>> i love you. >> new york. >> and everything in the whole world seems to be happening on zoom right now. chris cuomo is ready to take it over. our coverage continues now with you, chris. you doing zooms? >> can't stop love, erin. what do i have to zoom for? i do this. this is my zoom. have a good night. i'm chris cuomo and welcome to "prime time." federal guidelines to slow the spread are set to expire tomorrow. no state appears to have met the benchmark to reopen, that is 14 straight days of declining number of cases. not one state has met it. the president's leadership in this moment, i'm not really sure about needing testing after all. really? for the love of logic, just two days since pence said we should

all be proud about the step-up on testing, when will the doublespeak end? no wonder people look to the governors for guidance. we also have another big story tonight. what is the real deal on research on a covid treatment? is this about hope? for all the doubt, we do know something, and it is amazing. even illness becomes wellness. that saying was from malcolm x. we must be together as ever as one. let's get after it. all right. our nation's top infectious disease expert just said today there is a drug that may be able to block this virus. >> if you look at the time to

recovery being shorter in the remdesivir arm, it was 11 days compared to 15 days. that's a p value, for the scientists who are listening, of 0.001. so that's something that, although a 31% improvement, doesn't seem like a knockout 100%. it is a very important proof of concept, because what it has proven is that a drug can block this virus. >> okay. let's all say the name of the drug together. ready? remdesivir. the drug is called remdesivir. you're going to hear it a lot. it's not easy to say. but now you know. the fda has reportedly fast tracked it. that's what's happening right now, for emergency use. that was dr. fauci, obviously, talking about the drug. he says the data shows it does have a clear-cut effect in diminishing a patient's recovery

time. not a cure. it diminishes recovery time, like tamiflu. so what is the real deal about who it helps and how much? we all want a cure, let's be very clear. but we can't invest in hype or false hope. it only weakens our ability to have the resolve to fight the disease. the good news, a key researcher behind the clinical trial for the drug is our guest tonight, dr. andre khalil. doc, thank you very much for being on "prime time." >> thank you, i appreciate it. >> i appreciate you, you're our best guest for this. give us your take. what is your level of enthusiasm about this drug's ef cation and what do you believe its efficacy to be? >> this is a very important question, chris. i'm one of the principal investigators for the nih trial.

this trial was run mostly in the united states with about 50 sites here, 20 sites outside the united states, south korea, singapore, japan, germany, and spain. so this is a very large trial, sponsored by the nih. there was a large group of very experienced investigators at the university of nebraska, the principal investigator. we started this trial right on february 21st. we enrolled the very first patient in this very important trial in february. it was one of the patients that came on the cruise, the "diamond princess" cruise. this trial, actually the very interesting aspect of this trial is that a very strict methodology, as strict as it can be in terms of a scientific methodology.

>> so it's legit, it wasn't too small a sample, it wasn't double blind, it was peer-reviewed, it checks all the boxes. >> absolutely, chris. importantly, it's not peer-reviewed yet. >> not peer-reviewed. >> the preliminary results are so important that we decided this has to be out to the public, that everyone has to know, because the results are so significant that we cannot just hold and wait for the whole process to go through and see what's going to happen, because we believe -- >> let's talk about why that is, doctor. let's be very clear. you're a researcher. you're a highly skilled academic and clinician, you're not a politician. i'm not asking you to sell the drug to people. but wall street went crazy. and releasing preliminary data is unusual. you are saying the same thing dr. fauci said, which is yeah, but this data matters so much that we need it to get out.

why does it matter so much? it's not like this is a pill that you'll take where you can never get this, it's not like a vaccine. why did you think the research was so important that it needed to come out? >> great question, chris. here is the deal. this is really, really important. this is what i've done for 20 years. i'm very much, as you said, i'm a clinician, i take care of patients. together with clinical care, this is what i do for life. this is really what i do for life, that's my 24/7 activity. and, you know, when we participate in a trial that strict, it has to be robust, double blind, placebo controlled, with the sponsorship of the nih. there is no trial that has been done with such strict methodology. that's very important, because

as you know, there is a lot of fake science out there. this is absolutely true science. and that's why i'm participating in this trial because i believe this trial really could bring some important findings. >> all right. so none of the chloroquine stink is on this study. this was done in a different way so you have more confidence in it. but why are the preliminary findings so potent? what is the eureka moment here that people have to know right now? >> so there is two things that are very important for me. and i'm seeing that not only as a researcher, as a clinician, as somebody who takes care of patients every day. the two findings we know today that dr. fauci mentioned was, one, that the time to recovery is reduced by four days. this is not a small deal. this is a big deal, because it's four days, from 15, 14 days, about a third of the time that patients are going to require oxygen, are going to require respiratory support, are going

to require being in the hospital. why this is important, if you would ask me if i would stay drugged state for two weeks in a hospital or two weeks minus four days, there was nobody that would say they would prefer to stay the full two weeks. every day you stay in the hospital, you have increased risk of complications. >> understood. >> from the patient perspective, this is definitely something very important because you're going to really have a third reduction in your time for recovery. the second thing as important as well is that there was a trend, even though the trial was not powered for mortality, but there was a trend for improving mortality from 11.6 to 8% with remdesivir. >> 3% reduction in death? >> exactly. if you put together, almost 4% reduction in death, with four days' reduction on the need for hospital and respiratory

support, this is not something to take lightly, especially when it comes from a trial that is that robust. this is not a cure. >> let's talk about that. >> if you brought the mortality down to zero and you had absolutely 100% -- this is not a cure, this is a treatment. that's why the trial -- >> i totally get it. >> -- to look for other therapies as well. this is the beginning of the process. >> so let's talk context here. tamiflu, which people are familiar with, you get the flu, you get the pill of tamiflu, i know this isn't a pill, it's an iv treatment that has to be done in the hospital at this point, but that's not a cure either, right? it reduces the length of the flu. that's the same dynamic we're talking about here. in terms of whom it is great information for, not me, somebody who had a nasty case but stayed home, or somebody who

gets a case and doesn't have to go in the hospital or somebody who goes in the hospital but doesn't have an extreme case. this is a drug that at least as tested, was about extreme cases in the hospital where this was an iv treatment. so we're not talking about something that is a pill that we can pop and it will make what you deal with at home shorter in duration. so this is a very limited population we're talking about with the drug. is that a fair point? >> it's a very fair point. i'm glad that you brought this up. this is a very fair and very important point. this drug is only to be given for people with moderate to severe covid disease. these are patients who not only have the infection but they have the infection already spread to the lungs, causing pneumonia. they're required to be hospitalized. they're required to receive oxygen or be on ventilation. these are definitely patients that are in the more severe

spectrum of the disease. and that was the goal of the clinical trial. this is not a medication that should be given to anyone that doesn't meet the inclusion criteria. you have to have pneumonia from the virus, you have to be in the hospital requiring respiratory support or requiring oxygen. it is an intravenous medication that requires an intravenous catheter to be administered as well. >> let me get one public policy point before i run out of time. i want to say in advance, dr. kalil, i know how busy you are with processing this study and your other clinical work, i really appreciate you taking the time, because the country is hearing about this now, they need to hear it straight right now and they're not going to get a better source than you, you have no agenda other than the science. people hear about this, remdesivir, this is it, this is the cure, stop with all this isolation, the mass craziness,

we have something that will keep us from dying, let's reopen, let's be more ambitious. what is your caution? >> well, i can tell with 100% certainty, remdesivir is -- should not change, you know, even with the data we have, with the positive data that we can shorten the time of disease, we can potentially save lives, remdesivir will not do anything to, in terms of public health. remdesivir is strictly going to benefit people with moderate or severe disease that are in the hospital. just having the remdesivir available, let's say it's approved, it's going to be a great benefit for patients who are very sick from covid in the hospital. but when it comes to public health, remdesivir will have absolutely no impact, because remdesivir is not a drug to be used to prevent the infection,

it's not a drug to be used in somebody with a mild infection who is at home who will improve without any medications. remdesivir is for a very specific small proportion of patients that get really sick, that have a high risk of death. this is the patient population that will benefit from remdesivir. it should not have any significant impact in terms of public health policy, in terms of opening or closing. this is a whole different subject that will not be influenced by the availability of remdesivir. this is a very important thing to understand. prevention and treatment are two very different things and should not be confused at all. >> the hopeful thing is we finally have a tool in the box. remdesivir is the first thing we know with science behind it, you can give to someone who is an extremis, and it will help them. if you, dr. kalil, and your team, thank you for killing yourself to get this research done so soon. thank you, sir. god bless you and your family. stay healthy.

>> thank you, it's a team effort, investigators all over the world. it's a huge team effort. university of nebraska. it's really an effort of so many people. and i cannot thank everyone here, but it's just the beginning. we're going to find more treatments and more things that hopefully will improve the lives of all these patients being affected by the disease. thanks so much for the opportunity, chris. >> doctor, thank you, it made a big difference, i can't get a better source for my audience than you. be well. appreciate it. quick sum-up. we finally have a tool in the box. we're losing way too many people. you know the ratio of people who go on ventilators to get off? it's not good. in fact it's shockingly bad. now there's something that maybe will help. it's for the worst cases, the moderate to severe in the hospital. at least we have something. now, is it a cause to leave your house and to start being

cavalier? no. and i don't know why people are hyping it that way online. i don't know why wall street traded up the way it did on this, i don't know, other than that it's organized gambling. it is cause for hope. but it is not a cure. we don't have to worry less about getting the disease because of this, all right? now, reopening talk, okay? it's as contagious as anything, i know i'm hearing it, you're hearing it, we all want to get going. a big part of the equation is masks. to be honest, i don't know what the heck the deal is. let's bring in sanjay gupta. we've gone full cycle on this. nobody needs masks, don't touch the masks, let other people have the masks. now everybody needs the masks. what's the deal and why? ever nancial plan needs a cfp® professional -- confident financial plans, calming financial plans, complete financial plans. they're all possible with a cfp® professional. find yours at letsmakeaplan.org. what does an apron have to do with insurance?

an apron is protection. an apron is not quitting until you've helped make something better. what does an apron have to do with insurance? for us, especially right now, everything. ♪ for us, especially right now, your cells. trillions of them. that's why centrum contains 24 key nutrients to feed your cells, supporting your energy so you can take care of what matters most. centrum. feed your cells. fuel your life.

we've done incredible with the testing over the next couple of weeks. we've seen some astonishing numbers. i don't know that all of that is even necessary.

>> what? if i had any hair left, i would rip it out. the day before yesterday, pence stood there proud, next to trump, and told you all, be proud today because this is momentous. the massive step that the federal government took in working with the states to get testing prep to a whole new level so we can reopen. literally monday. and now the president says he doesn't even know if testing is necessary? listen. let them explain to the faithful how it's okay that he said this, he's being misconstrued. it's a bunch of bunk. it is not okay. it's poisonous pandering to ignorance. as a result, are you surprised that states, especially red states, right, almost all of the 21 states that are going to lift restrictions early on businesses and otherwise, where are they going to get their guidance? why should they believe anything hard and fast? it doesn't appear any of those

states met the federal guidelines of 14 days of cases on the decline. but can you be surprised? when the president changes his message every other day? liberate your states. don't stay home. testing is everything. i'm not so sure about testing. of course you're going to have this. and it is just appalling from leadership. that's not playing politics. it's truth. now, let's get truth on something else here. let's bring in dr. sanjay gupta and talk about masks, okay? now, i happen to have a very fetching mask that a friend of mine made for me. i will model it for you. look. it is made to cover even a pie hole as big as mine. this was made by my beautiful young friend selay, sanjay's daughter. it is a beautiful fabric mask. doc, you and i have been talking masks it seems forever here and it seems like we've gone in a 360 about it. >> well, yeah, you're right.

initially the guidance was you don't need masks because first of all, the masks that health care workers are using, you save those for health care workers. there was a shortage of them. so the other types of masks likes the one you're showing there weren't necessarily designed to protect the user. i think what changed at some point several weeks ago was the acknowledgement that a mask like that could protect other people from the user. so if you wore that mask out in public, chris, and you had the virus, you could actually decrease the amount of virus that you would shed into the environment. so it's a way to mitigate the spread. it's not perfect by any means. the n95 fitted mask, that's the one that's actually going to be the best in terms of protecting the user. but a mask like this would offer some benefit towards decreasing the amount of virus being put out into the environment. that's a good thing. especially as we're trying to slow down the spread. that was the thinking, chris. >> it seems to have become a

little bit of a touchstone for people. that if you have to wear a mask, that's a severe restriction, that's the real deal. i talked to governor dewine last night, in ohio, and he had an interesting, and honest and candid answer, for why he was not making it mandatory to wear a mask in a retail store. his answer was simple. i think people should wear them. i'm not making it mandatory, no, because the pushback was so strong, it was a no, don't do that to us, we don't want to wear them when we go into retail stores. what is it about the mask, sanjay, that you think is such a litmus test about whether a restriction is tolerable. >> i think it's three things. one is the point that you just made. it hasn't been explained very well to people. i think they lost a little bit of faith in the explanation. wait, you told me i don't need them, now you tell me i need them, so i don't trust you guys anymore.

second is the liberty, don't tell me what i can and can't do. the third is this idea, the misconception, people aren't doing it to protect themselves. you know, if i frame the reasoning and saying, hey, look, you're not doing it to protect yourself, you're doing it to protect the people around you, you're doing it so you don't spread the virus which you may have in your nose and mouth and not even realize it because you could be completely without symptoms and still have the virus and still be spreading it. i think if people were to understand that better, maybe they would be more likely to do it. if you can keep a safe distance from someone, you probably don't need it. but it's hard, as people start to go out more in public, and you don't know, did i keep a safe six-foot distance around me for the entire time i was out? if you're not confident you can do that, you should wear a mask so you don't inadvertently infect someone else. >> and the states are doing it, state by state, whatever the rule is, different places, new york, new york has a rule that you just outlined. something really interesting that i saw from the reopenings,

every state that is reopening has created a new assumption in the impact models that is the white house is using. and every addition to it has increased the death projection. each week the death projection is going up. now, is that just a natural assumptive consequence of time or is there a co efficiency, where if you're an added boost from early reopenings? >> the early reopenings are definitely fueling changes in the models. i've talked to the people who author the models and asked them, what are the inputs, how are they coming up up with these numbers, and that definitely feeds into it. this is not looking as much like a curve in many places, it looks like a plateau. we've gotten up to a certain amount and it's sort of flattened out there. flattening the curve is what

we're supposed to do, not create a plateau. that's why you're seeing a significant change in numbers. chris, i'll remind you, just over a month ago, the same modelers, imhe modelers, said the death toll would be 90,000, and they reduced it to 60,000. why? because the stay-at-home orders were working, people were abiding by it, they were checking people's cellphone data, checking their mobility, anonymously, obviously, trying to figure out were people staying at home. the answer was yes, more than they expected. so that brought the numbers down. but now the numbers have flattened, that's made the projected numbers start going up. and they added probable infections into the equation. and then this last point, how do we account for the reopening in these models? i've got to tell you, and i don't mean to poke fun at the modelers because this is hard work, but all these models are wrong.

some are useful, as we say. the range is huge. like if you look at the imhe model, the range is somewhere between 40,000 and 140,000. we focus on the middle number, but it's a huge range they're providing which kind of basically is, you know, understandable. we really don't know for certain where this is headed. right now, the projected numbers of deaths do seem to be going up. >> look, to be fair to them, you know, you get asked to model a projection with an assumption built in that a state has to have 14 days of cases trending down. >> right. >> not just a slowed increased rate. and so you must start doing your modeling and your projections. and now, none of the 21 states that are reopening or about to reopen have met the standard. your model is shot. you don't have a chance of having any real accuracy on that. >> that's right. >> the hard part of it is,

nobody is correcting it. the president came out today and said, i don't even know that testing is needed. so why even have it? why use it as a standard? >> that was surprising. given that everybody i know and around the president, i talked to many people on the coronavirus task force, have told him, is telling him, will continue to tell him, that testing is important. it's the pivotal thing. you can't make any other decisions unless you have eyes on this and it's going to continue to be important. we will argue, i think people will argue about what is the right number of tests that are needed. and, you know, the harvard roadmap, they say ultimately by july you need 20 million tests a day. and just to clarify, that doesn't mean, you know, the population of the country is only 350 million, roughly, so several people will get tested several times in order to give people confidence in order to return to the workplace. maybe the answer is somewhere in between, maybe it's not 20 million a day, who knows what it's going to be, but it's a lot more, chris, by all accounts,

than we're doing now. >> look, what we're really going to battle ultimately is going to be the "x" factor of fatigue. and, you know, my best sense from my reporting and my knowledge of the players is that the president is betting on fatigue, that people are going to get tired of this, they're going to want to reopen, and every little suggestion, liberate your states, i don't even know that testing is necessary, all these little things, hyping up the drug that they came up with today, making it sound like it's almost a cure. this is all to push people towards fatigue and that will be the biggest battle. we'll see how it plays out. i think we'll see it sooner than expected. dr. sanjay gupta, you are a gift. thank you for being on the show tonight. >> you got it, chris, any time. >> and thank your daughter for the mask, it's awesome. i can't believe i've kept it away from the girls so long, because this is the best looking thing in the house, and it covers my mouth, which is a

bonus. california has been taking a much more cautious approach than any of the 21 states reopening now. why? what do they see that other states are discounting or ignoring altogether? we have the mayor of los angeles here. another lucky guest. why? his city is about to be the first city in the nation to do something that is very significant. what is it? next. since 1926, nationwide has been on your side. we've been there in person, during trying times. today, being on your side means staying home... "nationwide office of customer advocacy." ...but we can still support you and the heroes who are with you. we're giving refunds on auto insurance premiums, assisting customers with financial hardships, and our foundation is contributing millions of dollars to charities helping with covid-19 relief. keeping our promise to be on your side.

and 24 hour relief from symptoms caused byn. over 200 indoor and outdoor allergens. like those from buddy. because nothing should come between two best friends. feel the clarity, and live claritin clear. there is one thing we can all do together: complete the 2020 census. your responses are critical to plan for the next 10 years of health care, education, and more. go online to 2020census.gov and help shape america's future.

it's velveeta shells & cheese go online to 2020census.gov versus the other guys. ♪ clearly, velveeta melts creamier. keeping our customers, employees, and communities safe. during these uncertain times we want you to get great service without leaving the safety of your home. shop at sprint.com for free next day shipping and no activation fees on our best new phone deals, like a samsung galaxy phone for just $0 a month. plus, you'll also get a $100 prepaid mastercard when you switch online. stay healthy and visit sprint.com to get the services you need. for people with hearing loss, visit sprintrelay.com

important breaking news tonight. last will be the first city to offer free covid tests to everyone. it is a nod to desperation, you

know nothing if you can't test and you can't trace. you don't know what kind of scale and what kind of problems you have. especially when you're talking about the population centers. we're so clueless about the reality. we don't even know how many dead there are because of that. numbers in the state are stabilizing in california, okay? but they're still going up. let's bring in the mayor of los angeles, mayor eric garcetti, become a household name, wub to "prime time". >> i like the high and tight, the new haircut. >> thank you. the mrs. did it. the joke is when i asked her to cut my hair, and she said okay, she wanted to start with a straight blade right here, mayer. >> my wife gave me a cut, it looks uneven in the back and you can't see it and i can't say it so we're happy. >> you're looking good. we'll take it. all right, so let me play proxy for the president for a second. what are you doing, garcetti? i'm not sure you need these tests, that's what the prest said today and here you are

letting everybody get tested for free. obviously you will favor people with symptoms but why are you wasting the money? the testing is not even that important says the president. >> i have a different philosophy. we all know this is a silent killer that moves quietly through the population and why it is so important for people who don't show symptoms to get tested, because oftentimes, they're the super spreaders, because they don't know that they have that infection, and so it is always our goal, we stood up our first testing centers on our own with our own firefighters, paying for it with our own dollars and looking for our own labs. 40 days ago. 40 days later, we're proud to have the first widespread testing for nonsymptomatic people in a major american city. i think it is something we hope we can all get towards. even when we do that, we may still not have enough tests as you heard but it is a great and bold step forward and i'm very proud of our firefighters and everybody who has helped to stand this up. >> when you offer the tests, do you have the money, the man

power, and the materials, to apply all of those tests, to get it processed and do it in a timely fashion, and find people who have it, and may have contacted others? >> we believe so. we've been opening the aperture as was said, widening who could get tested, yesterday it was construction workers and the day before taxi drivers and ride share drivers. the week before, people without symptoms who work in critical industries like our medical professionals and first responder, grocery clerks, so each step we've taken at the end of the day, we have an additional test left and for us that was a good sign, even with the first day, people with no symptoms in these industries that they could get tested, we thought we would be overwhelmed and we haven't. and the county were los angeles, which is a superb partner, we can offer we believe, to everybody living in the county of los angeles, starting tomorrow, with or without

symptom, offer the test and get the results back in a day or two maximum, these days, it is three and go into places like the senior home, the home tless population and have a surge in those areas because those folks can't necessarily come to the testing centers and that's a critical part of the strategy. >> perspective. florida over the weekend, the betches the people go, they're all over the place. it does not slow down governor desantis's decision to move forward with reopening. california had a similar thing happen in areas where people were all over the beaches. the word is that it was a set of breaks for both the city and the state level, that we are not ready to do anything aggressive. why was the same stimulus, people going to the beach, call for two opposite conclusions for two different states. why didn't you see it the way florida did which is people want to get back out there, garcetti, let them do it.

>> i think as long as we do these steps in a smart way, we assess how great is the need, first. second, how big is the risk. and then third, what safety measures can you apply to deal with that risk, that there's nothing we won't be able to do necessarily until the future, but we have to be really careful. and as a region, we have to move together. los angeles county kept the beaches closed but to the north and south of us, some were open. in san diego, they thought about it carefully, they spaced people out. in australia they open beaches from 6:00 to 9:00 in the morning for exercise, that's it. you're not getting people loitering and tanning and being close to each other. so i don't think you have to take anything off the table. just be really smart and don't be overly anxious. this isn't about scoring political points. this is about saving lives while we're restoring a slightly better quality of life and economic prosperity to people. that's the wlens that i take. that's the lens that i take. >> why not you have a little break because of the summer

schedule for schools, but schools are the bogeyman. you don't want to mess with schools and kids, because if it goes wrong, the political payback will be harsh and fast. but you can't get people back to work if you can't get their kids back to school. now, again, the summer gives you a little bit of a hedge, because a lot of kids aren't in school in the summer. but do you accept that reality, that until you can make it safe enough to send kids back to school, you can't really get people back to work? >> no question. you know, a mother or father can't go back to work with peace of mind if their kids are by themselves at home. we have to think about the kids first. they need to catch up on their education, they need to move forward with their development. but secondarily, you're exactly right, chris. this is an economic issue, it's a childcare issue. let's not forget those kids that even as we open up schools with new rules that have preexisting conditions, they're not going to go back to school anytime soon. and we have to make sure we take care of them, provide for them to get an education at home, even as teachers are in the classroom. this is going to be tough on teachers, it's going to be challenging for school

districts. we do have time to think that through for the fall. as we see in denmark or everywhere, maybe it's fewer hours, fewer kids at a time. but we have to get kids back to the classroom and i'm confident we can find safe ways to do that, especially with temperature checks, tests at the schools as well. >> i'm hearing a few hours in a lot of places. that would be so sad, we already don't have our kids in school enough. but you have to deal with the situation as you find it. mayor eric garcetti, i appreciate it. one last quick thing, as far as you know on the state level, is california still resolved to follow the cdc guideline of 14 days of cases on the way down before reopening? >> that's the measure that our governor put out there. whether it be a formal measure or not, because sometimes you get more and more tests, you see it go up artificially just because more people are getting tested. but looking at deaths for sure, and hospital admissions, those are the two biggest ones. and lastly, let me just say, i appreciate what you said about masks.

i don't know if it's a guy thing but real men wear masks and we shouldn't be afraid of being seen with masks. so i'll go out on this one. >> let's see, let me test you. what is is the movie where andre the giant said "men in masks cannot be trusted"? >> "princess bride," of course. >> take care, mr. mayor. that was a good line. have fun storming the castle. who said it? billy crystal. who was his wife? carol kane. florida's governor bragged at the white house how well his state is faring in comparison to others in this fight. what we may not know is the full picture, specifically this. there has been growing curiosity about the death toll in this country from covid. two reasons. one, it ain't easy to count. why? because there are a lot of people who died without being tested, so you don't know what

the cause of death was. that's a fair reason. then there's another reason that may be specific to florida in particular. medical examiners saying officials are blocking them from releasing their own list of coronavirus deaths. is there any good reason for that? let's talk to a journalist who is deep inside and helped break the story, next. now, simparica trio simplifies protection.

ticks and fleas? see ya! heartworm disease? no way! simparica trio is the first chewable that delivers all this protection. and simparica trio is demonstrated safe for puppies. it's simple: go with simparica trio. this drug class has been associated with neurologic adverse reactions, including seizures; use with caution in dogs with a history of these disorders. protect him with all your heart. simparica trio. seeing the break in the clouds before anyone else. together, we'll weather this storm.

all right. look, i know the numbers that are flying all over the place. i know it's hard to trust them. i'm going to give you reason to be distrustful of the numbers. and new reason. florida. it's a story where medical examiners, who keep counting deaths and all sorts of emergencies, it's a typical public protocol, it's something you always have access to, you pay for it, why shouldn't you have access to it, especially now? but in this specific situation with coronavirus, "the tampa bay times" reports that florida made the medical

examiners stop releasing that information to you. kathleen mcgrory was digging into this for the times when the state pulled the data. kathleen, thank you for joining us on "prime time." can you see and hear me? >> hi, yes, i can hear you. thanks for having me. >> don't adjust your camera, it's a very extreme haircut. you went out of your way, okay, to layer the reporting about the different rationales for holding the data. but i think they all stink. i mean, they didn't give you one good reason other than privacy of people with covid. but since when is that a public policy exception for putting out data on a mass scale? >> yeah, they haven't quite provided us a reason for why they're withholding this information yet. and we're still pushing for it. but it's still not information we've gotten. we've been asking for it for about ten days.

>> you got an answer from the governor's office which was basically, we're awesome. but look, there is curiosity going all over the country about the numbers. but usually it's because there hasn't been enough testing to understand why people may have met their demise and whether or not it was covid. that's not what you're dealing with in tampa bay. what were you hearing from medical examiners about their darker suspicions about why they were being told to stop doing something that they always do routinely? >> right. i mean, so you're absolutely right. the medical examiners have been counting the dead in times of statewide crisis since 1992. it's kind of pro forma for them to be compiling this list. you know, and i have been doing some reporting a few weeks ago, just some very basic reporting to try to learn what the medical examiners were seeing on the ground. and somebody said, why don't you get this list? i said, okay, that makes sense. so i requested the list from the medical examiners commission.

i got it. and a colleague and i wrote a story about it. at the time, the medical examiners commission list, the count was about 10% higher than the official state count. and we wrote about that. we wrote about all the reasons why there would be some differences between the two counts.time and was told i coult a copy of that list anymore. there were some conflicting reasons why. first, i was told it was confidential. then, i was told the state might need to redact it. and, you know, that's kind of the situation we're in right now. you know, in talking to some of the medical examiners, what they're telling us is that this decision was precipitated by a call from the state department of health. and we know the state department of heath has tried to apply some

pressure to some other agencies to keep this data under wraps. and that's where we are right now in our thinking. >> and what is the official, and then the unofficial, feeling about why they would want to keep it under wraps? >> yeah. well, the -- the -- i don't know that there's an official reason, necessarily, again, because they haven't given us a reason, yet. you know, they are telling us that they have some privacy concerns around this data. it's -- it's questionable if -- if, once you are deceased, if the same type of privacy, you know, protections apply to you. but i think the unofficial thinking behind is that, you know, the state just doesn't want this number out there. it's another number. it's confusing. and some public-health experts have been critical of the way that the state is keeping its count of the dead, here, in florida. >> how so? >> well, so there are two different ways of doing this, right? the medical examiners are counting the dead, based on the

county in which the person died and the state in which the person died. now, the state department of health is looking specifically at florida residents. so in order to be included in the state's count of covid death, you ever to hahave to ha full-time resident of the state of florida. why does that matter? well, we have a lot of snow birds in florida. seasonal residents, part-time residents, and visitors, right? so public health experts are telling us for the count to kind of include those people who were infected in florida, who died in florida, you know, and to exclude them because their driver's license says new york or ohio. that that's not really painting an accurate picture of the epidemic, here, in florida. >> and most snow birds, by the way, are obviously, later in life, people who are more susceptible to this virus and it's more deadly for them as well. one other quick thing. have you guys found any other example of where, on any type of scale, the state used privacy to redact or remove cause of death

and disclosure of the same in the state? >> well, miami herald has done some terrific reporting. we know that the state department of health reached out to the miami-dade medical examiner and actually asked them or advised them not to release their information about deaths to the "miami herald." citing a law that applies, very specifically, it's a statutory exemption to our public records law that applies very specifically to records created for the state department of health. and the county attorneys in miami-dade read that or, you know, had that communication. they read the statute, and then decided they didn't buy it. you know, they thought that their death records were still public record. and they did, in fact, give them to the "miami herald." you know, we've seen other instances where the desantis administration has not been as forthcoming with information as reporters would have liked.

for a while, the desantis administration was releasing the aggregate number of people who had infections in nursing homes but not specifically which nursing homes had infection. and it wasn't until a coalition of newspapers threatened to sue that we got that granular information that the public needs. >> yeah, and also, i was just asking the question because i just -- in looking into the story today, i couldn't find another example, at least over the last ten years, of the state keeping death information on the basis of privacy. there is that one discrete law. well, this was only done for our own, internal purposes. but, in terms of disclosures, they've never used privacy because of the cause of death before. thank you so much for the reporting you guys are doing. this is going to go much deeper, kathleen, you are welcome here to tell the story, as it continues. thank you. >> thank you. i appreciate that. thanks. >> now, mcgory was already fair

to them but the florida state response, just so you know here, surplus of fairness, is reporti reporting deaths by residency is the appropriate method to calculate disease rates, which allow for a more accurate analys analysis through demographic data. a critical aspect of public-health planning. now, listen. i don't buy it. why? because whether you are a resident or not, if you are in a place and they have to figure out public health planning, they have to plan for the people who are there. and if they were so concerned about this itinerant nature, you know, if you are not a full time resident, we're not going to really worry about you. then the whole spring break thing starts to make a little more sense about why they let people come down there, who weren't residents, party their asses off and then go back to all these different states. so that's the statement from the state. doesn't make a lot of sense. you are going to hear more about this. we'll be right back.

life isn't a straight line. and sometimes, you can find yourself heading in a new direction. but when you're with fidelity, a partner who makes sure every step is clear, there's nothing to stop you from moving forward.

don't bring that mess around here, evan! whoo! don't do it. don't you dare. i don't think so! [ sighs ] it's okay, big fella. we're gonna get through this together. [ baseball bat cracks ] nice rip, robbie. ♪ raaah! when you bundle home and auto insurance through progressive, you get more than just a big discount. i'm gonna need you to leave. you get relentless protection. [ baseball bat cracks ]

let's bring in d lemon. i want to thank you for watching, of course. "cnn tonight" with my man starts right now. i want to read you a quote that rosalie gave to me tonight, don. listen to this. hold on, i got to get it here. >> want me to tell you your code? it's 473 -- no, kidding. >> here it is. when i is replaced by we, even illness becomes wellness. it's from malcolm x. isn't that great an ap of right now? >> strong. >> strong. i didn't believe it. when she sent it to me, i was like who said that? she said malcolm x. i was like check it twice. shut up and use it. >> all fired up about