The following is the transcript of an interview with former FDA commissioner Scott Gottlieb, Pfizer board member and non-executive chairman of the board at Illumina, that aired on “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan” on June 29, 2025.
MARGARET BRENNAN: For a look now at some of the changes to America’s public health policies under the Trump administration, we’re joined by former FDA Commissioner Dr. Scott Gottlieb, who sits on the board at Pfizer and is now the Chairman of the Board at Illumina. Good morning. 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 approach to public health on a lot of fronts. One of them was really laid bare this week with this newly remade Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, or ACIP. Secretary Kennedy had dismissed about 17 members of the existing board and put in some members of his own choice. And in a video, the president of the American Academy of Pediatrics said federal immunization policy is, quote, ‘no longer a credible process’ and it’s being politicized at the expense of children. That’s a pretty stunning statement. Do you agree with the Academy of Pediatrics?
DR. GOTTLIEB: Look, you’re right. I worked in the first Trump administration. I was fortunate to do that and proud to serve in that administration. I think we did a lot of important things on public health. We presided over the first cell and gene therapy approvals. The president tried to expand access to those treatments through the Right to Try legislation that he championed. He supported the FDA on an effort to try to keep tobacco products out of the hands of kids, record number of generic approvals, and a lot of other accomplishments. I think a lot of people on my side of the political aisle feel that a lot of these policies that Secretary Kennedy is championing are- are going to be contained to vaccines and not bleed into a broader public health doctrine. I think that’s not right. I think there’s a lot of people now who don’t think these things are particularly political, or shouldn’t be, and don’t think these decisions should be politically decided, who are going to find when they go to the doctor’s office that vaccines that they may want to protect their lives or the lives of their families aren’t going to be available. This does look like a political process right now. The secretary is going after issues that have long been bugaboos of him and his anti-vax group, Children’s Health Defense. I don’t think that’s mistakable at this point. I think that he would probably acknowledge that. That he’s taking on issues that he’s championed for the last 20 years to restrict access to certain vaccines. That’s going to grow. The list is growing, and it’s going to start to be very tangible for people and go well beyond just the COVID vaccine, which is, I think, what most people think about when they perceive this administration’s, or the secretary’s efforts, to try to restrict access to vaccines.
MARGARET BRENNAN: So one of the specific things from this meeting was advice to avoid flu vaccines containing an ingredient called thimerosal. Right around the same time as the meeting, the CDC removed information from its website that debunked claims that this ingredient was linked to autism. Secretary Kennedy says it’s- it’s journalists who are obscuring the truth. What do people need to know about the flu vaccine and this ingredient?
DR. GOTTLIEB: Yeah, so this is an old ingredient. It’s a preservative used in multi-dose vials of flu vaccine, primarily. Only a very small percentage of flu vaccine vials still contain it. What it is is an ingredient that’s added to multi-dose vials because those vials you’re going to go in and out of with different needles as you administer the vaccine to different patients. So they’re not single dose injections. They’re multi-dose vials that primarily used in some busy clinics, almost exclusively in adults right now. Back in the early 2000s, I was at FDA when we reformulated the vaccine, so we compelled manufacturers to reformulate the vaccines to take this preservative out. Not because we thought it was unsafe, but because there was a lot of consternation among anti-vax groups that they thought that there was a link between this ingredient and autism. The ingredient does contain small amounts of ethylmercury, not methylmercury, ethylmercury, which is the same kind of mercury found in fish, in very small- very small amounts. And so we compelled the manufacturers to reformulate the vast majority of vaccines, still four percent of flu vaccines that get administered, mostly to adults, are from these multi-dose vials. This has long been a bugaboo of the secretary and his 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’re right that there was a countering analysis from the CDC officials asserting that there’s no link between thimerosal and autism. That- that analysis was taken down from the website. The secretary put out a statement that said that it wasn’t- it didn’t go through proper review.
MARGARET BRENNAN: We’re going to take a break, Dr. Gottlieb, and talk more with you on the other side of this. These are complicated issues I want to dig into with you. So we hope all of you will stay with us.
(ANNOUNCEMENTS)
MARGARET BRENNAN: Welcome back to Face the Nation. We return to our conversation with former FDA commissioner Dr. Scott Gottlieb. Dr. Gottlieb, just to pick back up, we were talking about the meeting that took place this past week with the newly reconstituted Advisory Committee on Immunization. Republican Senator Bill Cassidy, you know him, he’s a doctor. He has oversight and chairs the Health Committee. He called for the meeting to be canceled because he said there’s no CDC director in place. And when it comes to these appointees, he said many of them ‘do not have significant experience studying microbiology, epidemiology or immunology’ and they may have ‘preconceived bias’ against mRNA vaccines. It’s- I’m not a doctor, but it seems to me that experience in immunology would be important if you’re advising on immunizations. His counsel was ignored here. Is there any check on Secretary Kennedy, at this point? Is there a need to get a CDC director in place quickly?
DR. GOTTLIEB: Yeah, well, the CDC director had a confirmation hearing this week, and hopefully she’ll be in place soon. I think she’s quite strong and a good pick for that job. The board, this ACIP board, isn’t fully constituted. There’s only seven members on the board. At its peak membership, it has about 15. And you’re right, a lot of the people who have been appointed don’t have deep experience, or any experience, quite frankly, in vaccine science. They are people who have been ideologically aligned with Secretary Kennedy in the past and worked with him, many of them, not all of them. And I think that that isn’t something that even the secretary would probably dispute at this time, and it did lead to some awkward moments at that meeting. For example, you know, one member had to have explained to him the difference between an antibody prophylaxis and a vaccine. So there were evidence in that discussion where the CDC directors had to provide some, quite frankly, remedial assistance to help brief these members on the basis of vaccine science. So it did show, hopefully, once they fully constitute that board, you’re going to get more balance on it. I think some people are skeptical. I remain hopeful that there will be some good members that get seated eventually.
MARGARET BRENNAN: You know, one of the things about the American health system is that question of continued innovation. Earlier this month, the FDA approved a twice yearly injection of an HIV prevention drug called lenacapavir. How significant is an innovation like that, and given the environment you’re talking about, will these new advisors get in the way of being able to get those kind of things to market?
DR. GOTTLIEB: Yeah, this shouldn’t come before ACIP. So this is a therapeutic. It’s a long acting antiviral that provides six months of protection against HIV and was extremely effective at preventing HIV infection in a population that was high risk of contracting HIV. So it’s a change in the formulation of an antiviral that allows it to be administered just twice a year and provide sustained exposure to the benefits of that antiviral. We’re seeing a lot of innovation like this. There was also news this week from a small biotech company that I don’t have any involvement with, that they had developed a pill that could provide sustained protection against flu. So it’s an antiviral, but it is formulated in a way where it- it could be administered once ahead of flu season, to provide protection across the entire season, and also look to be very effective. So we’re seeing a lot of innovations like this. What I’m worried about is innovation in vaccine science. I work on the venture capital side, where we make investments in- in new companies, and there has been a pullback of biotech startups that have been looking to develop new vaccines, for example, vaccines for Epstein-Barr Virus, which we know is linked to certain B-cell lymphomas, and maybe is linked to multiple sclerosis. That- that’s a new area of science, the potential to vaccinate children against that, much like we vaccinate kids against HPV right now and prevent cervical cancer and other types of cancers. Maybe in the future, we may be vaccinating for EBV, but there’s been a lot of pullback to that kind of investment. So I think we’re going to see less innovation in vaccine science as a result of the environment we’re in.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Quickly, Secretary Kennedy was asked this week about the declarations in some states to start removing fluoride from water. Oklahoma made some moves that direction. He said you’re going to see ‘probably slightly more cavities,’ but ‘there’s a direct inverse correlation between the amount of fluoride in your water and your loss of IQ.’ What should parents be thinking about when they hear things like that?
DR. GOTTLIEB: Well, look, this has been a long standing issue, another issue that Secretary Kennedy has championed over his career, this perceived- perception that there’s a link between fluoride and water and some neurotoxic effects of that. That’s been studied thoroughly. It’s been, I think, fully debunked. There’s very small amounts of fluoride in water, and at the levels that it’s put into the water supply, it’s been demonstrated to be safe. CDC’s- has data showing that there’s a 25% reduction in dental caries as a result of fluoride that’s added routinely to the water supply. It’s not just a question of increased dental cavities, but also oral health more generally, which we know is correlated to systemic health.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Dr. Gottlieb, good to get your insight today. We’ll be right back.
