state election results. the four member board as required by law to certify the results by november 23. so far, all of michigan's 83 counties have certified the results, but the rnc and state republican officials have asked the board to delay certification in order to audit results from wayne county and detroit. watch live coverage of the boards meeting at 1:00 p.m. stern on c-span. is the health care reporter focusing on the pharmaceutical biotech industry for business insider and joins us via zoom for a deep dive into the topic of coronavirus vaccine. it has been hard to keep up with the news of the past two weeks. take us through what you expect in the coming days and weeks. what we should be watching for this week. guest: thanks for having me, john. that makes two of us as far as trying to keep on top of everything.

as far as the current state of play, these past three weeks we have seen three crucial positive readouts of data from leading programs. the first came from pfizer, the second came from moderna, and the third one this morning just came from astrazeneca and the team at oxford. these are three leading vaccine front runners, all three in late stage studies appear to be effective, the first to 95% effective in preventing covid-19. thatnity is expected to do late november, early december. that will set up an fda decision, all eyes turning to the agency to see how quickly they can approve it and for what subgroups of the population. vaccineing on in the phase, but there is a lot going on and much-needed positive news when you think about the surge that we have seen in cases,

hospitalizations, and deaths. the fda approval, how quickly could they approve it, and what could keep them from being approved, and how is the fda ensuring confidence in the public in the safety of these vaccines? guest: i talked to peter marks, who is in charge of this process. he outlined a process and said it would be measured in multiple beats. we are seeing that play out. it is a crucial group of independent experts that is going to meet on december 10 to discuss pfizer's vaccine. that vaccine is already filed. pfizer has submitted their emergency use authorization last friday. -- it will take the agency until december 10 together these experts, whether to recommend these authorizations were not. it will take a week or two more, my own guest, on -- my own guess

. by mid-to-late december we could see one way or the other authorizations from the fbi. i at least on the effectiveness front, modernity and pfizer show 95% effectiveness. they wanted at least 50% effectiveness. it might make the gap part simpler. do we see good trends in the data as far as does it reduce the changes you get taken to the hospital, in an ic unit -- an icu unit, or that you die from the virus. was very upfront as far as saying what we know and what we don't know, and what we don't know about the vaccine is still the durability of protection, how long-lasting immunity would be, and the long-term safety profile host:

-- long-term safety profile. ast: i know this is taking lot faster. we'll take 17 days from the committee to meet? it seems like a long time from right now. guest: that is what i went back and forth with dr. marks on. the fda is really intent on ensuring public trust in this process. that is probably the top priority. they don't want it to appear to anyone on the outside that they are rushing to a vaccine without gathering the independent group of experts to look at the data and to vet it themselves. they want to go through it with eight transparent way. the upshot is that it takes time, dr. marks calculates they are moving as quickly as they can while going through all the steps of the process.

they need to prepare briefing documents for the committee members that go through all this data. these are massive studies of tens of thousands of people. there have been a lot of data points to sift through, and the agency's primary responsibility is to make sure they are not missing anything in the data set, and that takes time. host: give viewers a number to call in with questions that you might have on this process, develop a phone lines. democrats, 202-748-8000. republicans, 202-748-8001. .ndependents, 202-748-8002 it health care reporter from business insider, andrew dunn. it is businessinsider.com where you can see his stores. one question for the last segment on the story that the caller wanted me to ask you when you came on was, how these , concernsre developed

that they were made from stem cell lines and therefore there might be religious considerations that some folks might have about whether to inject it. guest: it is not something that has been too pertinent in my covers or something i have seen from a lot of people i have talked to. -- that came up a lot with the regeneron antibody drug that donald trump took. authorizationd over the weekend. that digs back -- that dates back to the 1970's. it is many iterations away from that in the scientific process. i have not seen that concern being raised, but it is something i'm watching out for. cash on afternoon at astrazeneca news this morning, effective, 95% in the other vaccines. take us to the positive

of thees or drawbacks various vaccines and what astrazeneca provides. guest: you start with pfizer from two we should go and that was highly effective. one of the biggest downsides, the biggest limitations of that beduct is that it needs to stored at extremely cold temperatures, -70 degrees celsius, which when you think of the infrastructure needed to support that, the u.s. health care system, the world health care systems are not set up to accommodate that. product also shows a high degree of effectiveness. you can store that in a refrigerator for about 30 days. that gives the health care system more leeway in figuring out how to distribute it across the country, get it to retail pharmacies get to people who

might not have access to a metropolitan health care center. astrazeneca's news came out today and we are sifting through it. this data is from brazil and the u.k., so it is not necessarily -- it is closer to 20,000 people. it is 70% effective on average, which is a little bit below the first two results, the researchers found they were testing different variations, different doses of astrazeneca's vaccine, and they found if they gave a low dose first followed by a second dose, there was 90% effective. there are still a lot of questions around it. that is only based on 2741 people who received that type of dosing combination. so we will want to see that number in a bigger group of people. that study is ongoing in the u.s.. inrazeneca, that can be cap a typical refrigerator storage for about six months while

keeping stability. that is very encouraging to see. when you think about vaccinating the world and immunizing developing countries that might not have the same infrastructure , the stream the cold storage, it is an encouraging development to see for sure. host: plenty of callers already. claudia is up first out of an osha, wisconsin, on the republican line. go ahead. caller: good morning. i know on the previous segment people were talking about who should get it first. my concern is increasing the number of dosages. i know that pfizer and moderna, the two leading companies right now -- and modernity has better capability for storing it at lower temperatures, but i am wondering why they cannot maybe solicit other manufacturers who already create injectables and have cold storage capabilities to try to increase those numbers

, rather than having it be a social issue of who is first, but to really emphasize maybe doubling the amount of production host: that can happen. thanks -- of production that can happen. host: claudia, thanks for the question. andrew dunn? moderna, ando of pfizer come as far as when you get such a great readout, which is what they see with high effectiveness, the next question becomes how much do you make? i pulled these numbers today as we are looking at astrazeneca -- 2 million immunizations in december. moderna can immunize about 10 million people. it is a little under 40 million people in december. how can you ramp that up and expanded through 2021? that remains to be seen to some level. they have a trajectory that

shows that growing into it eventually billions of doses. but it will take time to get there. one of the biggest hurdles is the supply chain. these are very complicated vaccines, especially pfizer and modernity. they are based on a new technology called messenger rna. there is a requirement to make the vaccine that is not typical. you need to get the , these fatty containers that you can carry the -- it is complex stuff and it requires hunting the globe to find these things in many different developers are making them. it will be interesting to see. if one appears to be highly effective as we get more data, what another pharmaceutical company volunteer its own manufacturing power, or would a government step in and say we are going to try to impel you to do this? that is something i'm watching very closely. we haven't seen that yet. i think it is due to the complex city of the biology.

these are not pills coming off the supply chain line, these are really complex, intricate medicines to develop. host: craig and washington, d.c., line for democrats. caller: good morning. i wanted to -- i see a lot of people you're dying a lot and going to the hospital. i would like to know is it possible that people would get regeneron, the same medicine that the president got, and the steroids? are they available? quantities are very antibodyn regeneron's therapeutic. almost playing to that last that the manufacturing process around an antibody drug is really complex. regeneron is made of two different antibodies used together to some level, which is a very complicated manufacturing process. so doses are going to be greatly

limited on that, especially when you see the surging levels of cases in hospitalizations. the government has taken over that distribution question. those decisions will be made by hhs and we will be following along to see where those doses actually go. his access equitable? i think that is -- is access equitable? when we have limited quality seville -- quantities available, how do you make sure they go to the right places at the right time and in an equitable way? host: in our last segment we talked about the group that is advising the cdc here, the advisory committee on .mmunization practices, a cit who gets to be on that? who are those folks? nott: the a cip is government scientists. they are not appointees by political figures. the is a group really of fda's advisory committee.

it is a group of nerds. that are going to come together come about a dozen of them, and decide the best way to figure out a game plan for how to allocate limited doses. that meeting should happen sometime in december. i think the details are still being worked out as far as when they will have enough data to finalize a decision. should health care workers get it first, should the elderly with comorbidities, or should other groups we prioritized? that is an independent group of experts. the leader that is jose romero from the university of arkansas, who chairs that committee. when you think about allocation and distribution of the vaccine. bet: who decides who gets to on that committee? is it self-selecting or is there an appointment process? guest: i'm not 100% sure on that, to be honest. i think the cdc plays a role in

choosing those rules, but i'm not 100% sure. in crawford, is maryland. independent. your next. covid-19,u know this scientists are still developing and learning about this and we have these vaccinations. is going to be a benchmark for things to get back to normal if people take this. it seems like without understanding the stability about this, is this really going to be a cure or is this just going to be similar to a flu shot where it mitigates it a little bit, minimizes the effect, and we know that fact it, other than the has a higher infection rate, it is similar to the flu -- without a mandatory vaccination, how is it going to get ahead of it? we cannot mandate flu shots. i don't expect that america will

be able to mandate these. i would just like your thoughts on that. this is not the cure-all, the end-all be-all. andrew dunn. guest: that's a good point. i have talked to a lot of developers and experts who agree with that overall sentiment, that the vaccine in and of itself is not a silver bullet out of the pandemic. in the interim, mask wearing and social distancing are going to be critically important to the topharmaceutical innovations limit transmission of the virus. you brought up some great points as far as unanswered questions about the vaccine. this is something the fda will have to be very upfront about in the early months, that we don't know the durability of protection. modernity,pfizer and is promising as it is, seeing 95% protection from the covid-19 disease. that is just a couple weeks

after getting the two-those regimen. we still don't know what happens in among, two months, six months, a year, if people need booster shots. a lot can happen in that time. we see it with the flu where every year there are different mutations, different strains to be vaccinated against. that means it is a real challenging virus to be immunized against. will we see that with covid? we have not seen troubling mutations so far. that is something that will definitely be top of mind in 20 want to see if a mutation can get around this vaccine and lower the effectiveness. that would be troubling. i would also say another point to bring up, these studies might be run in the future, but these initial trials were not designed to test to see if they can prevent transmission. we were looking more for preventing severe disease or moderate disease, symptomatic covid-19. but there is still a chance you could get the vaccine and it

could be highly effective. you still don't want to throw away your masking and social distancing because there could be a chance you could be an asymptomatic carrier and transmitted unknowingly to people. if those other people have not gotten the vaccine, it could lead to severe outcomes for them. it would take how -- complex public health messaging to make sure the messaging is straight, clear and levels with the american people. host: on that messaging, as well as the distribution here and the approval, how much is that being impacted by a presidential transition? guest: we will find out, i guess, as far as it is going to be interesting to see how prepared, how seamless a transition that can be from one administration to the next in january. a couple things to watch for on that is what happens with operation warp speed. that is a big question in my mind. this is the coronavirus vaccine

initiative that has been very ambitious, shepherding in cold billion dollars to administrators, putting the foot on the gas pedal as far as developing these vaccines. let's do the trial simultaneously instead of in a sequential order, and let's ramp up manufacturing before we know it works so that we have doses if it does prove successful. what does the biden administration want to do with operation warp speed? do they want to change leadership? those are unanswered questions that will be very important to follow in the next few months. and seeing if there are any hit ups -- any hiccups between the administrations will be something to watch for. -- jeff from just plainfield, illinois. since most of the companies making the vaccine are developed countries like the united states, how do other

countries that are underdeveloped -- are they going to be last in line to receive it , like bangladesh were places like that? what is the priority of countries getting the vaccine? guest: that is a great question because it is -- i think that is one of the more troubling things that i think about long-term. the way i think about it is the u.s. is probably months away from having a widely available the --, and you can see anthony fauci, u.s. government scientist leaders, that this is anywhere from early spring to late summer of next year in the u.s. global distribution is another ballgame, reaching 7.5 billion people across the world. like you said, countries like ethiopia, developing nations that might not have the infrastructure or purchasing power of the u.s. to spend $12 billion on vaccine programs.

one initiative to watch closely as the world health organization , kovacs alliance. this is a group of most of the countries around the world where the u.s. is not a part of this, but most of the countries around the world agreeing to share some level of resources and basically try to not leave developing mitigations behind in the rush to get a vaccine, to make sure that some of the units go to developing nations. but i think you are right, as far as when you think about each country fending for itself and trying to do its own population, it is going to be challenging for developing nations to find a way to get their hands on the vaccine and get their hands on the best one because there are about 200 different want -- different ones and development. we have only seen the ones from pfizer, journey, astrazeneca -- moderna, and astrazeneca. what happens with the rest? that is a huge challenge that

the world health organization will start to address but is probably use away from being available on the global level. bridgeport, connecticut. howard, a democrat. i was just curious, are there any respected scientists, personnel, organizations that have a contrary opinion as to the efficacy or the safety of the vaccines? absolutely. one i have talked to over the last few months is an infectious disease expert at harvard who harvard inenter at the 1980's, the 1990's, a longtime biotech exec who has been in this industry for a while. he expressed to me hesitancy around himself, how he things about the decision. he wants to see long-term safety, long-term durability. he worries about something like a mutation or that waning

immunity over time that could leave people susceptible. to reiterate, these are definitely theoretical concerns. we don't have data that shows protectionity of waning, but that is how he is thinking of it. though he sees it, especially that pfizer and moderna, there orno federally approved mra therapeutic vaccines out there. so what do these do in the long term? at least where he comes down on or twois waiting a year to see that long-term data for political trials to know for sure it is safe before getting it himself. host: thursday the white house coronavirus task force held their first meeting in months. one of the issues that came up with this issue, and dr. fauci addressed some of the concerned

americans might have about getting the vaccine. this is what he had to say. dr. fauci: the only way you can get an effective program is when people take the vaccine. we are going to be talking to you about that. i hear a lot now when we made these announcements this past monday, and then two mondays ago come about some reticence of people -- did you rush this? with this too fast? is it really safe and is it really efficacious? the process of the speed did not compromise at all safety, nor did it compromise scientific integrity. it was a reflection of the extraordinary scientific advances in these types of vaccines which allowed us to do things in months that actually took years before. so i really want to settle that concern that people have about that. what about the decision of the data? who looked at the data? was that some force that was maybe trying to put something over on you? no, it was actually an

independent body of people who have no allegiance to anyone -- not to the administration, not to me, not to the companies -- that looked at the data and deemed it to be sound. now that data will be examined very carefully by the fda, together with an advisory are going to look at that before the fda makes the decision about putting this forth for an emergency use authorization, or ultimately for license. so we need to put to rest any concept that this was rushed and in an inappropriate way. this is really solid. host: andrew dunn, strong words from anthony fauci thursday. guest: i think those strong words reflect what we have seen in the more troubled public polling as far as rising levels, a lot people saying they would not be the first in line to take it. a lot people saying that they

don't ever plan to get in line to take a covid vaccine. we will see where the never shape up in the face of data. a theoretical vaccine could be hard to get your hands around, seeing actual data. i think anthony fauci is also making a statement as far as to the public of watch the process, see how this plays out over the next few weeks. the independent board of scientist that first released the data, this will be followed by an fda review that has a group of independent experts vetting it on december 10, for pfizer's at least. those readings are long, they are dirty, they get in the weeds. they are going to talk about what doesn't work as well as what does work. then they are going to make a decision about this. even beyond that, you have the cdc committee that will meet another independent board of experts to check the vaccine again and figure out what the data supports as far as who should get it, when they should

get it, what the priority should be. this does reflect a troubling level -- if at the end of the day we do have a safe and effective vaccine, which remains to be seen because we have not seen the actual peer reviews and data from the studies in the medical journal, but people have to line up to take it and feel confident in the process that it was not too politicized, that it wasn't rushed. any of those concerns that can be alleviated to get it widely distributed. left just about 15 mins with andrew dunn of "business insider taking your questions about the coronavirus vaccines, what we expect this week, what we expect in the weeks to come. phone line if you want to join the conversation, 202-748-8000, ,epublicans, 202-748-8001 independents 202-748-8002.

you can get in touch with andrew. don is in sacramento. a republican. thanks for waiting. caller: can you hear me? host: yes, sir. caller: i just have a question. when embryonic stem cells came out and they were immediately beashed by the powers that in the medical profession because it would have put a lot of doctors and labs out of work -- and i remember back in college when a couple professors spoke to the fact that history teaches us what might happen. a long time ago, scientists that said that the world was round, galileo -- they were horrifically persecuted. i am not in favor of abortion for embryonic stem cells, but if

an embryonic stem cell is just simply something that is discharged from healthy females every month -- if i am correct on that logic, why the hell are we still suppressing it in lieu of the current crisis? host: back to the question of stem cell research. guest: it has not been a focus of my reporting, and i don't think i have seen direct criticism yet from any religious groups about that research process or some of the underlying foundation facts that led to these vaccines. but it is something i'm watching as far as if there are religious objections, and if that could lead to a substantial proportion of the country deciding not to get a vaccine for religious purposes. that would be something very interesting to watch going forward. tampa,ives is in florida, independent. good morning. caller: good morning.

i'm in the medical field. just discussing with a few of the physicians last week, in regards to the flu vaccine. the one injection once a season, once a year, every flu season, but then it takes up to three to four weeks for it to be effective in your system. this vaccine is looking at two injections, first day and then 28 days later. but how effective is it in your system after the second dose? are we waiting another 30 days for it to be effective? window,him say about a it is possibly good for two weeks, we don't know. so further investigating that. has he heard anything about how soon it is effective after the second dose? question,t is a great and that is something i think through the fda process when we actually see some of the underlying data, we will get hints on that.

with both of these studies that -- start with pfizer, the you get the first dose, you wait 21 days to get the second dose. then there are seven more days before you start counting cases. if you got sick with covid have to get in the first dose, you are not counted as part of the study. if you got sick with covid after getting the second dose, even five days after that -- if you are not at the second day market, pfizer did not count you in that primary measure. moderna's is very similar. that is a two-day vaccine given over 20 days. they waitedstudy, two weeks to start counting responses. that is when your immune system promotes vaccines. you need a couple weeks there, a little bit of time after you get your doses, after you get immunized come to see that immune response start to spike up and you get the peak of protection. i think you are right on as far evidencewe see any

that suggests after you get the first dose you are protected to a partial degree, or do you need to get both doses, 10, 14, something like that, some number of days to get that full degree of protection that we are seeing when we talk about 95% effectiveness? mentioned your beat is the pharmaceutical and biotech industry. here is your question right up that alley -- jim writes from massachusetts -- "are the vaccines at their least possible cost now, or is big pharma making a profit at human cost? also, how is patent protection affecting vaccine supply?" guest: that is a great question. no,nswer director, overall, they are at the least possible cost if you are talking about the marginal cost of making a unit off the supply chain. moderna and pfizer have both stated that they are going for a level of profit -- these are

for-profit corporations, part of the pharmaceutical industry that knows how to make money. they are running this as a for-profit business. if an tactic with companies like astrazeneca, which is working and johnson johnson, which is another large pharmaceutical company in late stage developing with another faxing developing. -- another vaccine development. johnson & johnson and astrazeneca, they both made not-for-profit pledges around the pandemic. they are going to sell their vaccine for profit. what this means for cost per doses, it varies, but i can tell you operation warp speed, the u.s. government has bought the supplies with a whole host of these companies, and arranges from about $40 for a vaccination course for moderna, $20, two shots east, $40 per person. for astrazeneca, it was about

four dollars per dose, i forget which one. but it shows the relative range there. there is a level of profit being made by some of these cup a's. the second point on patents, that remains to be seen at some level as far as the modernity being the company that i'm aware of. we are not going to force our patent during the pandemic period. as far back as the history when you look at the hiv-age drugs, with some of the controversy around enforcing your patent, not enforcing your patent, letting developing nations get access to the medicines that they definitely need, at least in moderna's case, they said we are not going to enforce our patent. what does that mean? these are very complex, biologic injectables. it is a very intricate manufacturing process to deliver these, and it is not making a small pill that might be a lot easier and more direct. so, you know, with a developing

nation, does their drugmaker have the know-how and the technical capabilities to emulate this process and use that intellectual property to start delivering more doses? that remains to be seen. we will see. host: durham, north carolina. this is gabriel. democrat. caller: good morning. on that same point that you just brought up, andrew, it is actually exclusivity versus patent because exclusivity has a different range of coverage for the pharmaceutical industry come as you probably know. secondly, and there are more enforcement measures. then there are things like henry waxman at play, the henry waxman act. let me go through a different topic here on the covid vaccine distribution. are -- note, if there right now it seems like once the

vaccine becomes available online, pretty clear guidance has been put out within 24 hours that there will be a massive disbursement capacity throughout the state. these are the 64 jurisdictions under the public health umbrella. let me ask you this. a little bit on the longer side of this but also the medical doctor side of this -- if you cannot -- as you pointed here, you can have all the data come all the efficacy singles -- signals, all the research and community collaboration. but at the end of the day, if the public does not trust the it,ine, they will not take especially in minor your groups to have a history of being impact and disenfranchised. how can those individuals be targeted and doing it in a way that gets them to buy in? i'm specifically talking about something that i hope you may write on in the future, and i would love to read it -- but

about state defense forces being activated like we saw during the 1980 -- the 1918 spanish flu, it 9/11, inw during post new york, activated. but there are volunteers that can be trained in short iteration, but more importantly they are from the community. host: i want to give andrew a chance to jump in. before you go, are you in the health care field, or the pharmaceutical development field? you seem like somebody who seems to know the topic pretty well. what do you do? caller: i am actually a loyal supporter, a fourth-year medical student at duke and a second year law student at duke as well. is it going at duke? are you doing this all virtually? caller: let me just be real with you. i think we have done the best job in the country come and i'm not bragging on duke's model,

but are infection rates have been so low because we have followed the directions. in the time that the preliminary data has come out. we have leading experts, former fda commissioner's and so on. i am interested in north carolina getting it right and tapping into the resources of the public, in particular the state defense forces, which is in the constitution. host: let me give andrew dunn a chance to answer. thanks for the call. go ahead. reallythat is a fascinating question, gabriel. have to say i don't know too much about state effort as far as around a century ago, but that will be something to learn more about. the broader question, how do you public, convince the c especially people who are following this process remotely, catching it once in a while, and they hear the names operation

warp speed, pfizer has called their project project lightspeed. these are names that are just speed as the primary goal come and they wonder our corners being cut? were studies done properly? how do you convince people of that when you have this diagram of they have to trust the scientific process, the trump administration, pharmaceutical companies, which are not always the most trusted groups right now. and they have to trust a mix that the process worked and do they go off the rails? i would echo one thing said by of the fda.the head i asked him how worried he was about the public hesitancy poles and spec -- skepticism about the vaccine. he brought a couple of main points. he said trust the process, watch the process play out. with the adcom, with the rollout. secondly, when people actually start getting the doses, not everyone will be comfortable

being first in line. but for that group that is skeptical, if you can watch your neighbors, a clergy member, your own doctor get vaccinated, talk to them a couple months later and everything seems to be going fine, they feel ok, and they can vouch for it, especially someone far asst as far as -- as clergy members and personal doctors. if you see that playing out and people can hear that message, there is a hope that that can resonate with people, that the vaccine is safe and effective. i watched it play out. before that, i would see my need for, my clergyman were getting vaccinated, so maybe it's ok. as far as the effort, that is going to be interesting. there are not a lot of specifics even yet as far as how much is operation warp speed going to go all the way with that last mile delivery of getting it to people? i have asked them multiple times over the last few months, what does this look like?

mobile van units that can reach hard-to-reach places, urban errors or very rural areas with the vaccine that might have no access to a .op-tier medical center details have not been forthcoming as far as that distribution plan at how much of that will end up being the state responsibility. keep watching north carolina and let me know what you see going on. because i think there is a good chance we end up with a response where each state is doing its own strategy. clearly having pros and cons. host: nancy has been waiting in altoona, pennsylvania, a democrat. good morning. caller: thanks for taking my call. i'm calling because it is so difficult to get people to even wear the masks.

i happened to hear the person in the phone call right before me that one of them is a month in between, which was my question. are both of them eat -- you need two doses, and how do we organize, how do we get the people back? we have to do this in a very systematic manner, because not followingt the guidelines of such simple things, and that is my question, that both of them, the ones that you have to get two doses, and how far apart -- i heard the one was one month, which i didn't know when i first called in. host: and now there is three with the astrazeneca announcement today. andrew? guest: all three of those are two-dose regimens. doses, 20 eight days apart. astrazeneca is two doses, 28 days apart. you will need a follow-up visit,

people reaching out their arms, coming back to the clinic at the right time to get a second one. that is a massive logistical challenge to pull off nationwide across the entire country. we will see how that plays out. as far as your point, getting the messaging right, getting people to show up and follow the deaths --d buy in, for all of science in 2020, it is how do you communicate with the public effectively? we are figuring out the virus in real time in january, february, march. figuring out how do people get -- infected? sometimes the answers change. that is part of the scientific process. i covered a lot of -- itychloroquine, the

started as a legitimate scientific theory, that it was probably efficacious in humans. sign, and theing trial showed it did not work. but there is a subgroup of people who believe this is a miracle cure, even though the data does not support that conclusion. so the challenge is finding people who are widely trusted. i think for a lot people this is someone like dr. anthony fauci, who has run the fah overseas unit for a decade -- for three decades. i know a proportion of this country does not trust dr. fauci, that they will not follow necessarily what he says just because -- that is the challenge as far as finding people who are widely trusted, and maybe that means what dr. marks is saying is for as clergy members and local doctors, that maybe there is a look -- a level of

celebrity involved. it remains to be seen. that will be one of the biggest challenges when we talk about the 2021 storyline -- how do you convince a country that is inherently skeptical of authority, inherently skeptical of the vaccine develop and process overall? how do you convince them to stick out their arms and get a vaccine that becomes available? host: andrew dunn, health care reporter with business insider. if the four member bipartisan board is required by law to certify the results by november 23. so far all of michigan's 83 counties have certified the results but the rnc and state republican officials have asked the board to delay certification in order to audit results from wayne county and detroit. watch live coverage of the board's meeting at 1:00 p.m. eastern on c-span.