with hepatitis c... ...i felt i couldn't be at my...

...best for my family. in only 8 weeks with mavyret... ...i was cured. i faced reminders of my hep c every day. i worried about my hep c. but in only 8 weeks with mavyret... ...i was cured. mavyret is the only 8-week cure for all types of hep c. before starting mavyret your doctor will test... ...if you've had hepatitis b which may flare up and cause serious liver problems during and after treatment. tell your doctor if you've had hepatitis b, a liver or kidney transplant,... ...other liver problems, hiv-1, or other medical conditions,... ...and all medicines you take. don't take mavyret with atazanavir... ...or rifampin, or if you've had certain liver problems. if you've had or have serious liver problems other than hep c, there's a rare chance they may worsen. signs of serious liver problems may include yellowing of the skin, abdominal pain or swelling, confusion, and unexplained bleeding or bruising. tell your doctor if you develop symptoms of liver disease. common side effects include headache and tiredness.

with hep c behind me, i feel free... ...fearless... ...because i am cured. talk to your doctor about mavyret.

tonight, we've been talking about the timelines the white house and health officials are suggesting for supporting a reopening of the country. president trump, today, said that the coronavirus will, one day, be gone and that it won't be that much longer. at the same news conference, dr. anthony fauci said despite the success social distancing has had during the pandemic, now is not the time to pull back. joining me now, jim acosta. and cnn chief political correspondent dana bash. jim, you were at the briefing today with the president. i was watching. you were pressing him on his talk of reopening the country. talk a little bit about what he said because, again, he is making it sound as if he decide the country reopens when it's, actually, state and local officials.

>> yeah, it was very squishy, anderson. i mean, one thing we did ask the president is whether or not he is going to listen to these doctors. doctors like anthony fauci and deborah birx, who essentially talked him into imposing these guidelines to begin with. and he said he is going to listen to the doctors, but he didn't say whether he is going to follow their recommendations. he also announced that, on tuesday, he is going to talk about this reopening the country council, as he described it, which is going to be made up of politicians and business leaders and so on. i asked him whether it'd be bipartisan. he said it'll be bipartisan. not many other details besides that. but it sounds like he has moved in that direction, anderson. he is moving in the direction of reopening this country and the question, at this point, is what is going to slow him down? it may not even be the doctors at this point because you hear the doctors saying the country is just not ready at this stage and they're not sure if it will be by the end of the month. >> maggie, i am wondering what

we make of the president's declaration today that he can override stay at home orders when it was a question of would he order governors to institute stay at home orders, he said he wouldn't. >> right. i think it was just one of these things that he says that i think not particularly based on a plan or on any legality. i also think there there is a number of people in his administration wloho would have real problem with the federal government forcing a national stay-at-home order. it would be very, very hard. what is clear, anderson, listening to the president today is it's not clear what metrics he is going to use objectively to reopen the country. will it be jobs? number of jobs lost. will it be number of tests done? will it be cases declining in specific places? these are all real questions, and when he was asked the question about metrics, he didn't answer. pointed to his own head and said this is my metrics. so i think we are going to see him sort of grappling with this. and these are real questions. i mean, to be fair, there is

obviously an enormous economic toll and a mental health toll on this country. so i understand why he is wrestling with this. but i do think that it is important for the country to understand what's going into his decision when that, ultimately, comes. and i think he has struggled to make that clear. >> dana, i mean, you have been talk tog talking to a source in communication with the president. what else did they say? >> yeah. just that. that, you know, when he finally does make this decision, you were alluding to this with jim. first of all, it's not really his decision to make. it is the individual governors. but he can show proper leadership by making this announcement and this -- these decisions, along with the governors, key governors, of course, it's very hard to do with all of them. but the key governors in the states that have had the biggest hotspots. so the source i was talking to, who communicates with the white house, was suggesting that would kind of be a twofer. first of all, let's get real.

give him political cover to do it hand in glove with governors, many of whom are democrats. but, more importantly, to have cover when it comes to the health situation because governors who are on the front lines aren't going to want to open up their states and open up restaurants, open up everything that equals normal life until they're ready. so it would -- it would do both of those things. unclear if he is going to listen to that. >> yeah. and, jim, now you have, you know, professor murray who we just talked to saying next week, his model has been more conservative, frankly, in terms of death toll than the white house's own model. saying that he is going to be releasing this report next week that shows -- that will show if social distancing efforts, if current efforts, do not remain in place through may, there will be very well projected to be a return by i think he said july in the counter numbers we are seeing in some of these h hotspots.

>> that's right. dr. anthony fauci made that very clear. if you loosen these guidelines, do not be surprised if you see outbreaks in certain parts of the country because the virus is still going to be there, whether or not the president the wants to get back to work. the other thing that needs to be pointed out is the country is just not ready from an equipment standpoint to reopen. we don't have enough tests. despite what the president was saying in these fact-challenged briefings all week, we don't have enough tests. we don't have enough medical equipment. after the briefing today, i was going to e-mail some doctors and nurses. i'm sure you get the same thing, anderson. saying don't listen to what the president says, listen to what we have to say. and what they are saying, anderson, is that our hospital system, in this country, and just not prepared for this whole problem to snap back into a another pandemic even if things loosen back up again. >> yeah, like you, i get direct message and instagram who can't get test for themselves and they are treating -- you know, they are in a hospital setting, dealing with this every single

day. maggie, the idea -- i think jim raised a really important point of clearly the president has a -- a concern about the idea of doing a lot of testing. and i don't know if the whole testing issue makes him -- you know, if he feels is an take on the early failure of the administration. certainly, cdc. for -- to get testing and sort of live up to the promises the administration was making about tenning for everybo for everybody. i don't know if that's that. but, clearly, every scientist is saying testing and contact tracing is critical to being able to get back to work. >> yeah, that's right. and, look, anderson, the president tends to use numbers the way he sees fit and thinks will help make his case. so he is just using the sheer volume of tests, as opposed to the per capita basis, which is really what every health expert says it needs to be judged on. we are all learning about this as we go but that is certainly

what health experts say. i do think it's because the president doesn't want to talk about the failures related to testing that are solidly on his administration, from the very beginning. he has continued to ask people, my colleague noah reported on this days ago. he's continued to ask people why are we still -- you know, isn't this on the states now? why is this still our problem? he genuinely doesn't seem to understand why it is the federal government who had issues with this all along is going to own this. and the answer is not going to be pointing to numbers of how many tests have been done until there is better testing. until there is a way to test for antibodies. this is going to remain an open question as to how many people can go back to work. >> dana. who -- i mean, where else, other than the scientists, you know, where is the president getting his advice from? is it, you know, fox and conservative media? >> yes.

>> is it, you know, business people he is friends with? or people on his economic team? >> all of the above. and the biggest concern among some in the white house, according to a source i talked to today, is that more and more, he's been talking to friends on wall street. hedge fund friends. others who are in the financial world who are clamoring for the economy to reopen again for obvious reasons. they are losing money personally. their businesses are losing money. their clients are losing money. so when the president hears that when he makes his rounds of calls, he comes back and he puts that pressure on his political and policy staff and, more importantly, on the medical professionals in the task force. but, make no mistake, there is and has been -- and we've all reported on this -- a split inside the president's team about just how far to go in closures. some people in the white house still think the administration,

in their guidelines, have gone too far. but, right now, there is it seems to be enough pushback against those voices he is hearing to keep the status quo. >> jim, it's interesting the idea that wall street firms, hedge fund people pushing him to get back to work. i mean, i have yet to hear from the task force about even what sort of some of the basics of getting back to work would look like. is every company going to have, you know, handheld digital thermometers that they can point at every employees' forehead as they come in the building and see if they have a fever? are they going to have, you know, rapid testing on hands so if an employee is coughing, they can test whether that employee actually has something and should go home. i mean, we haven't really heard what it's going to take, from a logistical standpoint, let alone the testing standpoint. >> it's a great question, anderson. cdc just put out guidelines for essential workers going back to the workplace and what they need to do. some of the guidelines are they

shouldn't congregate in break rooms and that sort of thing. but, anderson, i will tell you when i come into the white house every day, they check my temperature. and before i go into the briefing, they check my temperature. but some of this is inconsistent. take, for example, yesterday. before the briefing, they wanted us to take coronavirus tests. i took a coronavirus test. it came back negative. but, today, we went into the briefing room. there were no coronavirus tests. so, at some point, the administration is going to have to say to every fortune 500 country, to just about every employer in america, this is what you need to do to bring people back into the workplace. bring kids back into schools. churchgoers back into churches. and we just haven't gotten to that point yet. and all we hear from the president, it seems, day in and day out, is how he wants to reopen the country again. and as dana and maggie were saying, all the people inside the president's team, they seem to be on opposite sides as to where those details are leading at this point. >> jim acosta, maggie, dana

bash. up against, my conversation with gavin newsom, whose state seems to be weathering the pandemic better than most. i am totally blind. and non-24 can make me show up too early... or too late. or make me feel like i'm not really "there." talk to your doctor, and call 844-234-2424.

public health authorities in california say the coronavirus curve is flattening. but as we mentioned earlier, los angeles county extended their stay at home order. also, gavin newsom announced a slight increase in the death toll and thankfully that is lower than a number of other states particularly that size. i spoke with him shortly before air time. >> governor newsom, the fact that california, with 40 million people in the state, hasn't had

a surge the way new york has, what do you attribute to? i mean, you did get a head start on a lot of the other states. >> i think it's 40 million people practicing social distancing. it's 40 million people, by and large, staying at home. i think there is no greater nonpharmaceutical impact to bend a curve than people doing just that, and i couldn't be more proud of this state. >> dr. fauci, today, said that despite progress, this is certainly not the time to be pulling back at all. obviously, there is other considerations that the president and -- and others on wall street and elsewhere have. in terms of what the virus is doing in california, in the coming weeks, do you have a broad sense, based on what you know right now, how long your timeframe is to keep the stay-at-home orders in place? >> well, it appears we have not only bent the curve but we have stretched it. and we've stretched it out a little bit. we have seen still a modest growth rate on a daily basis. today, 2.5% increase in total number of hospitalizations.

that's the number, anderson, i look at every morning. number of people in icu and the number of people that are hospitalized. so those numbers are modest, which has bought us time. allowed us to procure more assets, not only physical alternative care sites but the human resources and appropriate protective gear. but it's still too early to say. and the worst thing we could do is run the 90-yard dash on this virus. >> so, right now, what are you telling people just for the foreseeable future? have you said we are going to reassess at the end of april? or have you not specified? >> we -- we haven't specified because it's really on the basis of the virus and the determination of individuals to bend the curve. to mitigate the spread of the virus. it's literally that question is best answered by asking 40 million californians what they will do to meet the moment, every hour of every day, over the course of the next few weeks. and over the course of the next few weeks, if we see this modest growth begin to bend in a

different direction, then i will be in a position, based upon the expertise of our health professionals and based upon where this virus is. based on more and expansive and comprehensive community surveillance. meaning testing. make that determination. >> if the president decide, in coming weeks, to make announcement to reopen the country, i mean, the white house has been talking about may as -- as somewhere in may. ultimately, governors, like yourself, will be the ones determining when stay-at-home orders will be lifted or to what degree. the president today said he can override states' stay-at-home orders if he wants. is this a mixed message? how do you interpret this? >> yeah. i don't anticipate that will happen. i mean, at the end of the day, i think the government will be led broadly and the president will ultimately be led by the facts on the ground. and that's federalism. 50 parts, one body. and i get the incredible power and potency of his voice.

but, at the end of the day, the practical application of that reality is at the state level. and i have all the confidence in the world that if we made a determination, what's best interest for the state of california to keep people healthy, keep people safe, which will buy us the opportunity to get this economy back on track, in a much more sustainable way than short fusing this process. i have the confidence the president will support those efforts. >> "the new york times" reporting today the federal projections show a spike in infections if stay-at-home orders are lifted at 30 days. at the end of the month. that, certainly, is in line with all the scientific advice that's out there. >> look. the worst thing we can do, again, you know, as we're getting so close to turning the page, turning the corner on this, is to get ahead of ourselves. to trip over ourselves and see the kind of spike that we are seeing around the rest of the world. what more evidence do we need

than to see what's happened in singapore and hong kong and wuhan, province, and elsewhere, where we are seeing people that were starting to come back out, now being pullinged back in. so we're the beneficiaries of some of those facts and some of those examples. let's deal, in realtime, on the basis of real data. real scientific evidence. and on the basis of the spread of the virus. but, again, there is no substitute for making a determination of when that date occurs where we give new guidance than the determination of millions of individuals practicing safe physical distancing. >> have you given much thought or do you have people sort of just thinking that far ahead, whenever the date may be, about what coming back online looks like? i mean, the president's talked about a big bang. you know, dr. fauci has said this is not going to be turn a key and suddenly everything, you know, starts going. it's obviously some sort of a gradual thing. but testing is obviously -- and you have already said this -- is

critical in all of this. contact tracing. is the state, right now, set up to do the kind of testing, the kind of public health contact tracing, that would be needed? >> every day, we're making real progress in that space. we're -- continue to be limited on the progress we, otherwise, could make if we had more supplies. particularly, swabs. i can't impress upon you more. in particular, it's now collecting the samples and the media related to the samples more than the rna extraction and the reagents that is a limiting factor, as it relates to expanding testing. but testing is improving. not only testing but the diagnostic side in terms of the time to get the results of the test. so we're going to start to see that scale. but the answer to your question is, yes, we have a team of people focusing exclusively, full time, on what the parameters look like. what the expectations are.

and if we meet those thresholds, how we can architect a strategy to very thoughtfully get back to some sense of normalcy, with heightened sense of vigilance to we can make sure that we don't have a second wave. >> how would that -- i mean, in a company, how might that work? would it -- i mean, would people's temperatures be taken when they came into, you know, an office building if it was a large company? would there be quick testing available if an employee had a cough? i mean, i -- i'm just trying to get a sense of what that might actually look like, sort of company to company. >> no. the answer is yes and yes, all of the above. again, the beneficiaryings. a all of us are beneficiaries of best practices and bad practices from around the world. you will see more face coverings, face masks, as more ppe is procured. you will see more points of temperatures being checked. you'll see much more aggressive efforts to socially isolate individuals and quarantine individuals in realtime, based

upon new technologies on tracking and tracing. today, just as an example, two california-based companies made announcement. we have been working with them. google and apple. in terms of helping with the tracing. all of that will be deployed. all of that's part of the architecture of which we're considering and we'll be making public, very, very shortly. >> the -- california, i know, loaned 500 ventilators, i think it was, to a number of states, including new york, new jersey. you said the california hospital system's only using about 31% of the state's ventilators. if the peak is still coming in california, you're confident, obviously, you're prepared for that if you have been loaning out ventilators. >> yeah. we have over -- in fact, as i speak at this moment, i just got the new numbers. 8,700 ventilators that are not in use, that exist within our hospital system and exist with our cache in the state.

i would love to deploy all of them to the hotspots, to illinois, new jersey, and to new york, and elsewhere. we're proud we were able to provide a few hundred. and we, of course, are prepared to do more if we feel we can. but, to your question, we are cautious. none of us are spiking the ball. none of us are suggesting, for a second, that we have turned the corner herement again, modest growth. but not the kind of acuity of growth, not the slope, that was originally anticipated. and, again, that's because of millions of people practicing physical distancing. >> finally, tonight, you know, obviously you have had differences with the president in the past. tough words on both sides. you have been able to work together, it seems, in this, for the needs of your state. >> yeah. look, anderson, we are involved in 68 lawsuits with the trump administration. i haven't been timid. he certainly hasn't been timid but i got to say this. it's just a fact. i would be lying to you, i'd be lying to the american people.

every single direct request that he was capable of meeting, he has met. we have the usns mercy in california because of his direct intervention and support. 2,000 of these federal medical stations because of his direct support. and so i can only speak for myself. but i have to be complimentary. otherwise, i would be simply lying to you, misleading you. and that is a wonderful thing to be able to say. and i hope that continues. but this has been a remarkable moment. >> your message to not just californians, but really all americans, about where we are, what lies ahead? >> stay the course. stay the course. i mean, the fact is, let us -- let us know run, as i said, the 90-yard dash. if we stay the course, we'll get this economy back sooner. we'll save lives. we'll avoid a second wave. we'll buy ourselves time for more and better treatment. and, of course, a vaccine and

the kind of -- the kind of immunity -- herd immunity that, ultimately, will get this economy back on its feet and get americans back at work, and back spending more time with their family and less time at home. >> california governor gavin newsom. appreciate his name. a lot more coming up tonight. stories of health professionals around the country who say they have been punished for speaking out about safety concerns.

and here we have another burst pipe in denmark. if you look close... jamie, are there any interesting photos from your trip? ouch, okay. huh, boring, boring, you don't need to see that. oh, here we go. can you believe my client steig had never heard of a home and auto bundle or that renters could bundle? wait, you're a lawyer? only licensed in stockholm. what is happening? jamie: anyway, game show, kumite, cinderella story. you know karate? no, alan, i practice muay thai, completely different skillset.

some health care workers say they've come under fire for speaking out against what they say is lack of personal protective equipment, vital gowns and masks and things they need to wear treating coronavirus patients. randi kaye has more. >> virus is in the air. that's what i was really concerned about. so i wanted to wear an n-95 mask. >> reporter: nurse from chicago says she was fired from raising alarm about not being allowed to wear n-95 mask at work. health officials consider the masks the best line of defense because it filters more than 95% of airborne particles. >> we were told we could only wear simple masks. i didn't think that was enough protection. >> reporter: lori says her unit in downtown chicago was treating

patients diagnosed with coronavirus, many of whom she said had fevers and bad coughs. >> i was travel nurse so i had my own mask. >> reporter: even though not taking from the hospital supply, she says she was told not to wear her n95. >> i emailed the manager, said i don't think it's safe enough. i want to wear the n95 and i'll wear a simple mask over the n95 mask. i then sent out email to 50 coworkers, i'm going to wear n-95 mask along with the simple mask. report the following taylory says she was let go from the hospital without being given a reason. now suing northwestern memorial, lawsuit alleges she was terminated for the purpose of quelling her speech. >> i cannot fathom any legitimate reason to muzzle a doctor or nurse, they fired her because speaking out on a matter

that was designed for safety. >> reporter: chicago's northwestern hospital would not comment on lori's pending lawsuit but told me via email the hospital is committed to the safety of our employees who are on the front lines of this global health care crisis. adding the hospital followed cdc guidance regarding the use of personal protective equipment for our health care providers. but a radiologist and physicians advocate for north carolina has heard about hospitals around the country silencing health care workers and trying to control the message, even giving some physicians talking points to use. >> a lot of physicians are very scared of telling the truth or challenging any of the policies that are being put forth by their institutions because they're afraid of being fired. >> reporter: nisha runs two facebook groups with more than 80,000 physicians, who are

sounding off about the lack of adequate protection from coronavirus. >> every day i get at least 10 to 20 messages from physicians around the country. people need to know how scared we are, not able to get stories out because of the hospital policies or afraid of being retaliated against. >> reporter: in chicago, lauri says she didn't speak up to cause problems but save lives. >> i just wanted everyone to be protected, didn't want people to get it. didn't want people to die from it. >> reporter: randi kaye, cnn, palm beach, florida. >> get perspective from senior cnn medical analyst and new york medical center, you just heard randi's piece, art. it's difficult. hospitals want to protect the privacy of their patients but also protect their own reputations. yet other -- there's other concerns of getting information out and getting action to fix wrongs. what do you make of the nurse being fired? are you surprised at what we've

been seeing? >> not totally surprised but i am really disappointed. i'll tell you why, anderson. we're in a tense, tense environment. there are a lot of frontline workers, heroes out there taking risks. some people not with adequate protection, the right kind of protection. certainly people who said to me i'm reusing masks that aren't supposed to be reused. it's a tense, tense, tough situation and not one i wish we would see lawsuits and firings. if we're stressed out on the front lines, don't have enough workers, last thing we want to do is fire people who speak up. i think what we want to do is look for mediation, try to do counseling, may want to put the matter off until after the epidemic is over. but you have to have some sympathy for people who are nervous, afraid, feel like they're being asked to take risks out of the ordinary.

i get that the hospital wants to control the message, lot of institutions do. many companies would be furious if employees talked out in social media or to the press but now is not time to go to war over free speech, not the right approach. >> i get a lot of direct messages on instagram from nurses, other employees in hospitals, frontline workers, they don't want names used or name of their hospital used because they're afraid for themselves but they want people to know what they're facing and what the difficulties and needs are. what do you think is the best way for a frontline employee to try to change a wrong or a difficulty they are all facing? >> look, social media, the internet, it's really tough to police that. lot of these policies about you have to clear this with pr

department at your hospital were built for different era, we're not in this era. some venting or complaining, there is outlet through social media and people have a right i think to say what they want there on their own time. you know, it's a free speech zone if you will. at the same time i think writing something thoughtful, trying to make presentations that go -- letters to the editor, whatever, get them cleared, it's fine to do that too. don't want anybody to feel if their life is on the line, asked to take terrible risks and bravely taking them they're going to wind up fired for that, that's not the right interaction. >> yeah, art caplan, appreciate your time. coming up, update on the complicated and confusing status of coronavirus testing. trace the arc of the president's comments ahead.

for people living with h-i-v, keep being you.

and ask your doctor about biktarvy. biktarvy is a complete, one-pill, once-a-day treatment used for h-i-v in certain adults. it's not a cure, but with one small pill, biktarvy fights h-i-v to help you get to and stay undetectable. that's when the amount of virus is so low it cannot be measured by a lab test. research shows people who take h-i-v treatment every day and get to and stay undetectable can no longer transmit h-i-v through sex. serious side effects can occur, including kidney problems and kidney failure. rare, life-threatening side effects include a buildup of lactic acid and liver problems. do not take biktarvy if you take dofetilide or rifampin. tell your doctor about all the medicines and supplements you take, if you are pregnant or breastfeeding, or if you have kidney or liver problems, including hepatitis. if you have hepatitis b, do not stop taking biktarvy without talking to your doctor. common side effects were diarrhea, nausea, and headache. if you're living with hiv, keep loving who you are. and ask your doctor if biktarvy is right for you.