Skip to main content

tv   ABC7 News Getting Answers  ABC  July 14, 2022 3:00pm-3:31pm PDT

3:00 pm
building a better bay area moving forward finding solutions. this is abc 7 news. hi there. i'm kristen z. you're watching getting answers live on abc 7. we ask experts your questions every day at three to get answers for you in real time today. we'll dive into san francisco's water monopoly with our media partners at the san francisco standard find out why city is doing better than many other areas in the bay area drawing this drought and why water agencies are now looking to san francisco as a lifeline. also. we're still exploring the impact of the supreme court's decision to overturn roe v wade. ucsf. neurologists are sounding the alarm that the abortion ban. may mean women can be denied drugs to treat neurological
3:01 pm
disorders like ms. epilepsy and chronic migraines. we'll talk with one doctor about the potential impact but first san francisco is running out of the monkey pox vaccine as demand surges city health officials have announced the vaccine supply is critically low and urging the biden administration to take more action quickly supervisor rafael. mandelman says the city is quote literally begging the feds for vaccines and he joins us live to discuss that call for help if you will. thank you for joining us supervisor. sure. glad to be here. thanks for talking about this. let's assess the current situation how great is the demand for a monkeypox vaccine right now versus the supply. our department public health has asked for 35,000 doses and we've gotten a couple thousand we have people lining up for drop-in clinics and waiting for hours and hours and hours and getting turned away and that's happened. i think a couple times this week so um, you know, we are very short on what we need to be giving out we need to be getting
3:02 pm
vaccines into arms and we're just we're not able to do that with the supply that we have. all right. we got less than one tenth of what we asked for is what you're saying. so you talked about this line. so let's go ahead and show some of that because we captured video of some of it and this is one outside berkeley steemworks yesterday. it went for blocks. you know, what does your response say when you see that. people are concerned. i mean residents san francisco's and people in the bay area are concerned and have sex with men trans folks are trying to access the vaccine just are having a horrible time doing it. and i really think there's a real failure of leadership around this at the federal level, which is why we're trying to make noise and push on our health and human services and the cdc to get more vaccines out. all right before we talk about, you know in what ways you can push the cdc or the federal government. and i do want to ask you particularly about the berkeley steemworks procedure because we did hear from some people there
3:03 pm
yesterday that they were prioritizing people who were patrons paid money to go inside and those who didn't want to pay the money were left standing in hours of long lines like 10 hours long. what is your response to that? do you feel like that was either legally or ethically crossing a line? that sounds terrible. i'm glad wasn't happening in san francisco, but it's teamwork is actually doing that. it's a terrible terrible thing. i should say. we've reached out to berkeley steemworks. we haven't heard back yet, but do you see a better way like a way of managing, you know, is it signing up is it when you have a vaccine shortage and we saw this in covid initially, how can that be managed better? yeah, well we did clear prioritization and clear direction to people of who should be getting the vaccine and when and right now the direction from the federal government does not make sense. for example sex workers seem like they should be a very high priority to get the vaccine and
3:04 pm
yet they're nowhere in the federal government's prioritization. the federal government is saying you can get you know, you are prioritized for vaccine if you've had a known exposure. but you know if you simply are someone. a population at risk you are not i think a lot of folks are trying to get the vaccine as a preventative knowing that they may be exposed at some point. but right now the technically you're only supposed to be getting the vaccine if you have been exposed, right? well the supervisor mandelman. can we talked about why you think there's a shortage? i mean as we know there are a couple of vaccines they've been out for decades, right? so it's not like covid where we had to go develop it. and of course the us has dealt with monkeypox outbreaks before yeah, no, that's it's inexcusable. i mean we managed to get tens of millions of of covid-19 vaccinations into into folks within months of them finding of them figuring out. they had a vaccine here. we've had a vaccine we didn't have to do any r&d at all and the plans that have been announced by the biden administration are to get vaccines to people by the end of
3:05 pm
2023 two million vaccines by the end of next year that said terrible terrible goal. it's not going to solve a crisis this year and it doesn't have to be this way, canada the united kingdom. germany are all you know providing the vaccine to anyone who who's in a population of india risk. so what are you specifically hoping to see in terms of the federal response and kind of getting the vaccines made and pushed out more quickly. do we need to call for a federal, you know defense production ad kind of like people were saying early on in the pandemic. is this something else? what do you think? it needs the cdc just buy more vaccine and get it out quickly. i just needs to focus on this and make this a high priority and i believe they can get it done. so, i think it's really a question of prioritization and an acting as other countries have done to protect their population. now you asked this question in a tweet that caught my eye that i thought was interesting. you said would monkey pox have
3:06 pm
received a better response if it wasn't primarily affecting queer people explain that yeah, i mean, i don't think this is a case of you know. anti-anti gay discrimination by the by demonstration. i don't think there's any animus in this but i think there is indifference and complacency and and for a lot of of gay men particularly, you know men who are older than me trans folks who are older than me and remember the you know that the 80s and the early days the aids crisis. that's a very similar feeling or there's a health crisis happening. they're interventions. that could be helpful in the federal government is failing to step now, of course, you know, the box is not aids and thankfully, you know, it is not fatal in the way that some monkeypox outbreaks have been but the sort of the indifference and complacent it complacency is has been noted by a lot of queer folks and is frankly pretty pretty troubling and upsetting. yeah certainly can see how those feelings and fears could be evoked again, but but do you see a so when you know looking at
3:07 pm
the federal response to covid right which has also been criticized as kind of disorganized inept inadequate. yeah, but except that that response. know there were some stumbles and there were some fails along the way but they actually have done really produced in record time and then although the distribution in the early days was was tough. yeah, they did get it out here. it doesn't even seem like they're trying to get the doses out that we need. they've set goals that are not realistic for addressing this crisis 2020 end of 2023 is not when we trying to get vaccines out right a lot of people saying the math just doesn't add up. okay. so for folks locally feel like they are in that high-risk category. they need that vaccine any tips on where they can get them right now. we understand that san francisco is basically running out in zuckerberg. general had to shut down his clinic right or is it still open for a few more days? it is changing day to day based on what we received from federal government. people should be checking dph website san francisco aids
3:08 pm
foundation the city clinic try, you know if you have been exposed, you know, try to get try to get yourself. an vaccination and you know, we hope the situation will improve in the next few weeks, but we need federal action to do that. all right, so there's no magical place you can send people to there's just yeah, okay, fortunately not people just need to need to websites and zuckerberg has doses they'll be trying to get them out as quickly as possible. okay? well since the number of cases rose dramatically after pride weekend, is there any talk in the city of maybe canceling any events postponing to contain the spread? um, i have not heard that talk i do think for individuals. it's people should be thinking about you know their own risk level and tolerance for risk and be thoughtful this summer if you haven't been vaccinated monkeypox is not something you know you want and you know, think about you know what you're doing who you're doing it with talk with partners and for some of these larger events. i think we need to get more guidance out to the venues and
3:09 pm
also to the patrons about you know is a giant dance party with adventure sweaty folks. us, you know, rubbing up against each other a great idea maybe not but we'll say we need to get the vaccines out and we need more definitive guidance from from our public health. well while we wait for the doses to arrive in larger numbers, there's something the city you think should be doing could be doing right now to get ready for that mass distribution. i remember in the early days of covid like we we were ready to go with the clinics right even if we didn't have the doses yet. i think deep i think department public health is getting themselves ready. i think the fact, you know the communication about what was going on at zuckerberg has not been super strong, but people figured it out and they have moved a ton of doses very very quickly. so i think we'll continue to push vaccinations out as quickly as we get them. we just need more. all right supervisor rafael mendelman. thank you so much for your time and insight today. appreciate it. thank you. coming up next at ucsf neurologist explains why the
3:10 pm
overturning of roe v wade could impact women with neurological disorders shall be joining us when that car hit my motorcycle, insurance wasn't fair. so i called the barnes firm, it was the best call i could've made. call the barnes firm now, and find out what your case could be worth.
3:11 pm
♪ call one eight hundred, eight million every search you make, every click you take, every move you make, every step you take, i'll be watching you. the internet doesn't have to be duckduckgo is a free all in one privacy app with a built in search engine, web browser, one click data clearing and more stop companies like google from watching you, by downloading the app today. duckduckgo: privacy, simplified.
3:12 pm
duckduckgo: states across the country doctors are concerned that i won't just be abortions or perhaps contraception that may become harder to get they say there's an alarming ripple effect and now women are being denied medication to treat other. life-threatening illnesses joining us live to discuss this ucs have neurologist dr. riley beauvais, dr. beauvais. thanks for coming on the show. thanks so much for having us. so the supreme court ruling overturned roe v wade, and now half the states are either banning or making a very very difficult to get an abortion, but the health impact is bigger
3:13 pm
than that. what is it that you and your neurology colleagues are worried about that's exactly right. so our concern is really that the abortion ban will have much broader implications for a patient population for a research and neurology and our practice and there's really implications with respect to reproductive rights in general and bodily autonomy and how that will influence decisions about neurological treatments made between a patient and their doctor and so we wanted to invite our fellow neurologist. select on what is at stake in our field and for our patients by this reversal of roe v wade, so an article you wrote mentioned the very real possibility of women not being prescribed certain drugs that they would typically get if they had ms or migraine or epilepsy talk about why that may be what is the fear? what is the reason doctors may say i'm going to give you something else. yeah, that's exactly right. so a lot of neurological
3:14 pm
conditions as you mentioned migraine multiple sclerosis epilepsy affect women and other persons of childbearing potential and for a long time. we really didn't know much about the safety of these medications during pregnancy and lactation and for majority of this medications, we really don't know sometimes there is evidence that these medications are unsafe but oftentimes there's absence of ev that they are safe and given this sort of uncertain scenario what we see quite commonly is doctors are worried about potential exposure of a fetus during pregnancy to a fetus to a medication during pregnancy. and so they just avoid certain high efficacy medications for patients altogether and where we've been moving. as a field is really working with contraception working with family planning with our patients with their partners with other care team members so that we can really optimize the
3:15 pm
timing of medications and the timing of pregnancy and really be able to treat our patients with modern medications with standard of care medications and also really minimize risk of of potential exposure or harm to the fetus and we're worried about is that we going to go backwards where neurologists are unwilling to prescribe these high efficacy medicines it because of potential risks of exposure to fetus and therefore our patients will actually be elating irreversible disability in the case of multiple sclerosis or having uncontrolled seizures in the case of epilepsy or just experiencing terrible migraines because of our you know are being in limbo with the evidence and with contraception and reproductive rights. is it that the doctors may fear that they may get in trouble with the law in their state if they prescribe one of these drugs and the person either had a miscarriage which can then be interpreted to be like you gave
3:16 pm
them something that led to an abortions or can you explain that? there's a couple pieces one is just that you know, we're always conscious about not giving a medication to a person who's pregnant or planning a pregnancy that could hurt them or the fetus. and and that's that's a clear concern. and so sometimes it's just that we want to make sure that the patient will will really reduce the likelihood of unintentional pregnancy. so there's that piece certainly the piece and and that has often the biggest piece. the idea that a doctor could prescribe the medication that would cause an abortion. i think there's much fewer medications that truly result in loss of pregnancy and that isn't sort of perhaps the dominant concern the dominant concern is just that we won't prescribe the most effective therapies. i see is there also fear that, you know, obviously for women who are either possibly pregnant or want to get pregnant. this is something that they care about they don't want to harm
3:17 pm
their feet is either but what about just women of bearing age who have no intention of becoming a mom anytime soon. mm-hmm. that's right. i mean, you know, we we do depend on contraception and effective contraception in that setting and a lot of the care that we have to provide for. our patients of childbearing potential is around preventing pregnancies that are unplanned and really planning the time and carefully so in general any person or childbearing potential, you know that there is a risk of unintentional and unplanned pregnancy, and we do say that even in clinical trials where we're worried about the safety of a medication and we require patients to be several forms of contraception to participate we still see unplanned pregnancies and so there really is, you know a concern if we can't rely on contraception and if in the case of an unplanned pregnancy where there is a risk to to safety and the well-being of the fetus to determination is not an option. it's sort of the full spectrum
3:18 pm
of bodily autonomy and reproductive rights. that is at stake. here. is this worry mainly hypothetical or have you heard confirmed cases of it actually happening already in some of those states? well the terrible thing that we are seeing is patients who have life veterinary conditions during pregnancy, you know sort of the kind of the big one that's been talked about is sort of, you know, ectopic pregnancies which are life-threatening the one that we worry about is neurologists is preeclampsia where you know if you think of sybil from downton abbey the pregnant person develops life-threatening high blood pressure organ damage and seizures and the only way to save that patient patient is to deliver the fetus and sometimes before that fetus could make it with a life-saving interventions that are available in modern nicues. and so the current supreme court decision carries the implications that these patients will die and we are seeing reports from some of these states where patients with these
3:19 pm
life-threatening conditions are not having access to delivering the fetus and you know termination so based on your medical determination. is there a polic path that you think makes sense. so that's a big question and certainly, you know supporting bodily autonomy for individuals is a key one here. you know, how how states move forward and how the country moves forward? i think you know, we're all looking and you know crossing our fingers that reproductive rights and bodily autonomy will be part of that ucs have neurologist dr. riley beauvae. thank you so much. thank you for profiling this this perspective. all right coming up next the statewide water wars. have san francisco faring better than most other bay area cities our media partners at the san francisco standard will be here francisco standard will be here to explain why stay with us when that car hit my motorcycle,
3:20 pm
francisco standard will be here to explain why stay with us insurance wasn't fair. so i called the barnes firm, it was the best call i could've made. call the barnes firm now, and find out what your case could be worth. ♪ call one eight hundred, eight million
3:21 pm
3:22 pm
reservoirs are at critically low levels as we face our third consecutive year of drought that means many californians are dealing with restrictions but in san francisco, there's plenty of water even now and that has barrier water agencies looking to the city as a lifeline our media partners at the san francisco standard have published a new report on this and joining us now to discuss it is the reporter of that piece sarah wright sarah nice to see you. good to see you too. alright, so why is it? was this go is able to tap into a lot more water compared to other bay area cities and counties. well, it really goes back to a 1913 law that was passed by congress called the raker act which allowed san francisco to dam the tuolumne river up in yosemite and they were able to fill up the hedgehogy valley and create a reservoir in order to capture all of that smoke snow melt. and so today we're still using
3:23 pm
all of that water that comes from the sierras and it's piped all the way down to the city and it really gives san francisco's. huge advantage in something like a drought situation. so when they kind of handed the keys to the city for all this water where they're stipulations placed on it in terms of how they use use it or how they share it. yeah, definitely so some of the stipulations included not selling it to farmers, but one of the biggest deals is actually that san francisco sells two-thirds of that water to neighboring bay area cities and municipalities and water agencies. so most of that water is actually ending up in our neighbor's tops as opposed to our tops. and so that gives san francisco kind of an advantageous position because we own and control this pretty vital source in the bay area so it gets to determine how much to sell to others.
3:24 pm
exactly, so throughout you know, the last hundred years of having control over this resource. san francisco has created these contracts with our neighbors the city of brisbane the city of palo alto and in the interviewing years. there's been a lot of back and forth actually in 2003 that back and forth led to the formation of an agency called boska, which represents all of these bay area jurisdictions that buy water from san so bosca exists in order to negotiate these contracts and make sure that everybody's getting their fair share right look and that's really not a big problem during good years when we have plenty of water to go around but once you get into three years of drought you're thinking hmm. i'll just keep a little more to myself here. so what does this translated into in terms of the percentage of water cutbacks during this drought right comparing san francisco users to users and other counties. right. so this year san francisco is
3:25 pm
asking it's entire system to cut back by 11% and what that translates into is 5% for city residents and about 15 16 percent for other bay area jurisdictions some of the jurisdictions are even being asked to cut up to 35% because they're among the highest water users. and so it's kind of proportional to your water use in san francisco's don't use a whole ton of water. so we're not being asked to cut quite as much as our neighbors, right? i mean after all san francisco's tend not to have those big lawns right requiring a lot of water. it's pretty cool here and and we got all that going for it, but our other water agencies or other counties envious of their neighbor in san francisco. be well going after the city to try to get a bigger share. so right now there's not a lot of conflict between the agencies but over the past few decades. there's been a ton of negotiations that have led up to this contract and so for example
3:26 pm
in 2018 those contract negotiations led to the current 5% cut back that we haven't here in the city. so without sort of those negotiations in that conversation, san francisco's may not even have to cut any water at all. so that's why having an see like bosca is really helpful for these ages for these neighboring cities because they can get a little leverage and get a little bit more say in the proportion of cut packs. they have to take well sarah we only have about 30 seconds, but the good times may not last forever right even for san francisco. yes, so as we continue, you know, nobody knows what the next few years are gonna hold in terms of water, but, you know, san francisco and and the state is really kind of in this new era of concerns about drought due to climate change and so moving forward these relationships and these contracts are gonna become even more important and no the cities are gonna have to come to
3:27 pm
stronger agreements. all right sarah, right? thank you so much. i'd appreciate that. you can check out more the san francisco standards other original reporting on their website and sarah's article a san francisco. that's sf abc 7 will continue to bring you more segments featuring their city focused journalism. look for that twice a week here on getting answers at three and a reminder. you can get our live newscast breaking news weather and more with our abc 7 bay area streaming tv app. it's available on apple tv android android tv fire tv and roku. search abc 7 bay
3:28 pm
when a truck hit my car, the insurance company wasn't fair. i didn't know what my case was worth. so i called the barnes firm. i was hit by a car and needed help. i called the barnes firm, that was the best call i could've made. i'm rich barnes. it's hard for people to know how much their accident case is worth. let our injury attorneys help you get the best result possible. ♪ the barnes firm injury attorneys ♪ ♪ call one eight hundred, eight million ♪
3:29 pm
on this interactive show getting answers today. we'll be here every weekday at
3:30 pm
3:00 on air and on live stream answering your questions world news tonight with david muir is next. i'll see you back here at 4. tonight, breaking news as we come on the air. we have learned ivan a trump ha died. former president trump's first wife found dead in her new york city apartment. paramedics responding to an emergency call, finding her body at the bottom of the stairs. what we've learned tonight. ivana trump helping her husband build the trump empire in the 19 1908s. tonight, the trump family paying tribute. what the former president is saying, and her children, too. amy robach with the story tonight. also breaking, the secret service and missing text messages from january 6th. tonight, sources now telling abc news according to a dhs watchdog, the secret service erased text messages from january 5th and 6th after oversight officials requested they be handed over.


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on