not particularly enlightening about the future of president trumps medical care all right dr angela rasmussen from columbia university thank you. thank you so much. authorities and paris have shut down bars and cafes for 2 weeks to slow the spread of. the french capital is on maximum alert but the tighter rules and forcing social distancing human factions and hospitalizations have hit highs not seen since the lockdown was eased in. tough times call for tougher measures with the french capital experiencing a sharp spike in coronavirus cases authorities say they had no choice but to introduce stricter rules for businesses in the paris region and. the end they don't make is going too far and we must cope with now before our health system is overwhelmed with the numbers make this clear and we must do this in particular to avoid shattering our country with. the new measures put a ban on gatherings of more than $1000.00 people and made by only serving alcohol will be forced to close. restaurants which abide by the regulations and put in place new hygiene protocols will be allowed to remain open off

well to help us understand the science let's cross now to dr angela rasmussen overall just at columbia university in new york thank you for taking the time to speak to us there has been speculation that the condition is more serious than the white house is saying now i understand you're not his doctor but what do the details that his medical team have shared suggest about his condition to you. well they haven't really shared much that that's actually very useful apart from the medications that he's taking and there's a lot of concern and questions about how sick he actually is so dex about his own one of those medications that he's taking is a cork according to steroids it's a very powerful immunosuppressant and it typically is used only in patients who are very very severely ill and we saw the the president walking out of walter reed tonight of of his own power on which suggests that he may not be that seriously ill that it's very difficult to say it's also worth noting that a number of patients who have called it may sort of have fits and spurts in terms of the severity of their dise

for more on why, i'm joined by angela rasmussen, a virologist at columbia university mailman school oflic health. >> angelina, welcome back to the "news hour." so people understand, when we're talking about herd immunity, what are examples of whe it has worked in the past? >> people can think of any of the vaccine preventable diseases that we've really conquered through immunization. if you think about measles, polio, these viruses used to run rampant through the population. once we started vaccinating people, those viruses essentially went away out of our population. and we've actually seen some of them come back, specifically measles, as people have started not getting vaccinations in larger numbers. so we can understand by looking at these other diseases how herd immunity works and how it can falter that that level of immunity is not maintained. >> nawaz: the administration has held it up before as a possible strategy this week, and two senior white house officials convened a call, and they held up something called the great barrington declaration, which says we should work towards

columbia university angela rasmussen says it's scientific junk. >> anybody with a background in biology this paper will realize much of it is actually nonsense. >> reporter: cnn as for to a half dozen scientists who say yang's had half-truths and one said the first stay wasn't plausible. one says the paper lacked a basic obligation to scientific practices. >> also really disturbed to see such a shoddy piece of work. >> reporter: and cnn could find no trace of yang's three coauthors in the u.s. or china. yan didn't respond to tell us why but a source says the three co-authors are sued nims for chinese-basted scientists who refuse to use their own names but the source offered no proof. steve bannon offered no response. yet there is more about yan's work. some of the sources of her research appear not to be credible. a lady getting a ph.d. in chemical biology first alerted cnn to citations at the end of yan's. >> these are not coming from credible sources and i think that is concerning. >> reporter: a paper only appeared as a post on a linkedin a report written by a person that cnn cannot

columbia university virologist angela rasmussen says the papers are scientific junk. >> anybody with an actual background in virology or molecular biology who reads this paper will realize much of it is actually nonsense. >> reporter: cnn spoke to a half dozen scientists who say the papers are filled with half-truths, not scientifically tenable, one who met with her and said her first study wasn't plausible. university of michigan professor anna mapp says the paper lacked a basic obligation to scientific practices. >> it was also really disturbing to see such a shoddy piece of work. >> reporter: cnn could find no trace of the three coauthors, in the u.s. or china. she didn't respond to tell us why. but a source tells us those $coauthors are pseudonyms for u.s.-based chinese scientists who fear using their own names, but the source offered no proof. miles gwo told us jan's work is her work independent of any control by me. steve bannon has no response. some sources of her research appear to not be credible. amanda piper alerted cnn to citations at the end of the paper. >> people who a

columbia university virologist angela rasmussen says the papers are scientific junk. >> anybody witholecular virology who reads this paper will realize that much of it is actually nonsense. >> reporter: cnn spoke to a half dozen scientists who say yan's papers are filled with half-truths, not tenable, one who met with yan and said her first study wasn't plausible. a university of michigan professor said it lacked basic scientific practices. >> i was disturbed to see should a shoddy piece of work. >> reporter: cnn could find no trace of yan's three co-authors in the u.s. or china. she didn't respond to tell us why, but a source tells us three co-authors are sued anyone else for u.s.-based chinese scient t scientists who fear using their own names but the source offered no proof. guo told us yan's work is her work. steve bannon offered no response. yet there is more about her work, some of the sources of her research appear not to be credible. amanda piefr first alerted cnn to issues with the citations at the end of yan's paper. >> people who aren't experts, aren't scientists, who have