Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

GOP Resists Calls to Remove Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene From Key Committee; Johnson & Johnson Announces Its Coronavirus Vaccine is 66 Percent Effective in Preventing Moderate Disease and 85 Percent Effective in Preventing Severe Disease; Johnson & Johnson Coronavirus Vaccine Possibly Less Effective against South African Variant. Aired 8-8:30a ET

Aired January 29, 2021 - 08:00   ET

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

[08:00:00]

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: Breaking news, important breaking news for you. NEW DAY continues right now.

ANNOUNCER: This is CNN breaking news.

BERMAN: We do have major breaking news in a moment that so many have been waiting for in the battle so many have been waiting for in the battle against coronavirus. Johnson & Johnson just released data in its global phase three trial of its coronavirus vaccine. Now this is an important vaccine because it's a single dose, not two doses like the ones on the market now. It's also easier to store. And now, for the first time, we know how effective it is. The company now says the vaccine is 66 percent effective in preventing moderate disease.

ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: The new report shows it's even more effective in preventing severe disease, but it does not offer as much protection against those new highly contagious variants of the virus. So let's get to CNN's senior medical correspondent Elizabeth Cohen. She joins us now with the breaking details. What do you have, Elizabeth?

ELIZABETH COHEN, CNN SENIOR MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Alisyn, so the bottom line here is that we may soon have a third vaccine in the United States. We already have Pfizer, we already have Moderna, and now with these results, it is almost certain that Johnson & Johnson will be applying for emergency use authorization from the FDA. The bottom line, this vaccine does not seem to be as effective as Pfizer or Moderna, but it still does have some impressive results and is still useful.

Let's go over these specific numbers. What the Johnson & Johnson trial data shows is that when you are looking at moderate to severe cases of COVID-19, it was 66 percent effective at preventing those, whereas Moderna and Pfizer, it was 95 percent. Those two were 95 percent. That is a significant difference.

If you look at preventing severe cases of COVID-19, which is the more important one, right? We don't want people in the hospital. We don't want people in the ICU. We don't want them dying. Johnson & Johnson was 85 percent effective at preventing severe cases. Moderna and Pfizer were 100 percent or nearly 100 percent.

So when I have asked experts, what would you get? Which one would you get? And they said, if I had the choice, I'd get Moderna or Pfizer. But if I didn't have a choice, which you might not have because of the scarcity now, if I didn't have a choice and Johnson & Johnson were available, I would for sure get that one instead, and maybe later get Pfizer or Moderna when there's more of a supply. John?

BERMAN: So there is a gap there in the relative effectiveness between the Johnson & Johnson vaccine and the ones we've seen from Moderna and Pfizer. We will discuss that in just a moment. Another key piece of the science that everyone is looking at so closely this morning, given the spread of the different variants from around the world, is how effective the Johnson & Johnson vaccine is against the variant from South Africa, because there's data, a lot of data in this case, about that. What have we learned?

COHEN: That's right. So lab results have shown that this vaccine does not work as well against this South African variant, and now we have results in real people from Johnson & Johnson and from another vaccine maker, Novavax, that supports that. So let's take a look at those numbers. Johnson & Johnson, they found their vaccine was 60 percent effective overall when they looked at other countries, but only 57 percent effective in South Africa where that variant is becoming so dominant. For Novavax, their vaccine was 89 percent effective overall, but only 60 percent effective in South Africa. So this really confirms what experts have been saying for quite some time now, which is that these vaccines will be effective against the variant from South Africa, but they will not be as effective against that variant as they have been against other variants. John, Alisyn?

BERMAN: Elizabeth Cohen, we really appreciate your reporting on this. Thank you very much.

As we have been saying, this is some information people have been waiting for, for a long time. Joining us now is Dr. Paul Offit. He is the director of the Vaccine Education Center of the Children's Hospital in Philadelphia, and he's a member of the FDA's Vaccine Advisory Committee, which means you're going to be looking at this data very carefully to figure out or to advise whether or not to grant emergency use approval here in the United States. Dr. Offit, as you look at this data for the first time, and the gap, frankly, between the effectiveness of the Pfizer vaccine and what we've seen from Moderna, from the Johnson & Johnson vaccine and what we've seen from Moderna and Pfizer, what jumps out at you? What's the most important thing here?

DR. PAUL OFFIT, DIRECTOR, VACCINE EDUCATION CENTER, CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PHILADELPHIA: First of all, these aren't data. These are press releases from the companies. What we will see when we review this, both Johnson & Johnson, Novavax, and submissions for an EUA is the data. So we'll have 100 pages to look at from them and 100 pages to look at from the FDA, so I think we'll have more information. What I guess comes out to me is that if you look at, for example, the

Johnson & Johnson vaccine, if you break it down by country, the vaccine was 72 percent effective at preventing moderate to severe disease in the U.S. and about 85 percent effective as preventing severe disease, which means, as Elizabeth Cohen said, preventing hospitalization, preventing ICU admissions, preventing death, which is what you want. That's really what you want. You want to stay out of the hospital and stay out of the morgue. If you have mild infection, it's somewhat burdensome to the person but not terribly burdensome to the hospital. So that's good.

[08:05:09]

And I think if we have an abundance of MRNA vaccines where everybody could get those vaccines now, this probably wouldn't be a discussion, but we don't. The CDC just announced two days ago that 3.5 billion people have received two doses of an MRNA-containing vaccine. That's one percent of the population. We need to get to at least 70 percent of the population. And that's going to take a while.

The other thing is Johnson & Johnson is also concurrently doing a two- dose trial. So we should have the results of that also hopefully in the near future. And worse comes to worse it may be that you get one dose of J&J vaccine now and then get a second dose later, which would provide even greater protection. We don't know that yet because we haven't really seen all the data.

CAMEROTA: Dr. Offit, can you help us understand why it's not as effective, why this technology that J&J is using isn't as effective as the Moderna and Pfizer?

OFFIT: Not sure. There's certainly very different technologies. The messenger RNA, the way that works is it's a small, potentially naked piece of messenger RNA that gets taken up into your cells, and then you make the protein, the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, then you make antibodies to the protein, which the Johnson & Johnson technology is essentially the same, except instead of taking this lipid nanoparticle in which the MRNA is encased, it's a virus. It's a virus that can't reproduce itself that serves as the Trojan horse to essentially bring the same gene into the cell. So they are different technologies. They apparently are different in their capacity to induce vigorous immune responses.

But again, the J&J data I think overall are encouraging in that it can prevent you from being hospitalized and from dying. And in a time where this virus is running wild in this country, and we don't have enough MRNA vaccine, I think it's a good sign, assuming that it gets a UAE approval, and we'll see.

BERMAN: I had a chance to talk to Dr. Fauci a few days ago. And I asked him directly, I said what's the bar? What's the number that you want to see for Johnson & Johnson. And I want to play this response because it's pretty revealing.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) DR. ANTHONY FAUCI, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ALLERGY AND INFECTIOUS DISEASES: Can't go much better than 94 percent, 95 percent, which is where Moderna and Pfizer are. But I would like to see the J&J product come around near there, just maybe a few off. If you see it 20 less than that, then you've got to be a little careful of that. There's going to be some eyebrows raised about which one you're going to want to use.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: All right, the first part of that, it's close on severe. It is 20 points down or more on moderate and severe. So you can see the dilemma this poses now, because now people are presented with this question, Dr. Offit, and I'm hoping you have a clear answer. If you have a choice, if you have a choice between taking the Johnson & Johnson vaccine, based on what we know, assuming that the data bears out what's in the press release, if you have a choice between Johnson & Johnson or Moderna and Pfizer, what should you do?

OFFIT: Again, if the MRNA vaccines were abundant and we didn't have the manufacturing issues we had, you would choose the MRNA vaccine. But that's not the current reality. The current reality is that we don't have enough MRNA vaccine. We have another vaccine in Johnson & Johnson. Again, we need to look at the data at the FDA level, but we have another vaccine which is highly effective at keeping you out of the hospital. That is an advantage in a situation where we don't have enough vaccines. So I think people need to consider that.

Were it me, were I not able to get the MRNA vaccine and I only had the choice of Johnson & Johnson, I would take it assuming that the data look good as we look at the FDA, I would take it in a second, knowing that there probably is a second dose trial out there which is likely to show it's even more effective. And knowing that worst case scenario, frankly, and this probably doesn't preclude you from get an MRNA vaccine down the line. Those two technologies shouldn't compete with each other. So again, we'll have to generate those data.

CAMEROTA: And we should mention again that you are on the FDA Vaccine Advisory Committee. And so does this information that you are hearing this morning about J&J, does that change what you are thinking on there, what you would advise?

OFFIT: It makes me hungry to see all the data. We will eventually see the 100 pages of data. I would like to see how sort of things break down. For example, we know that it was 57 percent effective in South Africa as compared to 72 percent effective at preventing moderate to severe disease. How did that break down for severe disease in South Africa? How good was this at preventing severe disease caused by a strain, the South African strain, that no doubt will start to become more and more prevalent in this country.

But again, this is stage one. Stage two, if the South African strain becomes more prevalent or the Brazilian strain, which is similar to the South African strain becomes more prevalent, we can still construct vaccines to prevent that, and so that may be the second generation product. And that's no doubt going on right now. BERMAN: Again, you just brought up the variant that we are seeing in

South Africa. The data is up on the screen there, 57 percent effective. We don't have much more detail there. Novavax just yesterday also came out saying 60 percent effective against the variant in South Africa. So we now have some data that the variant there, it is outrunning the vaccine more so compared to the -- than we're seeing in the original variant.

[08:10:08]

You just wrote a piece saying you're not as concerned about the variants maybe as some other people are, but does this cause you to reassess a little bit?

OFFIT: No. There's concern that obviously there's laboratory evidence that, if you are inoculated, for example, with the messenger RNA vaccines, you develop neutralizing antibodies. Do those neutralizing antibodies neutralize the virus in the laboratory? And the answer was less so. The question that John Moore and I raised in that piece in the "Journal of the America Medical Association" is how does that play out in the real world, because we don't really have an immunological correlate for prediction. Now we know how it plays out in the real world. Those neutralization in the laboratory did correlate with less protection in the real world.

But again, if you look at the Novavax data, you know that it's 60 percent effective in South Africa against mild, moderate to severe disease, sort of all disease. So how did it fare against moderate to severe or severe disease, because it also might be, and likely to be, frankly, much higher there. And those are data we need to see. And that's the difficulty with trying to make predictions based on press releases. You'd really like to see all the data so you can answer all your questions.

CAMEROTA: Dr. Offit, though, can you just help us understand how concerned we're supposed to be, how alarmed about the South African strain? Because the two cases that have popped up in the U.S., these are people without known travel histories. So that means there's community spread. And if it's one of these galloping varieties, varieties, and you're saying the vaccines aren't keeping up, it sounds frightening.

OFFIT: Again, first of all, it's not like there's no protection. You saw that there was 57 percent against moderate to severe disease in South Africa where the South African strain predominates. And you'd, again, like to what it is against severe disease. So it's not like there's no protection. And I think there is also likely we're going to have a second generation of vaccine out there.

I think what we should do right now is deal with the strain that is prevalent in this country, the so called D614G strain, which is the first variant, actually, that came out of Wuhan. Deal with that, get on top of that, and then we will be making vaccines against specifically the South African strain or these other strains as if they come up in our continued attempt to suppress the spread and dangerousness of this virus. So I think there's a lot of reason for hope here. That's how I see it.

BERMAN: Dr. Paul Offit, man, are we lucky to have you this morning for this breaking news. Thank you for helping us work through this, because it is a moment people have been waiting for.

Again, just to reiterate, so people know, Johnson & Johnson is saying that their vaccine 85 percent effective against severe cases of COVID, less so, 66 percent, about moderate and severe. Overall, that's much less -- not much less -- it is notably less than we saw from Moderna and Pfizer, which is something that we will be discussing over the coming hours.

In the meantime, new developments in terms of what the Republican Party plans to do going forward, really, what they want to represent going forward as the country faces this pandemic, as the country faces economic crisis. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy there showing you exactly where he wants the party to go. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:16:53]

CAMEROTA: What will Republicans do about the QAnon conspiracy theorist in their midst?

Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, she proudly harassed and heckled a teenager who survived the Parkland school shooting and posted a video of herself doing it. Then Republican leadership put her on the education committee.

CNN's KFILE also found recent posts of her endorsing positions, including the execution of top Democratic lawmakers.

Joining us now, CNN White House correspondent John Harwood. Also with us, Laura Barron-Lopez, she's a White House correspondent for "Politico".

Laura, Marjorie Taylor Greene is not going away, and these were not secrets. Her positions were not secret. There was a mound we're told of opposition research that her opponent had. People in Georgia knew about her. And people in Congress knew about her.

Liz Cheney, Steve Scalise went to Kevin McCarthy to say, this is a problem if she comes to congress. She is a poisonous person, and she made it. She was elected. Kevin McCarthy, as far as we know, has not yet talked to her.

What now?

LAURA BARRON-LOPEZ, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Yeah, you're right, Alisyn. "Politico" had unearthed a lot of racist, Islamophobic comments Marjorie Taylor Greene made and Kevin McCarthy at the time had acted as though Republicans were going to help her challenger in that race and help never game. So right now, again, Republicans are dealing with this same issue because Marjorie Taylor Greene has made an enormous amount of comments that you outlined about threatening the top Democrats or supporting threats to the top Democrat, Nancy Pelosi.

And so right now, the two options -- some of the options are expulsion, which is doesn't look at all like Republicans are going to support such an option. They could also strip her of her committee post but that would be something it appears a lot of Republicans aren't going to support but Democrats are going to probably push for because they don't really want to see her on those committee assignments, especially education committee.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: So, I want to put up the picture, the excited press release we got from the former president of the United States and the endorsement given by the House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, the picture from Mar-a-Lago. I think we have access to that to look at the former president there and Kevin McCarthy.

McCarthy, the House Republican leader said President Trump's popularity has never been stronger than it is today and his endorsement means more than perhaps any endorsement at any time.

John Harwood, it means more to him than anything he's ever gotten. It's like the best promise present. It's like a sled under the tree for McCarthy, this pat on the head from the former president. I think the most important thing now is when you look at his picture. What does that tell you about where the Republican Party is today and going to be tomorrow and what it means for the country.

JOHN HARWOOD, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: John, the issue is that the Republican Party has walled itself off against the realities of 21st century America, demographically, economically, culturally.

[08:20:11]

And they have, while doing so, been forced to appeal to a smaller and smaller group of Americans, the people who are angriest about the way the country has changed, most bitter. They need that energy, that anger.

That causes them to rely on extreme people, crazy people like Marjorie Taylor Greene. They can't afford to alienate those people. They will do only what they are forced by events to do to distance themselves. When all of that anger exploded on January 6th, whipped up by President Trump, then they backed off for a moment. Lindsey Graham said, I'm out. But the further distanced you get away from those extreme events, which everyone can see, the more they realize that is the fuel for our party. We can't do without it.

And that's why they're rejecting the conviction in the Senate for President Trump. That's why Kevin McCarthy is going down to kiss the ring after, in the intensity of the moment of the impeachment he gave that speech on the floor and said President Trump bears responsibility. They realize, they believe that if they are going to get back to power at this moment, they can't afford to do it.

There was a moment we all remember after the 2012 election, Mitt Romney lost, where the Republican leadership said we've got to broaden the appeal of our party. And what happened was they decided they were going to do that. Then Donald Trump came along and bottled that emotion, that energy. He pushed that plan to the side and they just doubled down on the extremism, and that's where we are.

CAMEROTA: Laura, it strikes me that Republicans, given Donald Trump's loss in the election, might actually be able to have their cake and eat it, too, because they get an adult in the White House who is going to try to solve the economic crisis and the coronavirus crisis that we're in. And they get to have their spiritual leader stay in Mar-a- Lago, not have to worry about governing or anything like that, but, you know, make appearances for the candidates coming up in 2022 and gin up the crowd.

BARRON-LOPEZ: Yeah, and the minority, whichever party is in the minority, but they tend to be able to just become obstructionists if they'd want to. And Republicans, as we saw during the Obama years loved to do that. And it appears as though they're headed that route again with Biden in the White House.

As John said, there's no moment of reflection right now among the Republican Party. The further we get away from January 6, the more that becomes obvious. That rather than deciding or figuring out if they could create a constituency or confronting their constituents and saying that they did lie about saying that the election was fraudulent and that there was mass fraud everywhere and that Trump won the election, which people like Kevin McCarthy did do. McCarthy said repeatedly that Trump won the election, incorrectly.

And rather than saying to their voters, that wasn't accurate and taking a turn, we saw over the last 24 hours whether it was McCarthy's trip to see Trump in Mar-a-Lago or Congressman Matt Gaetz's trip to Wyoming to rail against Liz Cheney, one of his own party members that the Republicans are sticking by Trump and that they're not deciding to take any turn to gather up new constituents or talk honestly with their own.

BERMAN: So, John, if you are someone at home who doesn't care as much about party civil wars as others, and I think they are fascinating. There's a million things to mine there. But if your concern is really only when can I get vaccinated and will I get a relief check, what does this infighting mean for you? How will it affect whether or not you get that vaccine or that relief check?

HARWOOD: Well, the principal way it's affecting when you get that relief check or vaccine is in the momentum for Joe Biden's program in Congress. You know, the Republican Party has now constituted, the people providing major financing of the Republican Party want government as small as possible to do as little as possible. That's partly why President Trump's response to the coronavirus was so incompetent last year. He didn't want to assert federal power.

And most what he's offered in a material way to his constituents is lies about, oh, I'm going to give you health care. I'm going to save coal, build a wall and Mexico is going to pay for it. He offered an emotional truth. You're angry, I'm angry. We're angry at those people but not material advance for the lives of his own constituents.

[08:25:01]

Joe Biden is now saying, I can have a unity package. I can push forward a consensus package even if Republican members of Congress don't vote for it. Why? Because if you look at polling, people -- Republican rank-and-file members want aid. They want vaccinations.

And that's a propulsion for Joe Biden to move forward, whether or not Republicans support his program or not. And it's holding Democrats together behind that program.

CAMEROTA: John, Laura, thank you both very much.

So House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says the enemy is coming from within the House of Representatives from colleagues who are making threats against each other.

Up next, we'll speak with a Democrat about how to protect lawmakers.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BERMAN: Developing this morning, CNN just learned the acting house sergeant at arms sent a memo to lawmakers advising them to, quote, remain vigilant of their surroundings and immediately report anything unusual or suspicious. The sergeant at arms and U.S. capitol police are also now partnering with the TSA to provide extra security at some airports where members are traveling.

Joining me now is Democratic Congressman Ro Khanna. He serves on the House Oversight Committee and he's a Progressive Caucus deputy whip.

Congressman Khanna, thanks so much for being with us.

What do you make of this letter, these new actions? How necessary are they, do you believe?

REP. RO KHANNA (D-CA): I think they are necessary.

[08:30:00]