Return to Transcripts main page

Inside Politics

New CDC Guidance: Fully Vaccinated People Can Go Maskless Outdoors, Attend Small Outdoor Gatherings With Other Vaccinated People; Seven States Lose House Seats After 2020 Census Report. Aired 12:30-1p ET

Aired April 27, 2021 - 12:30   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[12:30:00]

DR. ANTHONY FAUCI, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ALLERGY & INFECTIOUS DISEASES: In just the next couple of minutes, talking about the subject variants and the role of vaccination in protecting against variants. Can I have the first slide, please? So we're going to look at evidence from clinical trials, and when they are not available from laboratory studies, as well as real-world experience to indicate the degree of protection against variants of interest or concern. Next slide.

Here is the list, very familiar to you of a number of the variants that are in play throughout the world and in the United States. Next slide.

So let's go quickly through them and make one or two comments to inform where we are. First, the B117, the original U.K. variant, which now has assumed dominance in the United States. Next slide.

It is very clear now that this particular variant is covered very well by the mRNA vaccines as well as by the AstraZeneca, Novavax and others, as shown by data from Israel on the right in which the dominant 117 predominates there. As you can see, as the vaccine doses increase, the cases come down. Similarly, in the United Kingdom, using other vaccines, you see the same situation. This is good news, since this is the dominant variant. Next slide.

The next slide is the one that's the most problematic, the South African variant which is certainly not dominant here, but is in South Africa and other locations throughout the world. Next slide.

The data we have I presented at a form of conference. As you can see, the J&J is 64 percent efficacious, the Novavax 60 percent, the AstraZeneca not so good. Of note, Pfizer did a small study in which they looked at the effect in South Africa. And they found that as a matter of fact, it was 100 percent effective. The caveat here is still a very small study. But note the J&J, that even though it was 64 percent effective in South African study, there were virtually no deaths or hospitalizations. So although the efficacy went down for moderate disease, there was good protection against serious disease. Next slide.

Then we have the P.1, the one that is right now ravaging Brazil. Next slide.

We know from studies now that there's variable protection in real- world effectiveness, namely things that would not done necessarily in a clinical trial. In Brazil, it was 50 percent effective after a single dose. They went on to a second dose and that stayed at approximately 50 percent. This was under the condition where 75 percent of the cases were P.1, rather similar results from Chile a little bit better, with 760 7 percent effective versus symptomatic disease, 14 days after the second dose. Next slide.

Now returning to the United States, the California variant 429/427. Next slide.

Here, we have mostly in vitro data. And by in vitro data, we mean, we take the antibodies that are induced by vaccines, in this case, mRN and we determine their ability to neutralize the given variants in the test tube. And as you can see, there's a slight too modest loss here of about two to three fold. This is not likely going to be relevant from a clinical standpoint since there's a considerable cushion in the antibodies induced by this vaccine. Next slide.

And then we have the 526, which was originally the New York and spreading in certain areas in the New York City metropolitan area. Next slide.

Here, too, we rely on in vitro data with a moderate loss about three to five times of neutralizing activity from the mRNA. Again, this is still within the cushion that you would see protected since the antibodies induced by this vaccine are considerably high. And then finally, next slide. We have the troublesome India 617. Next slide.

Now, this is something where we're still gaining data on a daily basis. But the most recent data was looking at convalescent sera of COVID-19 cases and people who received the vaccine used in India, the Covaxin and it was found to neutralize the 617 variant.

[12:35:06]

So despite the real difficulty that we're seeing in India, vaccination could be a very, very important antidote against this. So I'll stop there with the final statement. The one thing you can gather from everything I've said that it's very important to get vaccinated.

So as Dr. Walensky said, even when you're talking about variance, indoors, outdoors, get vaccinated, and you will certainly have a degree of protection. I'll hand it back to you, Andy.

ANDY SLAVITT, ACTING ADMINISTRATOR OF THE CENTERS FOR MEDICARE AND MEDICAID SERVICES: Thank you. OK, let's go to questions.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Thanks Andy (ph). You know, I know a lot of people have questions today, so please keep your question to one question. Let's go to Erin Billups at Spectrum News.

ERIN BILLUPS, NATIONAL HEALTH REPORTER, SPECTRUM NEWS: Hi, thanks for taking my question. Can you guys explain the science behind the guidance change at this moment? Is the understanding that there are enough Americans fully vaccinated to sufficiently slow the spread of coronavirus outdoors, that the likelihood of transmission outdoors is very low. And what about pockets of the country that have not yet reached national levels of vaccination? Should the guidance be different for areas with lower vaccination rates?

SLAVITT: Dr. Walensky?

DR. ROCHELLE WALENSKY, CDC DIRECTOR: Thank you. There's increasing data that suggests that most of transmission is happening indoors rather than outdoors. Less than 10 percent of documented transmission in many studies have occurred outdoors. We also know that there's almost a 20-fold increased risk of transmission in the indoor setting and the outdoor setting. That coupled with the fact that we now have 30 -- 37 percent of people over the age of 18 fully vaccinated and the fact that our case rates are now starting to come down, motivated our change and guidance.

As noted, this is the third time we've changed our guidance in for fully vaccinated people. And as more people get vaccinated, and as case rights continue to come down, we will come up with further updates.

SLAVITT: Next question.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Kaitlan Collins, CNN.

KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Thank you very much. My question, given this new guidance, should states that have outdoor mask requirements change those to reflect this new guidance? Is that your advice for those states and those governors?

WALENSKY: What we're saying is states that have mass requirements outdoors, if people are vaccinated, we no longer feel that the vaccinated people require masks outdoors. So to the extent that those are consistent, I do want to sort of convey this outdoor large public venues such as concert stadiums and things like that. And a lot of that is the inability to distinguish between vaccinated and unvaccinated. And to say that in those settings, when you have those at that density, we really do worry about protecting the unvaccinated people.

SLAVITT: Next question.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Ariel Hart at Atlanta Journal Constitution.

ARIEL HART, REPORTER: ATLANTA JOURNAL CONSTITUTION: Hi, I'd like to go back to the question about four states that do not have yet the national rate that are below average. Should there be different guidance for us? I'm calling from Georgia.

WALENSKY: I think the general guidance is to ensure that people start getting vaccinated. And we do know that if you are vaccinated, it is safe to be outdoors without a mask and the general guidance is the more and more people who get vaccinated, the safer -- the more you'll have more people who are safer without mask. So, get vaccinated and if you aren't, then it's safe to be outside without a mask.

SLAVITT: Next question.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Kristen Welker, NBC. Hi, everyone,

KRISTEN WELKER, JOURNALIST, NBC: Hi everyone, thank you so much. Firstly, can you address if the risk of being outdoors is so low? Why doesn't this guidance apply to everyone? And secondly, while rates of vaccine hesitancy are dropping, you still have about four in 10 Americans who say maybe or no, they're not going to get the vaccine. How do you deal with that hesitancy? Are there any new strategies that you're looking toward?

SLAVITT: Dr. Walensky.

WALENSKY: You know, we still believe as people are in small gatherings, medium sized gatherings when they are unvaccinated, you're at risk -- you have people who are at risk of severe disease. So we do believe in those settings, masks should still occur. Certainly any activity is less risky when you have more ventilation, more space between people, more people wearing masks if they're unvaccinated. But again, I'd go back to the primary principles of being outdoors in general and wearing masks until -- outdoors until you have a vaccine.

The second question was confidence?

[12:40:01]

WELKER: And vaccine hesitancy that -- vaccine hesitancy numbers are dropping but it's still significant. I just had a conversation with someone yesterday, who said they weren't going to get the vaccine. I said, why. This person said, because I need more information. How do you get to those people who are still skeptical?

WALENSKY: Yes, we're spending an extraordinary amount of effort through our community corps and doing this outreach. We knew that we were going to, first, vaccinate everybody who was rolling up their sleeves immediately and wanting it and then we were going to have to do the work of meeting people where they are, understanding their reasons for not wanting to get vaccinated. And really explaining, is it about the science? Is it that you felt that the science was too fast? We believe and know that the science moved quickly, we've enrolled in 100,000 people in these trials. And the science stood on the shoulders of years and years of work before to be able to deliver these vaccines.

Dr. Fauci has previously talked about that. If people are worried about the side effects, we can convey the data of over 200 million vaccine doses delivered and the safety that will -- and the scrutiny of that safety. So we really need to meet people where they are and understand why they might be hesitant, and then give them the information that combats that hesitancy.

JOHN KINGS, CNN HOST: We've been listening to a very important briefing, this is President Biden's COVID response team. Dr. Rochelle Walensky, the head of the CDC speaking last there. Mr. Slavitt and Dr. Fauci also involved.

I want to bring our Chief Medical Correspondent, Dr. Sanjay Gupta, back into our conversation. Sanjay, very important on several fronts. I want to get into the particulars of this new guidance for the fully vaccinated Americans, that the individual, some of the individual specifics in a minute, but first, I just want to hold up this chart for our viewers to see, because this is what they are saying here. Let me bring it so I can get it center (ph), sorry.

If you look at the green on the one side, on your right, my left, that is for fully vaccinated Americans. Green means good to go. If you look at the other side, you have different safety levels and concerns for Americans not vaccinated. So we can get into the specifics here. But the main message they were trying to send in this is get a vaccine and you can get back to normal.

(OFF-MIC)

Sanjay, I'm going to jump in. I'm going to jump in while I do. Let's just go through --

DR. SANJAY GUPTA, CNN CHIEF MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Can you hear me OK?

KING: Now we got Sanjay. Come on in my friend.

GUPTA: Sorry. Apologies. So yes, you see the graphic, I don't know if we can pull that up full. But the prevailing message was, look, you get a vaccine, and there's lots of things you can do that you couldn't do before. Some of this I -- you know, is was even more than I think we expected in terms of basically saying, if you're vaccinated, you can resume these activities. These are the indoor activities. And you can see it's all green, as long as you're wearing a mask.

The other graphic I think, John, that the top half of what he showed was the outdoor activities. And they basically say in those situations, you don't need to wear a mask at all unless basically you're at a concert or something like that, where you're going to be next to people for a long periods of time. You know, and maybe not able to physically distance. So this is a significant change, go out to eat, go to outdoor dining, you know, establishments with members of other households. This is a significant -- this is going to feel like a significant change, I think

KING: Right. And let's stick with that. And if you guys could put up the outdoor one again, because I just want to get at what they're trying to do here if we let people to see this. And it's important. It's important about public health messaging. But look on the right side of your screen, right? If you look -- it's a green light, you're good to go.

Attending a small outdoor gathering with fully vaccinated family and friends, no mask. Attend to small outdoor gathering and fully vaccinated, unvaccinated people, no mask. Dining in outdoor restaurant with friends from multiple households, no mask. You should wear a mask if you're fully vaccinated, it says if you're attending a crowded outdoor event. Now look on the other side, though, less safe, red, for that crowded outdoor event. Less safe, yellow, for dining in an outdoor restaurant with friends about. They're essentially saying you want to start going out to restaurants. You want to go to a sporting event, get a vaccine. It's a kick, Sanjay.

GUPTA: It really is. I mean, I think for a long time, you know, and I put myself in this category. I thought, look, the incentive should be enough to basically say you get a vaccine, and it could save your life. 95 percent protective against, you know, getting severely ill or dying. But what we're hearing now is, OK, yes, the vaccines are very good at saving your life. Now we're getting to tell you what you get to do with that life, increasingly. That's what these graphics are to reflect.

Two things sort of jumped out at me. One is that the overall tone is look, high risk, medium risk, low risk, it's less sort of, absolutely can't do this, absolutely can do this. The other thing, John, we talked about right before the briefing you remember is a question that came up from a few of the reporters, are different areas of the country different. You know, where I live, for example, you have lots of viral transmission. Should that be a different criteria compared to places where there's lower transmission?

Rochelle Walensky, the CDC director was asked that and basically said our message is go get vaccinated.

[12:45:01]

So she did not make a distinction, John, as -- at least from what I heard, I don't know if you heard differently, that it should really be different in a place where there's higher viral transmission, you know, areas that are considered red zones versus blue zones, for example. And I thought that was important as well. I think, you know, we're going to hear from other epidemiologists how they sort of analyze that data. But that was an important point, I thought.

KING: I think it was a critical point. And I think we have our Chief White House Correspondent Kaitlan Collins with us who can join the conversation. Because to that point, Kaitlan, Sanjay lives in Georgia. 22 percent of the people are fully vaccinated. If you're in Maine, it's above 34 percent, 35 percent, I believe, right now. If you go back to Dr. Birx on the Trump White House Task Force, she traveled the country telling states this county is a red zone, this county is a red zone.

You know, it seemed pretty clear to me there what Dr. Walensky was saying is we're not getting involved in those politics anymore. We're not picking fights with individual governors, we're not picking fights within the individual state health directors. We're trying to tell the American people you want your life back, get a vaccine.

COLLINS: Yes, that did seem to be a broader direction coming from the CDC Director. And so that's why I asked her about some of these states that do still have pretty strict outdoor mask requirements in place and whether those they feel should be changed of course, because of this new guidance. The CDC doesn't actually determine what those states are doing but it's up to the states to follow the CDC guidance given we are getting this new guidance today.

And so the question was, should the states that have to have these outdoor, you know, pretty much blanket mask requirements change those. And Dr. Walensky seem to be saying, yes, that these states they feel they do not need to have these strict outdoor mask requirements in place for fully vaccinated people, they don't need to be wearing a mask outdoors. She did caution that with a little caveat, saying if it is a crowded setting such as an outdoor concert or something like that, that people she does -- she do -- she does still think that those people need to be masked, to coerce to protect those who are not fully vaccinated yet.

But I do still think when you walk away from this, there are going to be a lot of questions about whether or not the CDC is being too cautious here. That has been a question that some people have raised. But when you've talked to some of President Biden's health advisors, some of these federal health officials, they say that the CDC guidance, they never want to have to go back on it, they never want to have to go. They never want to feel like they got too far out there and have to go back on.

And so I think that is a factor that they consider when they put out new guidance, like what they're putting out today for fully vaccinated people. And so I think that's something for people to keep in mind as they're reading through this list of activities that the CDC is now saying you can do with no mask if you're outside and fully vaccinated. It's the way that they are considering when they actually put these in places, not just considering the science and what that's going to look like. They also never ever want to take a step to where they then have to go back and put more restrictions in place based on the conversations that we've had with a lot of these officials.

KING: Very important point, a very important briefing today. Kaitlan Collins, Dr. Gupta grateful for your time and insights as we analyze that.

Up next for us, a big political story. New census numbers are changing America's political map. Yes, just in time for the 2022 election.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:52:04]

KING: New census numbers are in and they mean big changes to America's political map. And at first glance anyway, these shifts could help Republicans both in the 2022 midterms and perhaps even in the 2024 presidential election.

Let's take a look. Number one, the census main job is to track population growth in the United States of America. These states, the brown states that lost population, the most, the green states that gain population the most. That is just looking at it from a where's the population growing and shrinking. Now let's look at it from another job the Census Bureau has which is helping states deal with reapportionment and then redistricting, meaning, where are the house districts across the United States? This is the current balance of power. 218 Democrats, 212 Republicans. We're missing some there because of vacancies. But that's the current state of play in the United States Congress.

Well guess what? These seven states because of those population shifts are losing house seats. Each of them is going to lose a seat, New York, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Ohio, Michigan, Illinois and California. Seven states lose seats. Six states are gaining seats, only six because Texas gets two because of the population shift there. North Carolina, Florida, Texas, Colorado, Montana and Oregon are gaining seats now as we walk through this process. And now, this is a political process.

And Republicans control the process completely. In five of these states, notably, Florida, Texas, and Montana, states that are gaining seats and it's Republicans who control drawing the lines. Democrats do control the process in New York, Illinois, Colorado, California and Oregon, gains for the Democrats in California -- in Colorado, excuse me, in Oregon declines. They get to draw the lines what Democrats will try to do, draw districts that hurt Republicans, if you will in those states.

So let's bring in to the conversation right now and have this conversation with Nathan Gonzales, he's the editor and publisher of Inside Elections. And Julie Hirschfeld Davis, congressional editor of the New York Times. Nathan, this is what you do, what you obsess about as we look this. I want to bring up the balance of power. When you look at the state of the House races now the state of House balance of power and these changes, the first instinct, this can get complicated, there can be lawsuits, but the first instinct is this gives Republican a few seats like that.

NATHAN GONZALES, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, yes, you have to wait and see what the actual maps getting drawn. I mean, there are four key states that we're watching when it comes to redistricting. Those are Texas, Florida that you mentioned, as well as Georgia, North Carolina. And each of those places Republicans are in control. And a big question is whether how far or how aggressive Republicans want to be because it's not just about the 2022 elections, you want to try to draw a map that is going to survive the decade.

And coming into this announcement, we knew -- I think the shift was -- we identified correctly the shift, right, that the movement was going to be from the east and the upper midwest to the south into the west, but it was not as dramatic as we thought. The pre-announcement estimates had Texas gaining three seats, Florida gaining two seats, Arizona gaining a single seat. And Arizona didn't end up getting a seat at all.

And so -- and what we knew -- you know, the House Majority was on the line before this announcement. Republicans need to gain just five seats and it's certainly on the line after this announcement.

[12:55:09]

KING: And Julie, first and foremost, will be the impact in the midterms. But I want to skip ahead a little bit just to see what the potential impact on the line here. If you look at states that are gaining, North Carolina also gains an electoral vote in the process, so thus Florida. Texas would gain two. From presidential politics standpoint, right now, in a close presidential election, these changes, at least now Democrats say we're going to make, you know, Texas more competitive, they're going to win Texas someday. North Carolina back in 2008. But as of today, if we were replaying either 2016 or 2020, again, advantage Republicans.

JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Right. I mean, as you said, overall, if on paper right now, it looks like there is a slight advantage for the Republicans not just in the congressional races, but clearly on a -- in terms of presidential electoral politics. But a lot will also depend as he said, and as Nathan said, on what these states choose to do, how aggressive they're going to be in the legislators and also on court challenges. There's a lot of data that still that will affect how the redrawing of districts works that comes out in the fall, we don't know what that's going to be yet.

And in some places, places like New York and Illinois, the -- places where Republicans may lose some seats, Democrats may also end up having to defend more competitive districts, for their folks who are now in conservative leaning districts that could grow more conservative. So it's kind of a mixed bag, it's pretty hard to game out how this is going to all shake out, particularly as you look past 2022. But no question that the Democrats are going to have to figure out how to strategize around trying to preserve some of their footholds in some of the more competitive areas.

KING: And now, Nathan, this becomes the work of people who sit at computers to draw lines who run voting records through the things that comes to lawyers get involved, obviously, in the states where people have control. But I know you're fascinated by one of the things. I'm just looking at the House map here, but New York would not have a lost a seat except for 89, 89. If 89, more people had raised their hands. When you're looking at the process, what else jumps out at you?

GONZALES: Well, Democrats are in control the process in New York. So even though the state is losing a seat, it's possible Republicans actually lose the House seat when it comes down to it. I think what people need to know is that we are delayed in the process. What happened yesterday should have happened at the end of December. And what we're -- the data that we're supposed to get in September should have already started to come out by now. And so states are really wrestling with timelines, maybe having to delay primaries, delay -- filing deadlines, primary elections, it's going to just get a lot more messy, John.

KING: Now the thing that jumps out, Julie Davis, is it looks like there was a lot of complaints during the process about undercounting Hispanic Latino votes, that's going to be an area of intense focus.

DAVIS: It is and, you know, we're not going to have the sort -- the ethnic breakdown data for some time. But that is something that you need to look at. You know, places like Arizona, as you mentioned in (INAUDIBLE), the results were not as bad as some Democrats had feared. They thought that there was going to -- the things were going to be worse for them. And the reason why may end up being that that Hispanics did respond in lower numbers, there's always something of an undercount among Hispanic residents in the census, but that may have been more pronounced during the Trump administration when there was very aggressive attempts to try to, you know, have a citizenship question beyond the census and try to sort of intimidate people so that they would not respond. If that did happen, that could help explain some of why the results are not as we expected them to be.

KING: So Nathan, if you just scratch it out on a napkin, it's plus three for Republicans. If you think about, you know, seats, that's just on a napkin, things can change. You're shaking your head already, I get it.

GONZALES: Yes. Well this is why --

KING: I get it. They have to draw the lines. Right. This is why it gets so complicated. But let me get to the question. If you went back a few months, there were a lot of Republicans who thought we could take back the House just based on what we're going to get from the census data. Is this as good for them as they thought or is the work harder?

GONZALES: Well, I think it's a little bit harder in a way that Texas where they control their -- have one last seat than they expected to be kind of -- to draw Florida. There's one last seat that they're able to draw. And so, but I was shaking my head because there are just so many factors involved. How good are the candidates? What did the lines look like? What's the political environment? How popular is President Biden in the democratic majorities? There's just so much that goes into this cycle, even more than redistricting.

KING: There is so much that goes into this cycle. The bottom line, Julie, is now the lawyers in the map doors get at it. But Nathan's right in the overall political climate, depends a lot on a president and his or her approval rating in the midterm.

DAVIS: Absolutely, and I mean, we'll have to see what the environment is like after -- would it's going to be a very eventful a couple of years on Capitol Hill. There's all sorts of legislation moving, there's all sorts of issues that are cropping up, and you don't know how that's going to play into, you know, what we're seeing here. I think it is the case that it would be very difficult to imagine that just these redrawing of lines that this is going to cause will sway the makeup of the House in 2022. It's really going to be about the cycle.

KING: Nathan Gonzales, Julie Hirschfeld Davis, grateful for your time, grateful your time today on this busy Inside Politics. We'll see you tomorrow.

Ana Cabrera picks up right now.

[13:00:00]