Ex-FDA chief says that hantavirus is "not going to spread like a pandemic virus like COVID did"

[0:00] Passengers from the Hantavirus-stricken cruise ship arrived this morning in Spain's Canary [0:05] Islands, where they were ferried onto land by small launch boats, then checked for symptoms [0:11] before being flown on evacuation flights. Close to 150 people on board the ship, and among them, [0:19] 17 of them Americans, they're going to be flown to a quarantine unit in Nebraska. [0:25] No one so far is showing symptoms. For more now, we turn to former FDA commissioner, [0:30] Dr. Scott Gottlieb. He also serves on the boards of Pfizer and UnitedHealthcare. Welcome back, [0:35] doctor. Thank you. So there have been three deaths linked to the outbreak. Here in the U.S., [0:42] there are six states monitoring potential exposure, all either linked to the ship itself or flights of [0:48] people who have been on the ship, and then those 17 Americans. Do you agree with the CDC and the [0:55] World Health Organization that the risk to public health is low? Yeah, I do agree with that. We have [1:03] to concede that there's still things we don't know about this virus. We haven't had to grapple with [1:07] many outbreaks in the past. There's been two large outbreaks in Argentina. But based on that experience, [1:11] what we know is that typically for transmission, you have to have close contact. We also know that [1:16] people typically aren't contagious unless they are showing signs of the infection itself in what we [1:21] call the prodromal phase, where they start to have an onset of symptoms. And the progression from that [1:25] onset of symptoms to severe disease, and in these cases death, is typically just days. This is a very [1:33] aggressive virus. And so based on what we know, the transmission risk is low. Now, that said, [1:37] when you look back at the past experience, there are these outlier cases where there appears to have [1:42] been transmission among people who weren't perceived to be in close contact. And so there are these [1:47] cases that we need to look at closely from the past experience. And just be wary that perhaps there's [1:52] things we don't know fully about this virus. I will say that we are nearing the end of the [1:56] transmission window for the people who are being repatriated here in the U.S. And so it looks to me [2:02] like the last death on that cruise ship was May 2nd. That patient had an onset of symptoms on April 28th. [2:08] If you believe that the incubation period is about two to six weeks, they'll be at the peak of that [2:14] incubation cycle some point this week. So I think we're about two weeks away from knowing whether or not [2:19] there'll be additional cases that come from that initial outbreak on the cruise ship. [2:23] So a key moment here. I mean, the WHO said it's very clear this is not COVID all over again. But as [2:31] you know, it has ignited some of the very same skeptics who during the pandemic really questioned [2:37] our government institutions and the response. The WHO has said there is no research that ivermectin [2:45] is an effective treatment for the virus. But I'm wondering what you make of these calls for [2:50] alternative treatments and resistance of government health advice. [2:59] Look, I think we're going to be relitigating the consequences of COVID for a long time. [3:03] And I think a lot of people who are in public health positions right now believe that their [3:07] tenure and their appointment to these positions is a referendum on COVID in some respects. [3:11] And so that echoes through their public comments. This is not COVID. It's not going to spread like [3:15] a pandemic virus like COVID did, like a coronavirus did. It spreads far less efficiently. There aren't [3:21] any treatments, successful treatments for this virus. Ivermectin certainly isn't an effective [3:25] treatment. Just by virtue of its mechanism, it doesn't work against this virus. It prevents viral [3:30] replication in the nucleus, not the cytoplasm where this virus replicates. It's just not going to work. [3:35] So I would encourage people not to use that. I know that there's been some things on social media [3:39] suggesting that people should stockpile Ivermectin. We don't have an effective [3:43] treatment for Hantavirus. And that's what makes this very menacing. [3:46] Well, indeed. And we're going to continue to track that. You served in the first Trump [3:52] administration as his FDA commissioner in the first term. The person in that job now has been [3:58] a guest on this program, Dr. Marty McCary. He was a vocal critic of COVID response during Trump and [4:06] Biden. There's a lot of reporting right now that his current position, that he's at risk of losing [4:12] his job. Given how important the FDA is, they regulate, I saw, one-fifth of consumer spending in [4:19] this country. How damaging would it be to lose its leader? And is there someone who could step in [4:25] quickly? No one obvious to me. And there's been some reporting about different candidates that could [4:32] work on an interim basis there. Marty's a friend. You know, I think that that's a very difficult job. [4:37] It, as you said, regulates about 20 percent of the U.S. economy, products that are very important [4:41] to people's lives, medical products, food, food safety. And so there's a lot of debate and [4:47] consternation about decisions that get made at FDA. And so it's been a controversial position for [4:52] whoever's held that job, including me. You know, I got criticized for decisions that I made in that [4:56] position as well. I think the continued upheaval at FDA has been detrimental to the agency, not just the [5:02] speculation about Marty's fate, but also the departures that we've seen from the agency. The agency's [5:07] lost thousands of medical reviewers, some voluntary through the doge cuts or some forced through the [5:14] doge cuts. Involuntary means some voluntary. There's been a lot of voluntary departures from [5:18] the agency. If you look at the oncology division, they had a starting strength of about 100 medical [5:22] reviewers at the beginning of this administration. They're down to about 50. The hematological group [5:27] that reviews drugs for leukemia and lymphoma had 21 medical reviewers, and it's down to six. [5:33] They lost an entire breast cancer review team. So there's been a lot of departures from the agency. [5:37] You've seen political appointees take over what are typically career leadership positions, [5:42] running the medical product centers, the drug center and the biologic center. [5:45] So I think cumulatively, that's taken a toll on the agency. And this continued speculation that we saw [5:50] on Friday, I think, is just going to be another step downward. [5:52] JUDY WOODRUFF, those are stunning numbers to hear you rattle off there. [5:56] I want to ask you about some of current leadership there. Secretary Kennedy was speaking about the [6:05] use of antidepressants in this country. Almost 17 percent of Americans use them. He says they're [6:11] overprescribed. And he compared his experience of heroin withdrawal to a family member's experience [6:17] getting off antidepressants known as SSRIs. Take a listen. [6:21] I watched a family member get off of them after a couple of years on them. And she was suicidal [6:30] literally every day. She woke up every morning and said, I don't want to live. And she said, [6:36] the only reason I'm staying alive is for you guys, for the family. [6:41] JUDY WOODRUFF, he later said that he was not telling people to stop if they're taking that [6:47] medication. But what do you make of his description of antidepressants as risky? [6:52] DR. Look, these are prescribed in a primary care setting. And like any drug that's prescribed in [6:58] that setting, I'm sure there's some marginal prescribing, isolated marginal prescribing. [7:03] But for most Americans to take these drugs, they're very important and, in some cases, [7:07] lifesaving. And I would encourage everyone who is thinking about potentially stopping these [7:11] medications based on the secretary's comments to consult their doctor. There is a period of time [7:16] that patients need to be weaned off these drugs. They can be successfully weaned off these drugs [7:19] if they want to be. And there's alternatives that could be effective for their mental health. [7:23] But nobody should just stop these drugs outright without being under the consultation of a medical [7:28] provider. I worry that the secretary's comments is going to discourage legitimate use of these [7:32] drugs in the same way that his comments around Tylenol discourage use of Tylenol in the setting of [7:37] pregnancy, where it could be very important for certain pregnant women who need pain relief and [7:41] fever relief in that setting. We saw a lot of women move away from those drugs, [7:45] use of those drugs, even appropriate use of those drugs. Based on the secretary's comments about [7:49] that, I worry about the same thing here. It's clear that the secretary wants to put downward [7:53] pressure on the prescribing. He tried to implement regulatory steps to do that as well. And so it is [7:59] concerning. Okay. Dr. Gottlieb, we're going to have to leave it there. I want to have you back to [8:05] talk about vaping one of these days, but I'm going to have to leave it there due to time constraints. [8:10] Thank you so much for your analysis.