players that would over. it was big for the sec in general. don't you think? >> ed: the sec dominated this draft. see you tomorrow, looking forward to it. >> sandra: we will see you all tomorrow morning. thank you for joining us. "outnumbered" starts right now. >> melissa: gradual reopening of america kicking into high gear this week. as more states prepared to ease restrictions on businesses and public gatherings. stay-at-home orders in more than a dozen states set to expire by friday. doctors warned we are not out of the woods just yet. >> social distancing will be with us through the summer, to really ensure that we protect one another as we move through these phases. >> melissa: all right, joining us on the virtual couch today we have katie pavlich, lara logan, kennedy, and dr. marc siegel, as well. i'm improvising that. you all know your own titles, so

i won't bother with that. dr. siegel, let me start with you. what you think about this idea of things reopening? what do we have to keep in mind? >> dr. siegel: there are two things we have to keep in mind, melissa. one is what areas of the country we're talking about. if we are talking about areas that are hot spots, i'm more concerned. michigan, there's a lot of pressure for michigan to reopen, but it's 37,000 cases in michigan. georgia, we've been talking about the georgia governor pushing surgeon reopening, but there is 22,000 cases in georgia, 30% increase over the past week. in florida, beaches are reopening, but people are too close together on beaches. the number one point is, can we reopen parts of the country that are less involved, and can we do in a way, like dr. birx says, where we preserve things we've learned about social distancing, about disinfecting, about washing hands? the new normal, cannot remain in place? it's doubtful to me, because people just go into denial and

reject it. second point is we have to do this with massive testing. i want to know who has this virus, who's been exposed to it, who's getting over it, and who might spread it to a neighbor if we are going to be open things. when we reopen things, we need more information. >> melissa: there were a lot of points in there. let's break down some of them. you mentioned dr. deborah birx. let's hear that asked dominic exact statement from her nope, okay, we don't have that right now. so, she said we need to stay apart, that we need that social distancing, as you said. and you don't think we can really do that. for some businesses, i don't know that it makes sense for them to reopen if you insist on the social distancing. for example, for restaurants. you make the tables really far apart, can they make enough money to make it worthwhile to reopen? what do you say to stuff like that, dr. siegel?

>> dr. siegel: melissa, you're the economics expert. first of all, though, i will say i think we can reopen piece by piece, and preserve social distancing. look, a restaurant that is doing take out only can figure out a way to reopen by reorganizing things. it's much better for the restaurant to have people in the restaurant and then to remain on this take out only were completely closed. i don't know exactly what rules of social distancing we are going to need going forward. we say 6 feet, but that virus spreads even farther than 6 feet. all of it has to do with knowing who has it and what areas of the country we're talking about. montana, there are so few cases. why should we have the same rules in place for montana or nebraska or north dakota? i think the bulk of this covid-19 is in the northeast, the bulk of it, and the west coast. some of it in cities, sporadically. most of it is in cities and we have to take that into account. i do think we have to reopen restaurants with social distancing. >> melissa: we tend to have an urban centric point of view,

because that's where we are. lara, you're in a different part of the country, of course. what i things like where you are, and what are the expectations as things reopen? >> lara: it's very interesting that you say that, melissa, because it's exactly what i was thinking about as i was listening. while people say -- some of us live miles and miles and miles apart. in fact, a lot of us. it's not just in texas. i am in hill country outside of austin in san antonio, but you're talking about montana, missouri, there's lots of othere far apart, and social distancing is kind of built into the lifestyle. that said, of course, nobody wants to see a spike in this virus. nobody wants to see it return. nobody wants to be responsible for sending it back to the cities and back to other parts of the country where people are vulnerable. and there are a lot of retired people that live in communities like mine, and across the center

of the country. but there is something here that is being left out of the conversation. when i talk to people, what they say is, "this is the most drastic measure we've ever seen in our lifetime." it doesn't matter whether they are young or old. it's the most extreme form of restriction that anyone has experienced, and the consequences are extreme. what they want to hear is more conversation about that, about all the stores that are not going to reopen, all the people who are still going to lose the house. about people who will die years from now, when there are no reported, no new stories about what's going on. that's where people feel really strongly, that it's not good enough to say, "you know, you could be risking other people," because they are already at risk. they are at risk of losing everything, some of them at risk of dying. they want to know what we are going to do about that. >> kennedy: yeah.

kennedy, we've said this all along, it takes a lot of faith in order to let the government encroach on your own personal civil liberties like this. and some people are really running out of that faith and patience and trust. >> kennedy: they are, and i think that's always a good thing to question, where these directives are coming from. lara makes a really good point, it's what's going to happen in the future. it's looking down the road. because we are so wrapped up in the present drama, when you're in the middle of a crisis, it's a lot harder to sit back and say to yourself, "well, what does this mean for my business three months from now, three years from now?" because i think that's where you really see the effects. we've talked about this several times. a lot of the people who were making these decisions, as to whether or not we stay home or dip a toe into the water. they are the ones who don't live and die by every paycheck. so families who aren't going to

be served by some of these federal stimulus programs, they are questioning. they do want answers. maybe people are looking at places that have wide open spaces, and that looks more attractive to them. if you can work remotely, maybe you want a little more space to run and frolic with your kids and have a different kind of normal that you craft from the ground up. i think it's great. >> melissa: yeah. katie, i want to ask you on this next part, about testing. in the meantime, dr. anthony fauci says this needs to happen, if states want to safely reopen their economies. listen. >> you have enough chests to respond to the outbreaks that will inevitably occur, as you tread easily back into the different phases. right now we are doing about 1.5, 2 million per week. we should get to up to twice that as we get into the next

several weeks, and i think we will. >> melissa: katie, when i listen to the doctor talk about what needs to be put in place before we can all go back outside, it always reminds me that doctors never recommend you take any risk. you know? they always err on the side of being as cautious as possible. i had a friend growing up, whose dad was a neurosurgeon. he made her wear a helmet walking down the street to the bus when there would be snow out, because he thought she would fall and hit her head. [laughter] of course, it was his perspective as a neurosurgeon. but the poor kid was wearing a helmet walking down the street. to him, that made all kinds of sense. she was willing to take the risk, though. what are your thoughts? >> katie: well, i think the standard of that is the big question here. of course, more testing would be great, but we have 300 million people in america. we've heard over and over again that they can't test everybody. that means if you can't test everybody but you want to keep the economy indefinitely

suspended, that means there will be human suffering on a number of other levels. the standard is not, "is it going to be 100% safe?" that is not a standard that applies to anything. the standard should be, "what is the risk of our current situation?" and the american people, when the shutdown started and the first phase of the social distancing guidelines that were 15 days that were then extended to 30 days, they were not asking for the coronavirus to completely go away. and that we wouldn't have a single other case in the back end of this. they were asking to flatten the curve. they were asking for the ability to get the hospitals across the country ready, so they weren't overrun with patience. now, as we've seen, hospitals all over the country have done that. they've put off elective surgeries, they will hopefully bring that back since the white house announced last week they should be doing that. they are now waiting for patience. i've talked to a friend who has family in phoenix who works in the emergency room as a nurse and a doctor, and they are

seeing their hours cut as a result of the way this situation has been handled, and terms of the coming back. we are at a point now where things need to change, and you have to look at the risk, and how you mitigate it. over the past two months, they've put into place things i've done that. the standard cannot be that there is a single case and have to shut everything down. it has to be, "what's the risk and who is at risk for getting sick again?" >> melissa: dr. siegel, let me ask you about the testing point. there are two doctors that run an urgent care out of bakersfield, california, who are getting a lot of attention right now, because they are saying things need to open back up. that, basically, when you look at the numbers, we close down on this idea that millions of people are going to die. now, even without the test, if you just extrapolate out what we've seen so far, in california for example you have 3/100 of a chance that you die if you get this disease.

96% recovery in full and quickly, and they see the economic harm does not merit, or isn't in balance, i guess, with those risks as they've actually turned out. what are your thoughts? >> dr. siegel: first of all, melissa, since i met out number here, i'm going to tell you, i agree with everything your last guest hosts said. [laughter] in medicine we did something called a cost-benefit analysis. it's not only about lives lost from the virus. part of this is why i've lost from depression, from suicide, from joblessness, from heart attacks, people not working out at jim's could have heart attacks, strokes. all of that has to be factored in. and i'm so glad we're focusing on that today. to your point about testing, i want to slightly disagree carefully with katie. i think we can test 50-100000000 people. but we need to test them with an antibody test, but with a

point-of-care. not the test to see if you have. this is the tough part, the standard, one or two or three antibody tests to see he is in the community has it. we found out 27% of the people in newark may have it. 6% in miami. 4% in certain counties in california. that information helps us to know when to reopen on how to reopen. >> melissa: you're absolutely right, the time has come for us to shift to the antibody test. great discussion, guys. the coronavirus pandemic rocking the u.s. economy. what white house officials are saying about the impact and the recovery. plus, the latest stimulus bill now pumping over $300 billion back into the paycheck protection program. what is being done to ensure small businesses get the money they need? that's next. ♪ >> better crafted than earlier, just because it sets aside

community development banks and minority neighborhood banks, and companies are not going to be eligible. ♪ at newday usa is helping more veterans refinance than ever. the newday va streamline refi is the reason why. it lets you shortcut the loan process and refinance with no income verification, no appraisal, and no out of pocket costs. one call can save you $2000 every year. call my team at newday usa right now.

that's ensure max protein, with high protein and 1 gram sugar. it's a sit-up, banana! bend at the waist!

i'm tryin'! keep it up. you'll get there. whoa-hoa-hoa! 30 grams of protein, and one gram of sugar. ensure max protein.

>> i think, as we begin to reopen the economy in may and june, you're going to see the economy really bounce back in july, august, september. we are putting in an unprecedented amount of fiscal relief into the economy. you are seeing trillions of dollars that is making its way into the economy, and i think this is going to have a significant impact. >> melissa: treasury secretary steven mnuchin, optimistic about the u.s. economy, that it will rebound this summer. but white house senior advisor kevin hassett warns that the u.s. is still in the middle of a

"really grave situation." watch. >> if you take what happened at the end of the first quarter, we are getting that first quarter gdp number this week. it's pretty likely that a negative number. for second quarter gdp, it's going to be the biggest negative number we've seen since the great depression. >> melissa: kennedy, that is terrifying. it struck me over the weekend, as you go through this, i think families are going to realize that maybe not everyone was touched by the virus. nobody in your family got it, or in some cases you don't even know anyone who got it, but i wy household will be touched by the economic impact. if you were lucky enough to still get a paycheck for all of this, you probably have a 529 for a kids or a retirement account that's been decimated, or you own a home that has lost value. or, you're in the other group where you've lost your source of income or your job. the economic effects of this are going to be enormous. what are your thoughts? >> kennedy: absolutely.

you think about the long-term impacts, it's not just putting off a vacation for a few months. we are really talking about the value of the home, if it's gone down and you are planning on selling, maybe taking the equity out or relocating, people are not going to have the same economic mobility. it is really tragic for people who have lost not only their jobs, but their businesses. you know, some businesses will have hope of getting some of the stimulus money from the small business program, but for others, they won't. that is what is really tragic, again, are those long-term effects, and this placement, the economic displacement. if you went to cities like san francisco, los angeles, and even new york, you saw the homeless populations grow during a great economy. what happens to those homeless populations in a recession, or, god forbid, he depression? i hope there is a v-shaped recovery.

i hope it boomerangs and we are back right where we were. my biggest hope, though, is that it touches those who have been so complete decimated, as you've pointed out, by this time. >> melissa: lara, and you are part of the country, do you know more people who have been touched by the virus, who have been sick? or more people who have had an economic impact on them? >> lara: well, we've only had one person in this area. they were a first responder, a medical person who came from houston. so, here in the hill country, there have been very, very few cases. but everyone has been touched by it, because of how it has effected shutting down the schools in the businesses. i've spoken to business owners who say that they have used up all of their reserves to keep their costs, keep their company going. and they have no money to buy stock. everyone is looking forward to christmas now, in business terms. if you are in. there is no money for christmas stock at the moment.

so that's going to have a long-term effect. but i want to tell you something, melissa -- it's not just in the united states. that might not seem to matter to lots of people, but, for example, my family in south africa, my father has been very, very ill for a long time. he's in his 80s. they depend on airbnb as their income. they have had no income, they can't pay their medical bills, they are in the middle -- i think it's week four of a complete and utter lockdown. there are families in south africa, there is shacks and the townships with no running water. they've gotten out house outside. they don't even have indoor plumbing, with ten, 12, 14 people in there. what about the social unrest that is going to follow? because that is not unique to south africa. it's all over the world. it's on this country's doorstep. in latin america and other places. in this global world now, we are all impacted by that. what follows the social unrest, what normally follows? protests, violence, and what follows that?

repression. so there are long-term consequent is. we say "economic," and it doesn't have any emotional feel to it. you don't really connect to it. how can you care about economics and money more than you care about somebody's life? what if you had lost someone? of course, that is very much present in all of us, that fear. at the same time, there are very significant consequences that really will be counted in people's lives. that is a big part of this, that people are very concerned about, and not enough is being talked about there in order to really address it. >> melissa: know, katie, i mean, that is such a strong argument. the other side would say that we have the luxury of focusing on the economics, because we did shut down, so we controlled the disease. and it turned out we didn't have millions die like we thought we were going to. that's how the other side would come back against what lara just said. what do you say to that?

>> katie: i would say, again, it comes down to risk mitigation. there's going to be a risk in any decision you make. it doesn't seem like there is ever really a good one. of course, there has been this argument, if you want to open up the economy, you're not being careful about people getting sick again. but i think the overall picture, melissa, economically, is this is when financial health -- whether it's personal or for the federal government or state government -- really matters. this is when overspending, $24 trillion in debt for the federal government, the state governments that were in the red already who are hit by coronavirus are having a airy problems with keeping up with this emergency. there will come a point -- and, with all due respect to treasury secretary mnuchin, the ppp program has been essential to keeping a lot of employees employed at businesses so they don't have to close their doors, but there will come point when we just can't continue to spend $2 trillion, $500 billion, every two weeks.

the debt will come to pay at some point. so there are consequences for all of these actions that we are taking. long-term is important, especially when you're talking about politics, which seems very much focused on the immediate rather than the long-term. >> melissa: yes. and dr. siegel, we will get your perspective on the other side of his break. we want to mentioned that coming up in the next hour harris faulkner will be talking to white house senior advisor kevin hassett on all of these topics. so you want to stay tuned for that. in the meantime, has the president had enough of the daily coronavirus task force briefings? and, what the white house is saying about them. plus, just how huge the trump 2020 fund-raising advantage is over joe biden, and the alarms the presumptive democratic nominee's allies are now sounding. ♪ veterans: you know mortgage rates have fallen to 50-year lows. but did you know that your va benefit lets you easily

refinance to a lower rate? one call to newday can save you $2000 a year. with newday's va streamline refi there's no income verification, no home appraisal, and no out of pocket costs. it's the quickest and easiest refi they've ever offered. call newday now. the coronavirus continues to affect us all, and we are here, actively supporting you and your community. every day, we're providing trusted information from top health experts...sharing tools to help protect families from fraud... and creating resources to support family caregivers everywhere. as always, you can count on aarp to advocate for you and your family. join us and stay connected at aarp.org/coronavirus ffine, no one leaves the tablefine, we'll sleep here.

♪ it's the easiest because it's the cheesiest. kraft. for the win win.

>> today we are not tracking a briefing. there will be briefings throughout other parts of the week. absolutely not an effort to cut back. we are looking at different ways to show this president leading. >> katie: white house press secretary kayleigh mcenany announcing there will not be a coronavirus task force briefing this evening, for the third day in a row. this, after the president on friday slammed the media while calling the briefings "not worth the time and effort." since march, the president and vice president pence have given almost 50 daily press briefings to update the country on the administration's response to the pandemic that has killed more than 53,000 people in the u.s. dr. siegel, let's go to you first. i think these briefings have been enormously helpful. giving the american people information. i don't think the social distancing would have been unsuccessful about without them updating people every day to explain the data that was coming

in and showing people the results of what they were doing. what do you think about that? >> dr. siegel: katie, i completely agree with your points, not to mention the demonstratiodevastation to the f administration, including hot spot areas, that of cost hundreds of millions of dollars. focusing also on the health care workers' response, trying different treatments, how patients are doing. all of this being brought to the spotlight. it isn't just the president talking. the task force includes people like dr. tony fauci, who has been a top virologist in this country for many years. infectious disease. and dr. birx, as well. and dr. redfield, who run cdc. all these people come into the microphone and informing the american public. hugely important. the issue is, though, unfortunately a lot of this information gets politicized. it gets bandied about in the media like some kind of contact sport. that is so deeply disturbing. one mistake -- i'm not saying mistakes have been made, big ones have been made, obviously -- but the idea that people are

waiting in the wings to take this information, attack the president or other people in the task force, is not helping in the fight against this virus. >> katie: you know, lara, early on there was an argument made that the political reporters in the white house press corps should be replaced with health care reporters. that did not happen, and people argue that maybe we get more relevant information and questions. as the doctor just pointed out, a lot of the questions that have been asked over the briefings we've had weren't always so focused on the pandemic at hand. >> lara: well, how about you just replace those reporters, the ones who actually don't have such a hatred for the president and such a history and record of hostility and all of the interactions and their reporting? coming from publications whose reporting on this president and administration is 99% or 100% negative, 100% of the time. that is the context in which these briefings are taking

place. if you look at what the president treated himself, he said, "why am i boosting their readings with fake news, when they are only hostile and not reporting the facts?" from the reporter's point of view, obviously there's a lot of journalists and people who would push back against that, especially ones who -- there is of course a need to be critical of the administration, and the president, and to examine these things in detail. but the reality here is that it's not happening without a history and a context. nobody's fool by that. ask anyone out there. if they don't like trump and they hate trump, they are cheering the reporters. and if they are in the middle and they really want to know what is happening with the virus and they are open-minded or they support the president, than they are frustrated that these reporters are not giving him a chance to speak. still, this president is someone who is unpredictable. he's been unpredictable from the start. just because there is not one briefing or a week without briefings doesn't mean they won't resume again. we don't know it's going to

happen. any time i hear a reporter or a news organization putting people out there who are going to tell you what the president's thinking and doing, unless they got it from the president himself, i don't believe it. because they've all been wrong almost all the time. >> katie: so, melissa, what do you think about the white house's reasoning here, that they want to spend time on other things? it's true, while president trump is very accessible, his three hour briefings over the past two months, that does leave a lot of room for making mistakes while you are receiving new information. >> melissa: first of all, i can't believe he kept it up this long. i mean, this president, it shocks me every day the amount of energy and stamina he has. i don't think any of the rest of us can keep up with him, and i have no idea how he does it. we couldn't stand there for hours and hours every day. i know i couldn't. i think it had to end at some point, and it makes sense to have it now.

because we are seeing this -- we are seeing the curve flattened. we are seeing the seriousness of this, or maybe the new territory. we know we are dealing with. people have been inside. it feels like we are not out of the woods, and i don't mean to imply that in any way, but it does feel like we turned a corner and we are getting closer to opening things back up all around the country. so it's a perfectly logical time. it did get to the point where reporters were going into "gotcha" mode. but they will always do that. that's just sort of the nature of the beast. this time it's more exaggerated than in the past. but this is a totally different president. >> katie: well, speaking of the presidency, there is an election going on, kennedy. >> kennedy: that's absolutely right. there's another guy who would love to have that job. his name is joe biden, and his allies are reportedly very concerned his campaign will not be able to compete with

president trump's fund-raising juggernaut ahead of the electi election. "the new york times" analysis finds the trump campaign and our nc had a $187 million advantage over the biden campaign and the dnc. one democrat fund-raiser telling the hill, "that's insurmountable. i don't see how you make that up. biden does not have a strong grassroots fund-raising apparatus. he doesn't even have in person events he can go to. it's just the zoom calls." now through on the pandemic, we lost with all the hillary clinton money raised. how do we win with less?" so, lara, you got people around the globe who are worried about where their next paycheck is coming from. in a good economy, it's a lot easier to donate money to a presidential campaign when you're in the middle of a pandemic and the economy has come to a grinding halt, does joe biden have a shot at fund-raising? >> lara: jo joe biden has never

-- at no point in the selection process has he been really boosted by grassroots support. so, why does anyone expect that to change when money is tight? this is a lot of the politics, ringing alarm bells that are really meant to signal to all the democratic donors who have lots of money that you need to step up and support joe biden. with the depth of the hatred, the extent of the campaign against this president, it's hard to believe that major democrats -- i mean, how many democratic billionaires are there out there? you've got bill gates, you got tom steyer, you got bloomberg. can't they do that $187 million that trump has, can't they do it in like four seconds? for me, i'm always skeptical and pretty jaded at this point when i see these kinds of headlines. because what we've seen from the democratic establishment in this country over the last four years is that they are absolutely and utterly motivated to get rid of

this president. the strongest card he had in his favor, which was the economy that was booming, that is now an absolute shreds. the consequences of that are going to be felt every single day from now until the election. to me, it's -- >> kennedy: i'm glad you brought that up because -- >> lara: credibility. >> kennedy: yes, and you talk about the president's secret weapon has been the economy. katie, i want to know from you, what is joe biden's secret weapon? we haven't seen a lot of him. we've never seen him face the press the way this president does or has been, at least on a daily basis. so what is joe biden superhero strength? >> katie: [laughs] i'm not sure that he has one, outside of the left being so made omotivated by the hatred of president trump that they would vote for anybody to get him out of office. he can't go out on the campaign trail, he can't raise money. if you don't have a fund-raising apparatus that is based on got

to grassroots support, guess what? you have a voter turnout problem, especially in states that really matter. polling is all over the map on this, as we saw last time around. it wasn't exactly credible when it came to who was going to win the white house. joe biden is having a very tough time campaigning from his home, while the president has been able to prove the track record on the economy, and now he can make the argument going forward, the country was hit for something that we were not expecting. it's nobody's fault. "you can trust me to do what i did in the past three years, and again for the next four." he has a better argument to make, and joe biden's had a really difficult time remaining relevant a while everything has been shut down. >> kennedy: i think it would be his invisibility cloak, because we haven't seen much from him. [laughter] rumors are swirling about kim jong un's health as a north korean dictator has been absent from the public for more than two weeks. what local media are saying, and

what really happened kim jong un. that's next, stay with us. ♪ it's best we stay apart for a bit, but that doesn't mean you're in this alone. we're automatically refunding our customers a portion of their personal auto premiums. we're also offering flexible payment options for those who've been financially affected by the crisis. we look forward to returning to something that feels a little closer to life as we knew it, but until then you can see how we're here to help at libertymutual.com/covid-19. [ piano playing ]

>> melissa: a north korean state-run newspaper answering speculation about dictator kim jong un's health after he was last seen two weeks ago. the publication reports that kim wrote a thank you letter to builders at a seaside resort, proving he's alive. over the weekend, his private train was spotted in satellite pictures park near that resort. rumors about kim had escalated when he missed the annual april 15th commemoration of the birth of his grandfather, who was, of course, north korea's founder, kim ill sung lara, i want to live under international reporting and expertise here. this is a regime that is based in large part on ritual and observing that ritual. it's very meaningful, that he

missed that. what do you think is going on? >> lara: these are classic signs, people i speak to a u.s. have already noticed it's been happening over the past few weeks. maintaining a presence, even though you are not physically present. see you are right, he would have been physically present at that ceremony if he was alive. they maintain a presence without anyone seeing him. why is that? in a country like north korea, where people -- there is so much control over there, every moment, everything is managed by the central government, and by that leader. this is the moment where, if he is dead, which is not yet confirmed but looks likely, when he's dead you have to figure out exactly how you're going to maintain that control. so you're going to make sure that no threat arises to the new leader, that you maintain absolute power of the dynasty

and that you lose nothing in this transition. now, it's no surprise at all to see that kim jong un's sister, there is speculation that she is the one that's going to replace him. if you have been paying attention over the last few years, you would notice that she has been increasingly in the public eye, increasingly in the spotlight. most importantly, increasingly at his side. his go-to person, his number one. in a sense, there's already been so much to something of a shipping operation. people have been used to seeing her there, and this will not surprise them, either >> melissa: dr. siegel, there's been so much speculation about what may have happened. he could have been injured during a missile test, there is another story that one of his bodyguards came down with covid-19. i want to stick with what we actually know. what are your thoughts on what we know about his health before this? >> dr. siegel: the third report, melissa, was he had some

kind of a heart procedure. that was also reported. here's what we do know -- 36 years old, a chain smoker, very obese and overweight. when the summit occurred last year, he was audibly wheezing. i was told by reports that he was having trouble catching his breath, and that when he was walking you could see the signs of breathlessness. all of those things, and then he has a very thick neck, which can be a sign of a pick wiki and syndrome, which is sleep apnea. that has all kinds of medical risks. blood pressure, heart disease, stroke, all risks. he had some kind of procedure and disappears from the public eye. i am suspicious, based on his health history, that there is a serious concern if he is alive at all, as lara was saying. >> melissa: leucine regime james there, at the head of this regime, without it changing much about the country before. it wouldn't mean he was gone

necessarily that that much would change. we will certainly see. in the meantime, the race for a coronavirus vaccine is on. the country that develops one for us will have a big economic and health advantage. but does america risk coming in second? that's next. ♪ ok everyone, our mission is to provide complete, balanced nutrition for strength and energy. whoo-hoo! great tasting ensure with 9 grams of protein, 27 vitamins and minerals, and nutrients to support immune health.

and nutrients to this virus is testing all of us. and it's testing the people on the front lines of this fight most of all. so abbott is getting new tests into their hands, delivering the critical results they need. and until this fight is over, we...will...never...quit. because they never quit.

>> melissa: a new "wall street journal" op-ed warning that the u.s. must win the race for coronavirus vaccine, but risk coming up short. former fda commissioner scott gottlieb riding in part, "doses will be limited initially as suppliers ramp up, and a country will focus on inoculating most of its own population first." the first country to the finish line will be the first to restore its economy and global influence." gottlieb also riding that the u.s. needs to move with unprecedented scope and urgencye potential vaccines at once. dr. siegel, let me start with you. we talk about this race for a vaccine, if somebody gets their first it doesn't mean the rest of the research is going to stop happening. even if we came in second, we could come up with our own. i assume he's talking about the mass production and the hoarding of the resources that you would need in order to produce the vaccine.

that's what makes a difference. it didn't get a lot of attention about a week ago. the government announced that mp materials was awarded the department of defense contract aimed at restoring the earth's production in the u.s. rare earth materials. this is part of that stuff we let go to china, where they have control over the ingredients. we are already planning ahead to have a company here working on that. what do you think about -- why is it important to be first if we can get the materials or se self? >> dr. siegel: you already hit on it, melissa. that is so well set up. the reality is the concern is china itself. there is two vaccines in china that are under really advanced attention now in terms of speeding along the process. i will talk about them. obviously, china has not done a great job being forthcoming in this pandemic. they hid information from us, they suppressed information. so there is no reason to think that if china gets the vaccine

first suddenly it's going to be shared with the rest of the world. the two vaccines i want to talk about, beijing institute of biotechnology has a vaccine that is already in phase two trials. that is when you do what you were talking about. you ramp up. you start with the manufacturing process, you get all hands on deck. they also have a vaccine that is being tried in primates, and found to be successful. so that is great news. it looks like it might actually work, and that's terrific. but we aren't doing as much testing in animals as we need to do, to see if our vaccine candidates are working. if we get there after china does, i am concerned about whether we are going to get complete access to their vaccine. we have a vaccine that motor and it is manufacturing, that dr. fauci and the nih are very keen on. it is about to enter phase two trials. it is a revolutionary technique. it, too, it looks good. i'm reading between the lines of

op-ed. we need a lot more resources thrown at the moderna vaccine. >> melissa: kennedy, what do you think of this? >> kennedy: i think the competition could be a fantastic thing. i disagree that it's only a competition between nations. i think companies within the united states who can see some economic gain, i don't have a problem with that at all. the more fire that is lit under these companies, the more urgency and the fewer bureaucratic roadblocks, the quicker you are going to see a vaccine. i also agree with you, melissa, just because another country has it doesn't mean we have to stop research. go ahead, develop them all at once. that is when you are going to serve for the most people. this is when competition is a fantastic thing. >> melissa: yeah. katie, we have learned the very hard lesson, though, about depending on china for anything, haven't we? >> katie: i think it will be a

tough sell to get americans to take a vaccine that is made in china. i don't think we will rely on them for this. the good news is that there is a lot of innovation going on, and the for-profit status of these companies has enabled them to do the research to get us what we need. >> melissa: yeah. all right, more "outnumbered" in just a moment. we'll be right back. here's huge news for veterans with va loans. mortgage rates have dropped to all time lows. by refinancing now, you can save $2000 a year. and newday's va streamline refi shortcuts the process. veterans can refinance with no income verification, no appraisal, and no out of pocket costs. one call could save you $2000 a year.

8xn3k89pzhqaódqsh h=qva pzaua@ndg#õ if you have a garden you know, weeds are low down little scoundrels. with roundup sure shot wand you don't need to stoop to their level.

draw the line. the sure shot wand extends with a protective shield to pinpoint those pesky bedfellows. it lets you kill what's bad right down to the root, while comfortably guarding the good. draw the line with the roundup sure shot wand. roundup brand. trusted for over 40 years. and finding new ways to take of ourselves. but you can still screen for colon cancer. because when caught in early stages, it's more treatable. so, don't wait. cologuard is colon cancer screening done at home. you can request it from home too. ask your prescriber if cologuard is right for you... or learn more about online prescribers at requestcologuard.com. it's for people 45 plus at average risk for colon cancer, not high risk. false positive and negative results may occur. ask about cologuard today. you get way more than free fshipping. you get thousands reswhen you shop for your home at wayfair of items you need to your door fast the way it works best for you.

even the big stuff. you get a delivery experience you can always count on. you get your perfect find at a price to match on your schedule. you get free two day shipping on things that make your home feel like you! wayfair. way more than furniture.

>> melissa: our thanks to dr. siegel and the rest of the virtual couch. lara, i want to give you a chance for some final thoughts on today. >> lara: when i hear all that talk about china being so far ahead on the vaccine, my first question is why? why are they so far ahead, and why were they studying the coronavirus in that particular laboratory anyway? i say that because u.s. intelligence sources i've spoken to say they've monitored those laboratories from the day they were established, and that the main thing they do there is produce bio weapons. i'm not saying that's what they're doing, but it's a good question and it been answered.

>> melissa: especially when he asked the economic questions, as well. if they get there first, there is a reward for that. all very interesting. thanks for all of you for joining us. "outnumbered overtime" with harris faulkner starts now. ♪ >> harris: and on this monday, at this hour, economies are reopening in several states. you are watching "outnumbered overtime." i'm harris faulkner. starting today, arkansas, colorado, indiana, iowa, kentucky, minnesota, and mississippi will begin easing restrictions on the public. and, in georgia, tennessee, and alaska, they are adding to their reopening procedures, which began taking effect last friday. colorado's governor says he used all available resources to make this decision. >> we always