in the meantime, have a great sunday. >> next, newsmakers with the dr. ci.hony fauc then the house select committee on benghazi releases its report on the embassy attack and president obama's address to the canadian parliament. >> on newsmakers this week, we fauci.ned by dr. anthony we will be talking about the zika virus and the u.s. and

global response. to help with our questions and studio, a health reporter with politico and a health reporter with the washington post. on fridaytting afternoon. just a few hours ago, you briefed president obama about the zika crisis. can you give us a sense of what you spoke to him about? >> we give the president on update on various aspects of the zika she was -- issue. particularly concentrating on puerto rico. spoke about the number of travel related cases, the number of

individual women pregnant and affected among travel related cases, spoke a lot about puerto rico and he wanted an update as to the status of the vaccine development program. i think he went away from not host: well briefed. what is the status of that development? >> vaccine development? host: yes. >> he vaccine development is several candidates in various of development. a few including the one we developed at the nih getting ready within a few weeks. ours will probably go to the end of august, beginning of september. phase one trial to determine if protection. we anticipate by the end of calendar year 2016, the beginning of 2017 that we will

be able to advance into what we call an efficacy trial mainly to ask if in fact the vaccine works, does it protect people against zika. there are several candidates each staggered but the early ones are aiming at going into an efficacy trial in early 2017. the president very interested in that time table and the resources that are needed to bring that to fruition. he's concerned about the fact we have not gotten an appropriation from the congress and he wanted to make sure we did not slow down and we did not interfere with the kinds of things that i need to do at the nih and what tom friedman we needs to do with the cdc. >> to that point on appropriation, it has been five months of the white house put in

the request. doesn't look like congress is any closer to getting this passed them back in february. i'm wondering if congress had approved that money back in february, what would have been different in the development of the vaccine or addressing mosquitoes? can you tell us? it's a complicated issue because with regard to vaccine, unlikely there would be any difference. the difference is going to be going forward. we have borrowed money from other accounts and i discussed this many times in the beginning in january when we started doing testinglopment of pre-clinically and inpatients for the phase one we will start toward the end of the summer. through theroceeded month, still with no appropriation, the president

allowed us to use some of the unexpended ebola money to then continue. we are reaching the point now where if we don't get appropriations, we will not be able to do the proper implementation of the more advanced phase two trial. on the been working borrowed money up until now. there has not been a significant slowdown. the issue is if we don't get the money very soon, all of the the leading up to, we will not be able to bring to the goal line. >> if you don't get it very soon, what is your drop the dead? you can't wait until early preparing fortart phase two now. is it going to be in another month or what? >> good question. let me just say the so-called specific tont is

the development of the vaccine and what we do and different from what the cdc is trying to do. specifically to your question about the vaccine, we have money to bring money to fruition. as you are getting ready for phase two, even though it will start in the beginning of 2017, you have to start preparing the site now. tothe sites are not prepared accommodate a phase two trial, you could interfere with the efficiency of what you are doing. i would say if we don't have a firm commitment to get the money to us within several weeks into the summer, we will have to

scramble around and figure out how we can work so as not to slow down the process because what you would want is a very smooth transition from phase one into phase two. that starts sometime in the next several weeks. even though we don't actually start the trial in january, you don't -- you start several months before. >> the president has requested $1.9 billion. congress considering $1.1 billion piece of legislation. how much of either of those goes to vaccine research and where does the other money go? >> good question. relatively speaking since the things of cd have to do our broader scope with regard to public health, what we get is relatively small proportions. not a trivial amount.

point 9 billion come nih would get about 277 million. of that, the overwhelming majority is the vaccines. >> it was actually senate democrats who voted down the $1.1 billion request last week. policy additions that were unacceptable. is this at the point where congress is to appropriate this money no matter what is attached to it? comment aboutn't something i would support if i were in the political arena. i'm in the scientific arena. the president even reiterated today to get the $1.9 billion available and not have any other things associated with it. back that up., i

we have a lot of important things to do and anything that delays it because of other things that get involved, complicating political issues get in the way of our getting that money as soon as we can. >> is it at the point where this needs to get approved the matter what is attached? would like to see it get approved. i'm not really in a position to comment about the other politically related things associated with a legislation. >> would you take the $1.1 billion if it did have these other writers on that? >> i wouldn't refuse the money, i need the money. >> do you think you could tell to us a bit about why

researchers are confident that you can move forward with a good candidate for vaccines and maybe explain it to us in a way that the average person can understand? there have been interesting studies this weekend maybe you can tell us what we know now about the virus, what are the big critical questions that remain to be answered? very good question. the reason we feel reasonably confident that we will be able to develop a safe and effective vaccine is that we have considerable experience over the years with a family and a genus of viruses that includes viruses like yellow fever, west nile virus. when you look at the past experience and the ability to protective response against these classes of virus, we have been quite successful.

yellow fever is one of the most effective vaccines we have. it has been very highly effective. he would have had a good vaccine for west nile. study a few years ago did not go to fruition of devitt -- advanced development. , itou look at dengue fever is it is a day complicated because there are four types of it. to get a good vaccine, you have to have a good response against all of them were as we do know we can get a reasonably good response against individual ones. the president of getting a good vaccine against a virus is there. there is nothing unique about that that makes us think for example, with hiv, in which the body's immune response against the virus is not particularly good so it doesn't really give

you this roadmap to say we know we can induce the body to make a good immune response. when people get infected with a single virus, they are generally protected against other types of exposure of that particular virus. the immunological or scientific concept development is there. we feelthe reason pretty confident. we just need to do it. phased to get into the one. there have been a couple of studies using the prototype of vaccine. we were able to induce responses

by the vaccine that protected the mice and then we took a syrup from the mice that had been vaccinated and gave them to unvaccinated mice. primateave a human model. that monkey is protected from subsequent challenges. you put all of these things together and it spells a favorable issue with regard to our ability to develop a vaccine. wasn't there some bad news that came out of that study because those researchers found that when pregnant monkeys were infected that the virus stayed in their system for way longer? that is struggling, especially with implications for pregnant women in the united states. >> that is a very important point but it may be a scientific

explanation. and the data we just heard mentioned was when you infected pregnant monkey, the virus generally lasts about seven days and then it disappears and you are done with it. in this study with the pregnant monkeys compared to non-pregnant , the virus lingered on frack to 57 days, which is next formation for why there is such vulnerability for the fetus. lookm wondering when you at this long-term, assuming

there is a vaccine that can be developed, is this going to be the new normal that pregnant women have to be worried about? >> i believe it depends on where you live. we use as the example rebel. rubella,he 1960's, which in some respects is not transmitted by a mosquito but it's a relatively mild disease. we found out that most children get infected when they are children and get protected into adulthood and the women are generally protect it. but some young grows don't get it and when they get to childbearing age, a certain proportion of have what we call the congenital rubella syndrome.

rubella vaccine essentially got rid of it. the real target of the rubella openly women of childbearing age. if we vaccinate them when they are younger, we live in a region threat, this is a possibility that might be incorporated into the vaccine that is generally used in given to children to ultimately protect them during childhood. if you have a region or a country in which there is essentially no zika, i don't think there will be a policy that would have this as a broad, general vaccine.

>> for the people who live in those regions, should they at some getting tests point later this summer? what is the recommendation to find out if they might have zika? >> that is a very good question that we have been discussing in great detail. testing, you about have to distinguish between testing for the virus itself, namely asking the question am i infected now? if that is the question you're asking, there is a sensitive and specific and easy to do molecular test called a pcr that can determine if an fact you are infected. you get into some difficulty if three or four months down the pike, you want to ask the question was i infected did and am i protected?

the difficulty with that is if you live in the region where there are other viruses like a dengue fever floating around or you have been vaccinated with the ella fever vaccine, those test forantibody test a history of being infected and are quite nonspecific. proportion oftain good antibodies. a you are going to rely on test to tell you specifically if you have been infected, we are not at that point that we are very confident or comfortable with those tests because of the general lack of specificity and even some lack of sensitivity. >> a few minutes left with dr. anthony fauci. forward to the next

couple of weeks, not just for you but for all the u.s. agencies dealing with the response, what is the most critical issue that needs to be dealt with now that is not happening? >> it's not happening because it hasn't happened. we now have over 900 travel related cases in the continental united states and over 2000 locally transmitted cases and puerto rico so there are two things of concern to me. and that is a situation of the acceleration of cases we have seen and puerto rico over the there is aeks where considerable number of new cases each week. the other thing of concern is that as we get into the more active mosquito season

particularly in the southeast, since we have so many of these travel related cases, we are startned that we will seeing locally transmitted cases among people who never left the continental united states. making sure they don't become disseminated. that is the concern we have in the continental united states. >> one of the numbers on the cdc website, that there has been 13 thesmitted cases in

continental united states. can you talk about what you are doing to address that concern? a publicill really be service of education of the public. that if you are a man and you been be infected or have infected, there are a number of guidelines that are very well delineated on the cdc website. namely the main thing to protect pregnant women. , if man might be exposed you have a pregnant sexual a condomwear consistently and correctly for the duration of the pregnancy. if you don't have a pregnant partner and have been infected, practice safe sex for at least six weeks. if there is no indication at all and you have been in a region, at least eight weeks needs to be a practice of safe sex. of the educating people

couple major points. if you are pregnant or might be pregnant, don't travel to a region where there is active transmission. if you are a male who might be practice make sure you safe sex according to the guidelines of the cdc. >> over the next couple weeks as you continue research, what are the questions you are most looking forward to being able to answer with confidence? one i have is all at one point in a pregnancy -- what point in the pregnancy is the infection most worrisome and is there a point in which that concern goes down? we have a considerable amount of information already by observational studies. there is no doubt that in the first trimester, as with many infections that have feel

consequences, the first trimester is unquestionably the most honorable but there are a number of cases that you might be alluding to that hopefully will be answered. last week, we started a very zip study wethe started important ricoh and will continue in other south american countries that we will be looking at 10,000 pregnant women and following them to ask and answer some of the questions you are alluding to, namely what is the rate of infection? is there any difference between pregnant women who get infected but has no symptoms versus a pregnant woman who gets infected and has symptoms? what are the consequences? is there a difference and consequences on the fetus in regard to the incidence of abnormalities? also the question of at various trimesters, first versus second

versus third, what is the relative risk you have in the ?rimesters follow the children at birth, at three months, six months, a year. what we are starting to see, there are babies that are born who look normal from the standpoint of not being microcephalic. you say we at least don't have an microcephalic situation but those babies may have abnormalities with regard to seeing and hearing and developmental landmarks. those are the things we will be following with this large cohort pregnant women study. so, you think you will be able to get the funding to do that? that is not already taken care of. that is one of the things -- and this is a good question -- that we have to start because we

cannot delay and we had enough money to start it but we absolutely don't have enough money to bring this very important trial to fruition. leavetor, we will have to it there. thank you so much for being our newsmaker this week. >> good to be with you. >> now we turn to our roundtable as we continue with lena sun and jennifer have a record -- habbercorn. expectations of the coming week about what congress will do about these requests for funding. what do you see coming up? >> congress will only be in session for about 10 days and they leave. ci said, thatau sounded like a deadline to me where he said this needs to happen in the next couple weeks. when congress comes back, mitch mcconnell said there will be

another vote on this pretty much republican bill to fund the zika request and some have been pretty firm in saying they will not vote for this, they don't like the policy writers, they want family-planning money there which is not there now. it also has affordable care act funding moved into zika. then the question will be due the parties come together and come up with something that kind of cut both their priorities. if we see a deal, i think it will be on the 15th about 7:00 p.m. as they are ready to leave because that is when congress does something. >> if they don't, who gets the blame? >> i agree and also between now and the 15th, who knows if there starts to be a local case in one of those states? florida first -- just had its

first microcephaly case. the governor there has an very adamant in calling for additional funding. if you see a case in texas. the washington post abc did a poll that shows most americans are not that worried about sica and were much more worried about ebola. i think that conversation will change once you get the first locally transmitted case. there may be one we don't even know about because testing for this is so tricky. infected and you get tested, they can find the virus in your blood in a very small window but most people who get zika don't have any symptoms and even if you don't have it, it's a very mild and looks like other things. if you have it and are not symptomatic and also happen to , that is really dangerous. in the united states, the parts

of the country most susceptible are along the gulf coast but it's also where you have the climate conditions and in neighborhoods where you don't have air-conditioning or screens or there are a lot of small plastic containers. >> you brought up some of the studies that have been going on studiesd news about the have been going on. do you the cdc feels like at this point, they have their arms around the knowns and unknowns or how worried are they about what they don't know? >> i think they're pretty worried because tom friedman -- first of all, there has never been a mosquito borne virus that period.irth defects, you have almost every part of the cdc working on this in real time from their epidemiologists to their birth defects folks and they're trying to get the .esting and agnostics ramped up

they're also trying to help with mosquito control. that is not something the federal government does. it's up to every locality or in thedy's got to chuck truck. it's patchwork. these localities may be able to do stuff to get rid of the larva but a lot of places that are doing with west nile virus, which is a different kind of mosquito and requires different treatment. >> your thoughts on the response from the cdc and how they are trying to get their arms around this. >> i think linda is right. there are a lot of things they don't know and considering there is a 40 week lag time, if someone gets pregnant and gets that has a mosquito zika, we will not see the effects. they will not be on the front page of your local newspaper for many months. >> the crisis in slow motion.

>> right. i think that is why there is is urgency. the people know that what we are doing now will change how this plays out when these babies are born. >> nobody wants to wait until november. ,hat's where puerto rico everybody is the most worried because the time lag and the way the infection rate is going. they are predicting hundreds of babies with microcephaly and it will be right around november. >> thanks so much for joining us this week. >> i never felt the urge to make money. what turned me on of the 60's was to make policy. '