This is the transcript of an interview with Dr. Scott Gottlieb, the former FDA commissioner, which aired on “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan” on March 23, 2025.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Now, let’s discuss the state of America’s healthcare system with former FDA commissioner Dr. Scott Gottlieb, who is also a board member at Pfizer. Welcome back to Face the Nation.
DR. SCOTT GOTTLIEB: Thank you for having me.
MARGARET BRENNAN: I understand that measles has been reported in 18 states, primarily in Texas and New Mexico, with a rising number of infections, particularly among children. What do parents need to be aware of, and are adults sufficiently protected?
DR. GOTTLIEB: Adults who have received the vaccine should indeed be protected. This vaccine offers long-lasting immunity, and there is no recommendation for individuals who have completed their childhood vaccination schedule with two doses to receive an additional booster. However, those with concerns can check their titers. The CDC recommends that health care workers who are caring for measles patients may consider an additional booster later in life. The main concern lies with children. Vaccination typically occurs at one year and again at around age four when they’re entering school. There exists a vulnerable window where children may lack sufficient immunity. Infants receive some immunity from their mothers until about six months, but there’s a gap between six and twelve months when they are largely unprotected. While vaccination at six months isn’t standard practice due to immature immune systems, there are new guidelines suggesting that children between six and twelve months could receive an initial dose of the vaccine, in addition to the required second dose at age one and a third dose at age four.
MARGARET BRENNAN: I noticed that former CDC director Rochelle Walensky discussed this recently. The current Secretary of HHS, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., mentioned his desire to ensure anyone wanting the MMR vaccine can access it. He also identifies as a ‘freedom of choice person.’ What is your take on his hinted alternative treatments?
SECRETARY ROBERT F. KENNEDY, JR.: They’re reporting very positive results with Budesonide, a steroid that’s been around for 30 years, as well as Clarithromycin and cod liver oil, which contains high levels of vitamin A and D, leading to what they describe as near miraculous recovery.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Are these legitimate alternative options?
DR. GOTTLIEB: No, they are not acceptable alternatives to vaccination, and I would strongly prefer he encourages parents to vaccinate their children, especially in areas where the virus is spreading. The treatments he mentions, like steroids and antibiotics, would typically be used when a child suffers from pneumonia, is hospitalized, or is facing respiratory issues. In such cases, antibiotics might be given to prevent secondary infections, while steroids can alleviate lung inflammation. Ideally, we want to prevent children from reaching that critical state through vaccination. Regarding vitamin A, there is minimal evidence supporting its efficacy in this context — it’s generally applied in cases of malnourished children where it could offer some benefit. Discussing these alternative treatments can create a misleading impression that there are effective options available for measles when, in reality, there are not. The only effective way to prevent measles and its complications is vaccination. It’s similar to how some might decide against the flu vaccine because they know treatments exist. Personally, I would recommend everyone get vaccinated against the flu, but some do make that choice. However, with measles, there is no option; nothing can effectively mitigate the effects once contracted, so vaccination is the only preventive measure.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Indeed, the CDC does classify vitamin A as supportive care, with vaccination being the primary defense. Thank you for clarifying that. Currently, there’s no director at the CDC. As you know, the administration withdrew their nominee after failing to secure enough votes. Reports indicate that Florida Surgeon General and former Texas Congressman Michael Burgess are being considered for the role. How crucial is it to have someone confirmed and in position urgently?
DR. GOTTLIEB: It’s essential, especially given the ongoing measles outbreak in West Texas. We might see more measles cases this year than we have in 25 years. Effective leadership at the CDC is vital to manage this response. Mike Burgess has prior experience running the Health Subcommittee on Energy and Commerce, where he closely collaborated with the FDA. He was highly effective, taking significant steps to enhance our efforts to intercept opioids in mail facilities. He even visited the mail facility at JFK Airport to understand operations better before advocating for more funding to increase inspector presence. He has considerable experience relevant to the CDC’s mission.
MARGARET BRENNAN: The confirmed nominee will face a vote after the president makes a selection. Moving on, I’d like to discuss certain budget cuts being enforced by the president in what he refers to as belt-tightening measures. For instance, institutions like Johns Hopkins that conduct medical research and receive USAID grants are facing impacts. Columbia and UPenn have also pledged cuts to universities that depend on federal funding for health research. Are you aware of how many health programs might be impacted and their overall significance?
DR. GOTTLIEB: At this point, the extent of the impacts isn’t entirely clear, as the situation is still evolving. These effects are manifesting across various sectors. There are constraints on progressing with new grants, for example, issues with posting information in the Federal Register, and new grant-making policies are being instituted that restrict research activities in certain countries. Some grants are being canceled, particularly those involving cooperative research with China, based on policy decisions about certain DEI components. Additionally, we see broad institutional cuts, which have affected Johns Hopkins regarding USAID funding, as well as the $400 million cut at Columbia affecting a significant amount of research. Several factors are contributing to these challenges. It’s crucial that we approach research programs involving patients with caution. While website-related errors can easily be rectified, cutting grants tied to programs important for patient care requires careful consideration to avoid jeopardizing such essential resources. I believe DOGE is aware of this situation and is striving to address these implications.
MARGARET BRENNAN: That is indeed an essential point about being strategic in medical care. Dr. Gottlieb, we appreciate your insights. We’ll be back shortly.
