►
From YouTube: The Grant Street Experience: Jessica Pickett
Description
On this episode of The Grant Street Experience, Grant Ervin talks to Jessica Pickett from Tomorrow Global.
A
Hello,
everyone
and
welcome
to
the
grant
Street
Experience.
My
name
is
grant
urban
I
serve
as
the
chief
resilience
officer
for
the
city
of
Pittsburgh,
and
we've
been
focusing
in
on
the
kovat
19
crisis
on
our
podcast
hear
about
the
people
and
the
places
and
the
activities
that
are
happening
along
Grant
Street
here
in
Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania
kovat
19
has
kind
of
taken,
not
just
the
city
but
the
nation
in
the
world
by
storm
in
the
recent
months.
A
What
our
purpose
is
over
the
next
few
episodes
is
to
really
start
to
focus
in
on
some
of
the
people
and
activities
to
help
give
us
perspective
on
the
challenges
that
we
face
with
the
kovat
crisis.
Today
we
have
Jessica
Pickett
with
us.
Jessica
is
the
principal
consultant
with
tomorrow
global
LLC,
a
local
consulting
firm
that
focuses
in
on
public
health
issues
in
economics.
A
A
So
we
wanted
to
take
a
moment
to
get
to
know
Jessica
a
little
bit
better
in
kind
of
the
work
that
she
does
both
kind
of
locally
and
globally,
but
also
kind
of
pick
her
brain
a
little
bit
to
give
us
some
perspective
on
the
Cova
19
crisis,
from
a
public
health
standpoint.
What
some
of
the
things
that
we
can
have
some
deeper
analysis
on
in
terms
of
perspective
what's
happening
right
now,
but
then
also
look
at
issues
going
forward.
So
I'd
like
to
welcome
Jessica
Pickett
to
the
Grant
Street
experience
Jessica.
B
A
B
It's
something
I've
had
a
little
bit
of
a
practice
with
we
had
been
plant
I've
been
planning
to
be
doing
some
research
out
of
the
country
this
summer
and
fall,
which
of
course,
we
realized
I
realized
early
was
not
quite
feasible,
but
as
a
result
of
that,
I
realized
that
early
enough
I
think
I
may
have
adopted
the
last
puppy
in
Pittsburgh,
so
I'm
part
of
team
pandemic
puppy.
Hopefully
he
won't
interrupt
us
today.
B
It's
been
challenging
to
have
a
sense
of
what's
coming
and
I,
think
I
think
I've
spotted
the
equity
issues,
a
person
of
our
earlier
conversations
and
it
spotted
those
pretty
early
on.
So
especially
at
the
outset,
when
there
is
a
dissonance
between
how
knowing
how
severe
this
was
going
to
get
when
of
people
around
me
often
did
it
and
thought
I
was
being
alarmist.
B
That
was
I
actually
found
it
harder
earlier
on.
If
that
dissonance,
now
that
most
people
kind
of
ramped
up
their
response
and
in
giving
greater
awareness
and,
unfortunately
greater
salience,
as
this
hits
home
for
a
lot
of
people,
I've
been
able
to
move
into
being
I
think
able
to
channel
that
more
proactively.
B
So,
as
somebody
who
works
on
global
health
and
development,
this
is
something
I
can
contribute
you
professionally,
through
interactions
like
ours,
of
course,
but
also
through
system
looking
at,
for
example,
prospects
for
for
vaccines
like
global
vaccine
policy,
and
things
like
that,
so
I'm
gonna
be
hanging
in
there.
Maybe.
B
B
Government
programs
affected
affected
the
quality
and
price
of
the
care
that
they
received,
and
these
are
issues
we
do
see
in
the
US
as
well.
So
it
was
is
particularly
stark
as
it
hits.
You
know:
poor
rural
families
in
low-income
countries
there's
fewer
other
protections
in
place,
but
many
of
insights
are
the
same
here
and
you
know
the
law
in
particular.
B
We
see
this,
of
course
now
as
everyone's
dealing
with
a
great
deal
of
uncertainty,
but
before
graduate
school
I
had
gotten
my
start
in
global
health
working
at
a
think-tank
and
center
for
indc
called
the
center
for
global
development
and
a
brief
time
before
that
at
Gabi,
the
vaccine
Alliance,
and
during
that
time,
I
was
looking
a
little
bit
further
upstream.
Instead
of
just
at
the
the
national
and
sub-national
Health
System
level.
I
was
looking
at
things
like
how
do
we
incentivize
research
and
development
for
new
vaccines
and
new
drugs?
B
All
of
these
things
that
in
many
cases,
looking
specifically
at
infectious
diseases,
of
course,
at
the
time,
mostly
AIDS,
TB
and
malaria,
but
also
a
number
of
vaccine
preventable
childhood
illnesses.
So
all
of
that
kind
of
came
together
when
I
moved
to
Pittsburgh
about
four
years
ago
now,
I
can't
believe
it's
been
that
long.
B
When
I
was
working
at
Pitts,
Global
Study
Center
helping
to
design
an
undergraduate
global
health
certificate
that
had
leverage
a
lot
of
the
university's
amazing
expertise
at
the
graduate
level
in
both
public
health
and
medicine,
and
make
that
more
available
to
undergraduates
in
a
systematic,
legible
way
and
teaching.
My
own
course
on
the
political
economy
of
global
health.
As
part
of
that,
it
was
a
great
opportunity
to
also
think
about
how
those
issues
played
out
beyond
just
health
and
beyond
just
internationally
again.
B
These
are
the
provision
of
public
goods
is,
and
the
big
picture
issued
is
important
to
every
area
of
government
nationally
and
locally
and
working.
There
was
a
great
opportunity
to
expand
my
perspective
to
issues
like
those
we
see
here
in
Pittsburgh,
so
about
a
year
and
a
half
ago,
now,
two
years
ago,
as
much
as
I
love,
Pitt
I
stepped
down
from
my
full-time
role
there.
B
So
I
could
bring
some
of
those
insights
back
more
to
the
policy
side
and
my
comparable
as
the
principal
consultant
with
tomorrow
global,
and
so
it's
been
really
great
to
have
continued
opportunities
to
work
with
you.
Looking
at
things
around
sustainable
development
here
in
Pittsburgh
leading
up
to
this,
and
it's
been
rewarding
to
be
able
to
leverage
some
of
that
insight
during
the
challenging
time.
We
now
face
interesting.
A
So
when
you
start
to
kind
of
model
these
things
out,
whereas
you
know
typically,
we
could
face
a
weather
event
like
a
flood
or
you
know,
impacts
from
a
hurricane
or
things
of
that
nature
pandemic
was
relatively
low,
but
it
was
definitely
something
on
the
the
continuum
and
and
how
has
it
metastasized,
I
guess
so
fast
in
terms
of
you
know
an
event
that
started
in
Asia
and
kind
of
rapidly
spread
across
the
world.
So
maybe,
if
you
can
start
there
and
explaining
that
for
folks,
absolutely.
B
To
state
those
caveats
upfront,
one
of
the
challenges
with
this
moment
is
there
is
so
much
uncertainty,
even
among
experts,
especially
among
experts
that
knowing
who
your
who
you're,
taking
whose
words
you're
taking
at
face
value,
is
critical
as
as
much
as
credentialism
is
something
I
would
normally
react
to
guests.
So,
but
with
that
caveat,
some
of
the
question
is
like
a
big-picture,
virology
or
epidemiology
question
that
you're,
posing
I.
Think
we
still
don't
know.
Why
did
this
happen?
B
Here
it
looks
like
it's
I
think
the
number
I've
seen
recently
was
10%
of
patients
are
responsible
for
something
like
80%
of
transmission
at
each
point,
don't
quote
me
on
that
that
data
takes
a
long
time
to
find,
and
you
don't
really
even
know
to
look
for
it
until
you
have
a
pandemic.
So
almost
always
you're
going
to
see
the
the
early
stages
and
this
kind
of
hate
to
say
fog
of
war,
but
for
lack
of
a
better
metaphor,
we'll
go
with
that.
A
fair.
B
B
A
B
Note
from
the
medical
anthropologists
out
there,
but
any
to
the
point
at
hand,
we're
still
learning
and
it
seems
increasingly
seems
like
there's
a
number
of
things
about
the
nature
of
this
virus
that
make
it
even
greater
uncertainty
or
at
the
earliest
than
than
others.
That
said,
I
think
I
would
disagree
with
the
advice
you
were
given
early
on
about
pandemic,
being
a
high
high
impact,
low
probability,
event,
I
think
it's
three
years
now,
we've
known
it's
actually
high
probability,
but
there's
nothing.
B
You
can
it's
much
harder
to
control
or
to
address
at
the
local
level
and
reasonably
I
think
there's
probably
assume
that
there'd
be
a
much
greater
global
and
especially
national
response.
So
in
terms
of
the
impact
on
local
beyond
its
Berg
I.
Think
it's
understandable
that
it
wasn't
at
the
top
of
the
list
you
would
plan
for,
but
we've
known
this
is
coming.
B
There's
a
lot
of
things
about
how
increasing
urbanization
increasing
human
behaviors
in
general,
V
City,
the
environment
have
made
zoonotic
diseases,
that
is
to
see
the
transmission
of
diseases
traditionally
found
in
animal
reservoirs
into
human
hosts,
more
likely
and
then,
of
course,
with
greater
immune
organization
and
population
density,
as
well
as
greater
globalization.
So,
in
our
connection
between
different
cities,
your
interest
at
that,
once
it's
in
a
human
host,
it
can
spread
more
broadly.
It's.
B
It
absolutely
does-
and
this
isn't
this
is
happening
globally.
I
want
to
be
clear
like
that,
those
trends
as
I'm
sure
you
know
this,
but
I
mean
I,
have
a
dear
friend
who,
when
she
was
living
in
an
apartment
downtown,
you
go
a
bat
flew
into
her
window.
On
the
26th
floor,
it
got
trapped
in
there.
There
was
a
lot
of
drama
because
of
the
back,
not
because
of
my
friends,
but
just
so
like.
B
There's,
no
reason
that
this
couldn't
have
been
introduced
here
and
other
other
friends
and
colleagues
who
look
at
the
ways
we
tend
to
think
of
disease
as
coming
from
somewhere
else
and
other
izing
it
based
on
the
epidemiology.
I
would
assume
that
this
was
initially
introduced
in
or
around
Wuhan,
but
it's
just
as
likely
that
the
next
time
we
have
a
pandemic
that
it
could
be
introduced
even
by
a
bat
here
in
Pittsburgh.
B
Exactly
that,
so
what
I
do
think
has
been
a
surprise
is
that,
despite
at
the
global
level,
I
mean
there
has
been
a
lot
of
money
poured
in
internationally
depend
on
a
preparedness
for
a
while.
Now
this
is
Bill.
Gates
has
spoken
about
this
and
then
ringing
the
alarm
bells
for
years,
there's
several
other
philanthropies
and
foundations
that
have
also
made
pandemic
preparedness
and
biosecurity
a
priority
as
as
one
of
several
kind
of
long-term
existential
threats.
B
There
has
been
in
the
u.s.
in
particular,
actually
a
lot
of
investment
in
the
global
health
security
agenda,
as
it's
known,
especially
under
started
under
President
George
W
Bush.
After
reading
a
history
book
about
the
influence
of
pandemic
in
1918,
so
there
had
actually
been
a
lot
of
attention
to
the
risk
of
pandemics,
and
yet
everybody
I
know
who
works
in
that
sphere,
which
again,
among
another
thing,
I
said
that
is
not
my
ex.
My
prior
expertise
is
the
boss.
Security
I
have
tended
to
work
just
work
more
on
routine.
B
I
think
everybody,
even
its
biggest
biggest
expert
critics,
think
that
their
handling
is
very
well,
but
what
we
hadn't,
anticipated
and
I
think
they
should
have
is
that
by
its
nature,
the
World
Health
Organization
can
only
serve
as
a
resource
to
member
countries
right
and
they
rely
on
the
data
that
national
governments
provide
it.
A
lot
of
governments,
including
the
US,
but
definitely
not
limited
to
it,
had
an
incentive
political
incentives
to
underplay
the
severity
of
illness,
and
they
did
not
want
to
test
people
if
they
couldn't
treat
them.
B
They
didn't
want
to
raise
concerns
about
travel
or
economic
implications
if
they
didn't
have
to
it.
Whu-Oh
just
by
its
Charter,
can't
force
people
to
do
that
force
countries
to
do
that.
So
there's
a
less
coordinated
response
globally
and
then,
of
course,
nationally
here
and
elsewhere
in
the
UK.
Among
other,
is
a
big
example,
but
also
in
places
like
Tajikistan,
which
denied
it
the
last
possible
moment
and
now
has
the
highest
death
rate
in
Central
Asia.
B
A
It's
interesting,
too.
You
know
the
last
kind
of
major
shock
that
we've
had
and
this
kind
of
goes
into,
like
your
your
economics
background
a
little
bit,
you
know
that
the
idea
of
contain-
and
you
know,
part
of
my
kind
of
academic
training-
was
in
financial
modeling
and
financial
systems
and
the
issues
of
financial
contagion.
Looking
at
financial
crises
and
things
of
that
nature
and-
and
one
of
the
things
that's
interesting
is
how
similar
this
is
to
the
crisis.
A
You
know
whether
it's
a
currency
risk
contagion
or
you
know
what
we
saw
in
the
2008
recession,
the
interrelationship
between
countries
and
the
financial
system
and
the
health
system.
I'd
be
interested
here
about
kind
of
your
thoughts
on
the
health
systems.
You
know
that's
where
a
lot
of
kind
of
your
background
is
in
and
and
their
differences
and
how
they've,
because
they're
different
how
they've
responded
to
the
crisis.
B
In
addition
to
the
health
system
itself
and,
in
fact
interacting
with
it,
for
example,
I
believe
that
a
lot
of
the
pharma
stocks
well,
pharmaceutical
company
stocks
and
the
stock
market
in
general
are
fluctuating
a
lot
based
on
the
date
what
clinical
trials
have
just
been
published,
but
also
when
we
hear
calls
for
things
like
from
suitable
manufacturers
to
bring
all
manufacturing
back
to
the
US.
That
is
a
fundamental
shock
to
the
industry.
B
If
that
were
to
happen,
and
the
reason
working
that
you
are
hearing
this
intersection
of
them,
what
happens
when
you
have
calls
for
nationalizing
entire
industries,
as
essentially
a
global
health
security
measure?
That
is,
we
want
to
make
sure
we
want
to
limit
our
exposure
to
supply
chain
shortages
of
not
just
not
just
potential
vaccines,
but
even
enter
existing
antibiotics
as
the
financial
markets
and
economic
spillover
to
mean
that
there's
an
increasing
a
risk
of
shortage
of
those
mm-hmm.
A
B
Happened
when
they're
all
being
factored
in
India
or
China,
or
their
active
ingredients
which
80
or
90%
of
them
come
from
China.
Is
there
a
risk
that
those
will
be
that
export
will
be
banned
in
India?
Did
actually
try
and-
and
do
this
briefly
so
the
tendency
to
and
we're
seeing
this
also
in
the
nationalist
kind
of
race,
for
a
vaccine
where
the
US
has
I
think
as
a
condition
of
some
of
its
R&D
investment
has
asked,
has
demanded
that
vaccine
manufacturers
provide
the
first.
B
You
know
X
number
of
doses
to
the
US
and
I'm,
not
even
saying
this
necessary
unreasonable
from
a
contractual
perspective.
There's
all
sorts
of
questions
about
how
how
rnd
federal
investments
are
made
based
on
you
know,
but
using
taxpayer
dollars
when
there
aren't
guaranteed
price
concessions,
there's
a
whole.
B
It
like
that's
a
very
complicated
issue,
but
but
what
we're
seeing
is
that,
in
the
same
way,
we
started
to
see
we've
seen
countries
not
just
shut
down
borders
to
prevent
the
spread
of
disease,
but
use
the
spread
of
disease
as
an
excuse
to
shut
down
borders
that
they
already
wanted
to
so
per
certainly
I
know
ongoing
punitive
immigration
policies
that
are
being
floated
here.
That.
B
Exactly
you're
also
seeing
that
in
economic
sector
and
in
terms
of
how
something
about
different
health
care
systems,
what
we
have
to
think
of
is
so
one
of
the
reasons
South
Korea,
for
example,
or
Germany
have
been
doing
very
well
relatively.
Is
that
they're
the
government's?
Are
people
have
a
lot
of
faith
in
their
governments,
which
tend
to
be
very
kind
of
pro
science?
B
They
have
their
doctors.
Are
it's
incredibly
I'm
gonna
give
great
health
care
systems
they're,
also
ones
that
are,
for
the
most
part,
free
or
universal
health
coverage
and
a
meaningful
sense,
certainly
not
insurance.
That's
tied
to
your
job.
So
when
people
trust
their
doctors
can
go
to
their
doctors
early
on
to
be
tested
when
there's
when
there's
better
cordon
in
between
the
government
and
a
kind
of
less
privatized
health,
slightly
less
privatized
health
care
system,
even
though
this
is
still
these
are
those
are
both
I
believe
largely
private
providers.
B
Who
do
they
go
to
to
get
tested?
How
do
they
get
treatment
if
they
need
it?
What
is
the
social
safety
mechanisms
in
place
to
make
sure
that
they're
not
losing,
ideally
not
losing
their
job,
but
even
if
they're
losing
their
job
at
least
not
lose?
You
know
losing
any
source
of
income
to
the
US
healthcare
system
and
its
broader
social
policies
has
made
it
a
much
bigger
challenge
here
than
in
other
horribly
wealthy
countries
and.
A
B
So
my
understanding
from
the
last
time,
I
looked
at
this
data,
is
that
Allegheny
County,
for
example,
had
been
unusually
compliant
with
stay
at
home.
Hoarders
so
and
I
mean
that
inflexibly
to
get
a
trust
in
government
and
social
cohesion.
My
understanding
is
that
relative
to
many
other
US
study
settings.
B
To
other
counties
outside
Allegheny,
County
mask-wearing
is
quite
high,
so
in
that
sense,
like
the
trip,
the
trust
in
government-
and
you
know
what
a
political
economist
would
call
it-
social
capital
is
quite-
and
social
cohesion
is
quite
high
here.
So
that's
been
very
good
when
we
were,
you
know
at
this
early
stage
of
trying
to
better
understand,
flatten
the
curve.
B
However,
the
idea
of
flattening
the
curve
as
it
was
originally
put
out
there
was
that
we
that
would
be
buying
time
to
get
the
things
you
need
in
place
to
so
when
it
peaked
it
would
be,
it
would
not
overwhelm
the
healthcare
system.
You'd
have
better
treatment
options,
you
would
have
be
able
to
test
and
trace
and
can
identify
people
at
risk
and
prevent
the
spread.
B
Exactly
I
mean
I've
been
very
much
incredibly
impressed
with
the
local
response
at
the
city
level
and
I've
been
impressed
with
you
know
when
I've
spoken
to
mayors
of
some
of
the
surrounding
boroughs,
that
they've
been
very
confident
and
I've
been
incredibly
impressed
by
governor
wolf
and
secretary
Levine.
Just
amazed
and
in
fact,
I
know
it.
We
kind
of
skip
straight
in
like
the
global
national
to
the
local.
B
Without
talking
about
the
state
and
I've
been
quite
impressed
so
far
by
how
the
state
is
handling
it
and
I've
been
impressed
that
mayors
of
kind
of
the
surrounding
municipalities,
a
outside
the
city
of
Pittsburgh,
had
also
been
very
least
last
time.
I
spoke
to.
They
were
very
confident
in
trusting
state
workers.
B
But
you
know:
I
I
worry
that
people
don't
realize
that
without
those
additional
backbone
in
place
that
just
really
would
acquire
additional
frankly,
there's
a
whole
history:
brush
federal
resources
financially,
but
also
in
terms
of
coordination.
It
does
not.
It
looks
like
we
may
have
together
out
of
different
state
systems
for
contact,
tracing
and
different
databases.
That
way
it's.
B
B
B
Should
assume
that
once
we
go
green,
we're
gonna
eventually
have
to
go
back
to
yellow
or
back
to
red,
and
you
know
this
is
this
not
just
what
happens
within
the
city
or
the
county,
but
what
happens
in
surrounding
regions
and
areas,
especially
there's
there's?
The
city
doesn't
exist
in
isolation.
The
county
doesn't
exist
in
isolation
and
relative
to
other
parts
of
the
country.
We
have
a
lot
of
a
relatively
small
counties.
B
So
when
you
have
you
know
surrounding
counties
that
say
that
they're
not
going
to
follow
they're
not
going
to
enforce
state
orders,
I,
don't
see
why
there's
like
residents
there
are
any
more
likely
to
not
come
in
like
continue
to
come
into
Pittsburgh
anything
like
so
so
it's
going
to
be
tricky
there.
We
are
lucky
that
we
do
have
with
you
kim
soomi.
We
do
have
a
huge
excess
capacity
of
ICU
beds.
It
is
unlikely
we
are
going
to
overwhelm
hospital
systems
in
at
least
in
Pittsburgh,
which
is
great
news.
B
I
have
been
a
little
concerned
that
that
creates
some
perverse
incentives
when
they
were
the
ones
also
doing
most
of
the
testing.
As
of
this
week.
Speaking
about
other
local
good
local
news,
there's
now
free
testing
available
through
the
through
the
county
and
partnership
with
your
toe
so
like
this
week
has
been
I've,
been
feeling
even
more
optimistic
about
how
things
will
play
out
here.
Pits
one
of
the
University
of
Pittsburgh
vaccine
candidates
was
just
acquired
by
Merck,
which
is
one
of
the
largest
vaccine
companies.
B
The
ability
to
scale
absolutely
so
I
think
C
that
is
prominent
would
be
promising.
Even
if
there
wasn't
a
Pittsburgh
connection
to
make
sense.
There
is
a
Pittsburgh
connection.
I
have
no
idea
what
that
the
commercialization
contracts
look
like
coming
out
of
the
university,
but
I
would
hope
that
that
does
hedge
against
against
some
of
the
higher
ed
spill
overs
that
I
know
Peter
taught
them.
Peter
Walker
talked
about
on
this
podcast
last
week,
yeah.
A
You
know,
maybe
just
in
the
last
couple
minutes
we
have
together
you've
also
kind
of
just
brought
the
issues
of
vaccines.
I
mean
what
are
things
that
people
can
look
in
terms
of
like
the
what's
coming
right
and
in
the
work
that's
being
done
in
the
vaccine
space,
not
that
you're
a
forecaster
or
having
crystal
ball
or
anything.
But
can
you
explain
kind
of
like
some
of
the
work
that's
being
done
right
now
in
terms
of
the
system
for
folks,
so.
B
I
want
to
start
by
pointing
out
vaccines,
have
saved
more
lives
than
any
other
human
invention
ever
assert
and
and
not
just
in
terms
of
health
interventions.
Vaccines
are
wonderful,
they
are
safe.
There
are
some
individuals
who
can't
take
them
for
specific
health
reasons.
There
are
occasional,
rare
side
effects,
which
is
why
we
have
such
rigorous
testing
protocols
and
clinical
trials.
B
They
are
wonderful
and
one
of
the
globally
one
of
the
tragedies
both
locally
and
globally.
One
of
the
tragedies
is
that
immunization
rates
for
other
diseases
have
fallen
off
a
cliff
during
this
pandemic,
because
parents
are
understandably
concerned
about
taking
their
children
to
a
clinic
right
now,
so
it
is
like.
B
Like
in
other
countries,
polio
is
likely
to
make
your
surgeons,
despite
being
just
on
the
verge
of
eradication.
Measles
outbreaks
in
the
US
have
been
bad,
they've,
been
even
worse
globally,
and
so
it's
this
is
even
among
parents
who
deeply
believe
in
vaccines.
Countervailing
concerns
right
now
have
made
them
hesitate
where
they
might
not.
B
Supply
chains
have
been
disrupted,
so
even
parents
who
want
to
and
are
willing
to
take
the
risk
might
not
be
able
to
get
them.
Funding
priorities
have
changed.
Frontline
work.
Health
workers
are
s,
so
this
is
it's
already
a
big
challenge.
It's
also
despite
early
optimistic
hopes
that
this
that's
you
know
realizing
that
infectious
disease
kills
people
having
a
more
salient
mic,
wash
some
anti
backs
and
vaccine
hesitancy
discourse.
B
A
B
My
understood
how
to
look
at
how
it
was
phrased,
I
think
it
was
more,
they
won't
take
any
vaccines.
There's
an
tiebacks
another
were
unsure
whether
another
equally
light
sized
group
were
unsure
that
whether
they
would
take
it
and
about
50
percent
said
they
would
I
think
when
I
was
driving
through
Mercer
County
two
weeks
ago
after
stay
at
home,
orders
have
been
lifted,
which
is
why
I
was
out
driving
and
not
interacting
with
anybody.
B
As
an
art,
canoe
and
her
dog,
there
was
still
protestors
outside
the
County
Courthouse
they're
not
to
stay
at
home,
orders
have
been
lifted,
they
were
protesting,
masks
and
vaccines,
so
there
you're
already
seeing
this
confluence.
So
we
need
to
it's
not
just
about
when
a
vaccine
is
available.
It's
about.
Do
people
trust
it
and
will
they
take
it
and
that's
important
because,
as
I
said,
the
reason
vaccines
are
safe
is
because
they
have
such
a
high
hurdle
for
safety
trials.
I
am
a
little
concerned
that
we
might.
B
B
Couple
months,
it
is
not
worth
it
not
just
for
this
disease,
which
is
time
to
see
potential
side
effects,
but
because
it
could
undermine
trust
in
vaccines.
More
generally,
that
said,
there's
something
I
think
at
last
count:
110
candidates
in
preclinical
and
clinical
trials,
mostly
preclinical.
A
handful
are
already
have
started
human
trials,
most
of
the
data
of
those
first
generation
ones
that
are
in
human
trials.
B
It,
although
this
has
nothing
nothing
like
the
flu
in
any
other
way.
The
one
way
it
might
be
is
from
the
experience
of
the
patient
experience
of
getting
vaccinated
insofar
as
it
looks
like
these
early
candidates
might
be
effective
for
a
short
period
of
time
at
preventing
to
the
disease
in
some
people
who
get
it
and
reducing
the
severity
of
those
who
do,
but
it
is
not,
and
then
you
would
need
another
booster.
This.
A
B
B
Least
the
first
generation
some
of
the
candidates
that
they
are
the
early
ones
the
advanced
candidates
had
been
developed
originally
for
SARS
back
in
2003,
and
so
they
might
be
at
later
stages
in
the
process
that
may
or
may
not
work
as
well
for
this
disease.
So
all
that's
to
say:
I
am
I,
am
NOT
optimistic
about
getting
a
vaccine
that
vaccine
within
the
next
12
months.
That
is
still
a
vaccine.
People
will
be
taking
in
five
years.
I
know
you
might
get
ones
that
you
can
get
it
in
the
next
12
months.
B
A
Boosters
Jessica
just
that,
maybe
we
kind
of
wrap
up
here,
because
we're
coming
up
against
time.
You
know
one
of
the
common
themes,
it
seems,
as
you
knows,
we've
been
having
the
conversation.
Is
this
important
to
trust
trust
in
institutions,
trust
in
process,
trust
in
science?
Are
there
any
kind
of
you
know,
kind
of
50
kind
of
next
steps
or
kind
of
ways
in
which
you
would
see
kind
of
continuing
to
build
these
trusts
trust
in
kind
of
this
process,
which
ultimately
kind
of
builds
resilience
any
kind
of
thoughts
or
suggestions
you
might
offer
up.
A
B
Is
a
brilliant
question
and
when
I
don't
have
a
pity,
ready
answer
for
I
guess
what
I
would
say
to
kind
of
situate
this
within
a
minute?
Many
of
the
larger
conversations
you
and
I
have
had
is
that
we've
talked
a
lot
about
equity
or
the
lack
of
it
and
they're
in
the
region
and
in
the
context
of
Koba
19.
We've
talked
about
how
the
economic
implications
and
even
the
short-term,
with
distribution
illness
will
exacerbate
those
inequalities,
and
so
any
long-term
recovery
needs
to
be
taking
equity
into
concern.
B
B
Are
systematically
the
ones
who,
understandably,
don't
trust
the
government
as
much
when
I
mean
we've
seen
seen
the
news
out
of
Minneapolis
when,
when
people
don't
believe
the
government
and
it
whether
that's
government,
health
workers
or
scientists
like
the
Tuskegee
trials,
or
you
know
from
first
responders,
including
police
officers,
mayors
in
terms
of
their
policing
strategies
when
people
feel
systemic
system
at
systematically
feel
like
their
lives
are
not
valued.
Why
should
they
have
trust
in
institutions.
B
A
What's
going
on
and
kind
of
your
world,
your
research
and
the
work
that
you
do
but
really
appreciate
you
sharing
that
with
kind
of
listeners
and
the
residents
here
in
the
city
of
Pittsburgh,
it's
great
to
know
that
we
have
people
like
you
that
are
working
on
these
issues,
each
and
every
day
to
help
improve
our
city.
So
we
really
appreciate
you
and
the
work
that
you
do
so.
Thank
you.
Thank.
A
So
once
again,
I'm
your
host
grant
Irvin.
This
is
the
Grant
Street
experience
and
we'll
be
with
you
shortly
with
our
next
episode,
as
we
continue
on
this
journey
of
learning
more
about
kind
of
covin
19
and
the
impact
that
it
has
on
the
city
of
pittsburgh
and
how
we
can
build
more
resilience
in
our
city
in
our
response
to
this
crisis
and
the
others
that
we
face.
So.
Thank
you
very
much
and
we'll
see
you
on
our
next
episode.
Take
care.