Transcription: Scott Gottlieb in

The following is the transcription of an interview with the former FDA Commissioner, Scott Gottlieb, a member of the Pfizer Board and non -executive president of the Illuminina Board, which was issued in “Fac The Nation with Margaret Brennan” on June 29, 2025.

Margaret Brennan: At a look at some of the changes in the United States public health policies under the Trump administration, we are accompanied by former FDA Commissioner, Dr. Scott Gottlieb, who sits on the Pfizer Board and is now the president of the Illumina Board. Good day. It’s good to see you.

Doctor Scott Gottlieb: Good morning.

Margaret Brennan: You know, Dr. Gottlieb, you worked in the first Trump administration. This second Trump administration seems very different in its public health approach on many fronts. One of them was really exposed this week with this new renovation Committee Advisory of Immunization Practices, or ACIP. Secretary Kennedy had fired about 17 members of the existing board and put some members of his own election. And in a video, the president of the American Academy of Pediatrics said that the federal immunization policy is, quotes, “it is no longer a credible process” and is being politicized at the expense of children. That is a fairly impressive statement. Do you agree with the Pediatrics Academy?

Dr. Gottlieb: Look, you’re right. I worked at Trump’s first administration. I was lucky to do that and proud to serve in that administration. I think we did many important things about public health. We preside over the first approvals of cells and genes. The president tried to expand access to these treatments through the right to prove the legislation he defended. He supported the FDA in an effort to try to keep tobacco products out of the hands of the children, the record number of generic approvals and many other achievements. I think that many people in my side of the political hallway feel that many of these policies that Secretary Kennedy is defending Are- will be contained for vaccines and will not bleed in a broader public health doctrine. I think that’s not right. I think there are now many people who do not think that these things are particularly political, or should not be, and do not think that these decisions should be decided politically, that they will find when they go to the doctor’s office that vaccinate that they may want to protect their lives or the lives of their families will not be available. This seems like a political process at this time. The secretary pursues problems that for a long time have been bugaboos of him and his anti-vax group, the children’s health defense. I don’t think it’s wrong at this time. I think I would probably recognize it. Which is assuming problems that he has defended during the last 20 years to restrict access to certain vaccines. That will grow. The list is growing, and will begin to be very tangible for people and goes far beyond the Covid vaccine, which is, I think, what most people think when they perceive the efforts of this administration or the secretary, to try to restrict access to vaccines.

Margaret Brennan: Then, one of the specific things of this meeting was the Council to avoid the flu vaccines that contain an ingredient called Timerosal. Just at the same time as the meeting, the CDC eliminated the information from their website that discredited that this ingredient was linked to autism. Secretary Kennedy says it is: it is the journalists who are hiding the truth. What do people need to know about the flu vaccine and this ingredient?

Dr. Gottlieb: Yes, so this is an old ingredient. It is a preservative used in vials of the multiple dose flu vaccine, mainly. Only a very small percentage of flu vaccine vials still contain it. What is an ingredient that is added to multiple dose roads because those roads that you are going to enter with different needles as the vaccine manages different patients. Then they are not unique dose injections. They are multiple doses vials that are mainly used in some occupied clinics, almost exclusively in adults at this time. In the early 2000s, I was in the FDA when we reformulate the vaccine, so we force manufacturers to reformulate vaccines to eliminate this preservative. Not because we thought it was not safe, but because there was a lot of dismay between the Anti-Vax groups, they thought there was a link between this ingredient and autism. The ingredient contains small amounts of ethylmercurio, not methylmercury, ethylmercury, which is the same type of mercury found in fish, in very small quantities. And so, we force manufacturers to reformulate the vast majority of vaccines, even four percent of flu vaccines that are administered, mainly adults, are of these multiple doses roads. For a long time it has been a bugaboo of the secretary and its group, the children’s health defense fund. In fact, the only presentation at the ACIP meeting was from the head of that group. And you are right that there was a counteract analysis of CDC officials who claim that there is no link between couch and autism. That analysis was eliminated from the website. The secretary issued a statement that said it was not, did not go through an adequate review.

Margaret Brennan: We are going to take a break, Dr. Gottlieb, and talk to you more on you. These are complicated problems that I want to dig with you. Then we hope you all stay with us.

(Ads)

Margaret Brennan: Welcome again to face the nation. We return to our conversation with former FDA Commissioner, Dr. Scott Gottlieb. Dr. Gottlieb, just to recover, we were talking about the meeting that took place last week with the recently reconstituted immunization advisory committee. Republican senator Bill Cassidy, you know him, is a doctor. He has supervision and presides over the health committee. He asked that the meeting be canceled because he said there is no CDC director in his place. And when it comes to these named, he said that many of them “have no significant experience when studying microbiology, epidemiology or immunology” and that they can have “preconceived biases” against RNA vaccines. It is, I am not a doctor, but it seems to me that the experience in immunology would be important if it is advising on immunizations. His lawyer was ignored here. Is there any control over Secretary Kennedy, at this time? Is there the need to put a CDC director in its place quickly?

Dr. Gottlieb: Yes, well, the CDC director had a confirmation hearing this week, and I hope it is in place soon. I think it is quite strong and a good choice for that work. The Board, this Board Acip, is not fully constituted. There are only seven members at the Board. In his maximum membership, he is around 15. And you are right, many of the people who have been named do not have a deep experience, or any experience, frankly in the science of vaccines. They are people who have been ideologically aligned with Secretary Kennedy in the past and worked with him, many of them, not all. And I think that is not something that even the secretary would probably play at this time, and took some uncomfortable moments in that meeting. For example, you know, a member had to have explained the difference between an antibody prophylaxis and a vaccine. Therefore, there was evidence in that discussion in which the CDC directors had to provide some corrective assistance, frankly, to help inform these members on the basis of vaccines science. So he showed, hopefully, once they completely constitute that Board, it will obtain more balance in this regard. I think some people are skeptical. I still have the hope that eventually there will be some good members who feel.

Margaret Brennan: You know, one of the things about the American health system is that question of continuous innovation. Earlier this month, the FDA approved an annual injection of an HIV prevention medication called Lenacapavir. How significant is an innovation like that, and given the environment of the one who is speaking, these new advisors will be interposed in the way to be able to bring such things to the market?

Dr. Gottlieb: Yes, this should not come before ACIP. So this is a therapy. It is a long action antiviral that provides six months of HIV protection and was extremely effective to prevent HIV infection in a population that was a high risk of contracting HIV. Therefore, it is a change in the formulation of an antiviral that allows it to be administered only twice a year and provide sustained exposure to the benefits of that antiviral. We are seeing a lot of innovation like this. There were also news this week of a small biotechnology company with which I have no participation, with which they had developed a pill that could provide sustained protection against the flu. Therefore, it is an antiviral, but it is formulated in a way where it can be administered once before the flu season, to provide protection throughout the season and also seems to be very effective. So we are seeing many innovations like this. What worries me is innovation in the science of vaccines. I work on the side of the risk capital, where we make investments in new companies, and there has been a setback of the new biotechnology companies that have been looking to develop new vaccines, for example, vaccines for the Epstein-Barr virus, which we know is linked to certain B cell lymphomas, and perhaps it is linked to multiple sclerosis. That is a new area of ​​science, the potential to vaccinate children against that, just as we vaccinate children against HPV at this time and prevent cervical cancer and other types of cancer. Maybe in the future, we can be vaccinating for EBV, but there has been a lot of setback to that type of investment. So I think we are going to see less innovation in the science of vaccines as a result of the environment in which we are.

Margaret Brennan: Quickly, Secretary Kennedy was asked this week about the statements in some states to start eliminating water fluoride. Oklahoma made some movements in that direction. He said you will see “probably a little more cavities”, but “there is a direct inverse correlation between the amount of fluoride in your water and the loss of intellectual coefficient.” What should parents think when they listen to things like that?

Dr. Gottlieb: Well, look, this has been a long -standing problem, another problem that Secretary Kennedy has defended throughout his career, this perceived perception that there is a link between fluoride and water and some neurotoxic effects of that. That has been thoroughly studied. I think it has been completely discredited. There are very small amounts of fluoride in the water, and at the levels that are placed in the water supply, it has been shown to be safe. CDCs have data that show that there is a 25% reduction in tooth decay as a result of fluoride that is routinely added to the water supply. It is not just a matter of greater dental cavities, but also oral health in general, which we know is correlated with systemic health.

Margaret Brennan: Dr. Gottlieb, it is good to get his vision today. We will return.

• International Atomic Energy Agency