Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Passengers Being Monitored for Hantavirus in Nebraska and Georgia; Supreme Court Continues Mail Access to Abortion Pill for Three More Days; Martin Short Opens Up About Daughters Death: It's Been a Nightmare. Aired 3:30-4p ET

Aired May 11, 2026 - 15:30   ET

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

[15:30:00]

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: We're back with our breaking news on the passengers on board that cruise ship that was hit by a deadly Hantavirus outbreak. At this hour, 18 passengers from the ship are now being monitored in medical facilities in Nebraska and Georgia. One American has tested positive and is at a biocontainment facility in Omaha.

Another passenger is experiencing symptoms and is being observed at a biocontainment unit at Emory University Hospital in Atlanta, Georgia.

I'm joined now by Dr. Osterholm. He's an epidemiologist and the director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota. Dr. Osterholm, thanks for being with us.

And we're hearing of this U.S. traveler with no symptoms testing positive. Why is it the conclusion of health officials that people who are asymptomatic but test positive cannot spread hantavirus?

DR. MICHAEL OSTERHOLM, DIRECTOR, CENTER FOR INFECTIOUS DISEASE RESEARCH AND POLICY, UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA: Well, first of all, none of us would ever say you can't do something, OK? You know, there's always the realm of possibility. But I think we have to look at what does the history of working with hantavirus tell us.

And all the previous outbreaks that have occurred, and most of them have occurred in Argentina as a result of, of course, this being a virus from that area. Every one of those where there was ongoing transmission resulted from exposure to a, not only a symptomatic individual, but someone who in many cases was actually quite ill. That really gives you the sense that you have to have a high virus load in your body in order to also transmit.

So I don't think we have any evidence of anything contrary to that, even in this experience here relative to the amount of virus and whether you're going to be positive or not.

[15:35:00]

KEILAR: OK, really interesting. And then hantavirus, as we know, it's usually quite deadly when someone does contract it, but often a person doesn't know, right, that they have it. So it seems like it's a flu, maybe it's some pneumonia, and then it turns deadly very quickly.

We saw this in the case last year of Betsy Arakawa, Gene Hackman's wife. That was a different strain of hantavirus. We saw this in this initial cases of the Andes strain on board the ship.

How much does survivability though, increase when you have doctors very close to these passengers who are able to immediately diagnose or treat a patient as if they have hantavirus?

OSTERHOLM: Yes, well, first of all, there really are two issues here I think you need to tease apart. One is, if you are diagnosed with a hantavirus infection and you actually have evidence of the virus, then it obviously is important to have the kind of acute medical care that you might need for someone who develops a severe pneumonia, has cardiac problems, has kidney problems, and that surely can be a big factor in saving that person's life. But I think one of the other issues that's come up here time and time again has been the fact that do asymptomatic people really play a role in any of this outbreak and move?

And I think one of the things that some of us are concerned about is the apparent need to have everyone in a some kind of containment center. And I think we can monitor these people very easily at home with testing or checking their temperature twice a day, assessing any symptoms, with the idea that if there were changes, then you could quickly put a N95 respirator on them that would stop them from transmitting and get them to medical care. So I think one of the things we want to be careful here is not to be doing things just because it looks important or is good, but the fact of the matter is what will make a difference in whether the outbreak continues or the actual safety of the people who've been exposed.

KEILAR: OK, and so maybe this could change how some of these folks, as time goes on, they're not showing symptoms. For those 15 people who are asymptomatic, they're in quarantine in Nebraska now, they're going to have this individualized decision plan -- that's what we understand it's called -- to determine whether they should complete that. As you're describing, it's kind of like very restrictive, right?

This 42-day monitoring period that is there inside of this facility, very restricted. Or do they go home, checking their temperature a couple times a day, staying in touch with medical officials? How would you go about making that decision here in the coming days?

OSTERHOLM: Well, obviously that'll be up to the federal public health officials who are working with the group in Nebraska, or for that matter, at the medical center in Emory. I think at this point, what we're really trying to do is make sure that we're responding to the actual outbreak, meaning that, you know, we are really looking at what happened, how did it happen, and what does that mean for the safety of these individuals. You know, I can only imagine how people were able to get through the past several weeks being on that ship.

But we also have to remember that ship was a very unique environment. It really is one of the very first cruise lines that I'm aware of that was in Antarctic waters where an outbreak like this occurred, or something similar to it. And there aren't very many people that drink martinis on the deck of a cruise ship that's in the middle of the Antarctic.

And so we know that there was a very unusual experience here where these people were indoors, in a sense, in a ventilation system of a ship that basically was trying to keep it warm relative to the cold waters it was in. So I don't think that we should extrapolate from what happened after the first exposure and how that happened in the ship to how it's going to happen with these people now that they're off the ship. And I think that's an important point.

And I wouldn't necessarily handle them that way. I think you can, again, have many of these people reside at home with a high level of safety. We did that after Ebola in 2015, 2017.

All the returning health care workers from Africa, which we did have an infection, actually were all monitored at home very successfully.

KEILAR: Yes, Ebola obviously quite deadly. So that certainly does drive it home when you use that example. Dr. Michael Osterholm, thank you so much for being with us.

OSTERHOLM: Thank you.

KEILAR: Still to come, a deadline fast approaching for the Supreme Court to decide on access to the abortion pill Mifepristone. What to watch for as justices consider the drugs availability by telehealth and mail.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

OMAR JIMENEZ, CNN HOST: Let's get to some breaking news out of the Supreme Court right now. CNN's Paula Reid joins us now. What are we learning?

PAULA REID, CNN CHIEF LEGAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: So this is a significant decision from the Supreme Court. They are saying that they are going to continue to allow access to the abortion drug Mifepristone through telehealth appointments and through the mail. Now, the reason this is significant, because over the weekend, they temporarily paused a decision from the conservative Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals that would have required the medication to be obtained only in person.

Now, the makers of that drug appealed, warning the court of the potential chaos for patients who had appointments trying to access this drug. Now, of course, the Supreme Court had rejected a challenge to this drug several years ago. But right now, this access is only continues until 5 p.m. on Thursday. This is a temporary stay that they are extending. And then we will wait to Thursday to see what they say.

Will they continue to allow access via telehealth and the mail? Will they uphold the Fifth Circuit's opinion? Or will they say that they will actually hear this case on the merits?

[15:45:00] Now, this would be a significant case for them to take up and hear arguments on. But at this point, they are just continuing the stay they put in place this weekend. It will be in place until Thursday at 5 p.m.

KEILAR: OK, so this continues until Thursday at 5 p.m., which buys them a little bit of time. This obviously is a drug, Paula, that has been at the center of so much debate when it comes to abortion, abortion care. Talk to us a little bit about the sort of outstanding question here.

REID: Yes, so let's go back to sort of the COVID era. During that time, women were allowed to obtain mifepristone, one of two drugs in medication abortion regimens, through telehealth appointments. Then, after the Supreme Court ended Roe v. Wade, the Biden administration ended the requirement that those pills have to be obtained through an in-person visit.

But this question of whether mifepristone can be accessed through telehealth and through the mail, this is something that has been working its way through the courts. As I noted, two years ago, the justices rejected a similar challenge and allowed the drug to remain widely available.

So here we're watching very closely because one option before the justices is to actually take up this larger question and weigh in on whether it should be legal to get this through telehealth and through the mail. This is one of the outstanding questions right now. Unclear, though, if they're going to take that up on the merits.

All we know now is they're currently staying that lower circuit court opinion. As they did over the weekend, they're going to extend that stay, which was supposed to end today at 5 p.m. They're going to extend that until Thursday at 5 p.m. So we'll continue to watch this to see what they do.

JIMENEZ: Paula, appreciate the reporting.

I want to bring CNN's chief Supreme Court correspondent as well, Joan Biskupic, into the conversation. So, Joan, obviously we have an extension of this stay for a few days.

What does that signal, if anything, to you?

JOAN BISKUPIC, CNN CHIEF SUPREME COURT ANALYST: It's a surprise because they're signaling that they don't want anything new. They think they're going to be able to decide where to go from here just on what they already have. But there's a really important missing voice to the conversation right now, and that's the Food and Drug Administration itself.

Remember, it's the Food and Drug Administration that has lifted the requirement for in-person obtaining of this drug. It's allowed for the telehealth. And so what's happened is that all the court has in front of it right now are some sort of preliminary filings from the drug manufacturers saying what the lower court did here, the U.S. appellate court for the Fifth Circuit, to suddenly intervene and lift the protection for obtaining this drug through telehealth that's been in place for since formally since 2023, and as Paula said, originated even before during the COVID era in 2021. To have the appellate court suddenly intervene like this has thrown everything into chaos.

So now there's uncertainty for three more days. Right now, women and their physicians are able to obtain this drug, but it raises even more uncertainty how the Supreme Court's going to decide anything. And as I say, Justice Samuel Alito had called for a response to the appeal from the drug manufacturers, and only the state of Louisiana came in and explained how it really wants this drug not to be available in Louisiana.

It says it conflicts with the ban on abortion it has in the state there. It says it conflicts with just all sorts of state priorities, not just in terms of the ban, but the kinds of costs that Louisiana is claiming that it's suffering because of this drug being available by mail there, things that the drug manufacturers are countering, and that the Supreme Court has suggested from this prior ruling in area in 2024, it would frown on.

But obviously, the nine justices are really at odds. They can't even agree on whether they should ask for additional briefing, whether they should ask for oral arguments in the case, which would normally be what would happen here, rather than to have to decide it hastily. But maybe this pause is a good thing, that, you know, cooler heads can prevail and they can figure out where to go from here. But right now, they were kind of it.

Samuel Alito had set this deadline of today at five, and he's bought a little bit more time, which probably is a smart thing to do here. But as I say, they are still missing a lot of valuable information from both sides, as well as from the Food and Drug Administration that has not -- whose voice has not been heard at all in this litigation yet at the Supreme Court.

KEILAR: Yes, very good point. Joan, thank you so much. Obviously, our breaking news here, the Supreme Court extending a short-term order that will allow women to continue accessing the abortion pill Mifepristone through telehealth. While they go until Thursday now with this new deadline, a stay on a lower court decision.

Stay with CNN. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

JIMENEZ: Legendary comedian Martin Short is speaking publicly for the first time about the, quote, nightmare of losing his 42-year-old daughter Katherine earlier this year. In an interview with CBS, Short said Katherine died by suicide after her long-term struggles with mental health.

[15:55:00]

KEILAR: Katherine was one of three children that the now 76-year-old comedian adopted with his wife, Nancy Duhlman, who died of ovarian cancer in 2010. Here's part of the interview.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MARTIN SHORT, ACTOR AND COMEDIAN: The understanding that mental health and cancer, like my wife, are both diseases. And sometimes with diseases, they are terminal. And my daughter fought for a long time with extreme mental health, borderline personality disorder, other things, and did the best she could until she couldn't.

So Nan's last words to me were, Mark, let me go. And she was just saying, Dad, let me go.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KEILAR: We're joined now by Dr. Gail Saltz. She is a clinical associate professor of psychiatry at the New York Presbyterian Hospital and Weill Cornell Medical College. Dr. Saltz, thank you so much for being with us. I wonder what your thinking is on how Martin Short is sort of describing this idea of you know, a physical ailment, but a mental ailment and thinking of them both as terminal in some cases. What do you think about that?

DR. GAIL SALTZ, CLINICAL ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR, NEW YORK PRESBYTERIAN HOSPITAL AND WEILL CORNELL MEDICAL COLLEGE: He's absolutely correct. The reality is, psychiatric illness is a biological illness, like other biological illnesses, like cancer. It is a biological illness that is taking place in the brain, which is our most important organ, if you think about it.

And sadly, even though the origins of this type of biological illness may be some combination of genetic and environmental, and we treat them with everything from medications to psychotherapies, the reality is that some of these psychiatric illnesses do have a mortality rate, death by suicide. In clinical major depression, that's up to one in 10. So he's correct that one can die from, you know, psychiatric illness.

And sadly, it sounds like she struggled for a very long time, but ultimately, that is what happened.

JIMENEZ: And, you know, he also talks about the handling of an intense amount of grief over the course of his life from a young age. I mean, by age 20, he had lost both his parents, his older brother, David. He says he's never used his therapy and really just uses his own coping mechanisms.

He's also, of course, a very funny person as he's navigated this grief. Could you just tell us more about the impact or the role of coping mechanisms often in cases of grief and how that might make it maybe harder in the long run? How do you see it?

SALTZ: So this early trauma, the loss of your parents and a sibling, that's a lot of trauma as a young person. Some people have so much trauma and they are unable to cope, essentially, and they really will have trouble later in life, you know, recurrent depression or other issues. But in his case, right, he obviously had a lot of internal strengths.

He was able to do what's called post-traumatic growth. He was able to process these losses, cope with these losses, make his way through, not that they didn't grieve him tremendously. Hopefully, he had supports along the way and develop resilience.

That's essentially how we develop resilience, is making it through difficult things often early in life and building incredible coping tools. Humor is one of the most sophisticated and high-intelligence coping mechanisms, actually. And so being able to use humor himself and to spread that joy, as it were, to use humor with others in a helping fashion is probably a fantastic coping skill that he's used.

And he's obviously also looked internally for thoughts about what matters to him in life, what his priorities are, what his strengths are, how to utilize those strengths. And subsequently, he probably very unlike his daughter, biologically had the strengths and the ability to cope, develop resilience and manage his way through life in a positive way.

KEILAR: Gail, we just have a short amount of time, about 30 seconds or so, but his speaking out about mental health, how important is that for getting sometimes stigmatized issue just out there for people?

SALTZ: Hugely important. It's probably the most important thing that can happen in terms of my world. Stigma remains the number one reason people don't seek treatment.

Comments that have been made recently about medications and so on only enhanced stigma.

[16:00:00]

So celebrities or important figures, people who've been affected, talking about their stories and talking about the biology of the illnesses of mental illness is so important to de-stigmatize it and de-shame the issue so that people will go get care.

KEILAR: Yes, Gail, so important. Thank you so much for being with us. And if you or someone you know is struggling with suicidal thoughts or mental health matters, please call the 988-SUICIDE-AND-CRISIS-LIFELINE by dialing 988 to connect with a trained counselor. You can visit the 988-LIFELINE website.

"THE ARENA" with Kasie Hunt starts right now.

END