tv Smerconish CNN January 13, 2018 6:00am-7:00am PST
we're in philadelphia. we welcome viewers in the united states and around the world. hement to s meant to say it. that's my take on the president's inflamatory comments on immigrants and he was again speaking to his base. what's he saying now? well, just two words in a tweet, america first. plus, it's the number one best seller and coming under attack but what are people missing about the trump white house tell all "fire and fury"? michael wolff is here. and the president's physical health said to be excellent at his friday checkup at a time that many have been openly attacking his mental health which i think is wrong. the former president of the
american psychiatric association joins me live to discuss. plus, smart phones provide us all with connectivity. but are they making our kids lonelier? apple is being asked to address the problem. i'll talk to the pioneer researcher in this issue. and everybody agrees we're in the midst of an opioid crisis. but is the federal government doing all it should do to solve the problem? what could be done? i'll ask a former head of the fda. but first, he said it. on that i have no doubt. i think he knew exactly what he was doing. the profanity that the oxford dictionary defines as an extremely dirty, shabby, or otherwise unpleasant place, ben zimmer who writes a language column in the "wall street journal" told "the washington post" it's a word commonly spoken among friends but rarely written down or documented. we have all said it, me includeded, but he should not have. and certainly not in this context. because regardless of whether
the word enters the vocabulary of others, it's beneath the dignity of the office of the president. and when a president uses such a word he triggers a slur being whispered down the lane. marty baron, the editor of "the washington post" which was first to break this story told the washingtonian when the president says it, we'll use it verbatim. that's our policy. we discussed it quickly but there was no debate. and nor is there any defense in the fact that other leaders have used salty language where in this case waits not a one off. coupled with kplents abocomment birtherism, mexican rapists and the muslim ban and the december report of the president having said that haitian immigrants have aids and that nigerians who visit the united states never go back to their huts, it paints a disturbing picture. his reference to norway, i think, was a tell. yes, he just seen the prime minister and she was no doubt top of brain. but i've been there.
many are tall. blonde, blue eyed. con denli condemning the president's words, that's the easy part. the harder question to answer is why he's probably right in thinking his comment will invigorate his base. lots of factors, bigotry among them, for sure. there's a widespread perception that european immigrants do better here than haitian or african immigrants. the statistics don't match those perceptions. while the stats for haitians on income and education fall below the u.s. average, africans and europeans are on par with the overall u.s., median income is above the u.s. population as is education. and here's the stat that really jumps out, more haitians and africans are in the workforce than europeans by a big margin. some leaving the third world are escaping sad, horrific conditions. shame he didn't say it that way wlachlt set us apart is our history of welcoming them. you know the inscription. give me your tired, poor,
huddled masses yearning to breathe free. some will welcome the remarks because they feel dispossessed and they want to find people to blame for their lot. others wish for plain speakers even if we don't always agree with what they say. mistaken candor is preferred to insincere patronizing. and there is the age-old impulse to be led by a fire brand. william jennings brian, huey long, george wallace. finally, some will be not affected by this speech will be inoculated against being outraged because there are so many others. all of which explains why the president's approval rating is capped in the high 30s and probably not at risk of further decline. now it's flying out of book stores and into the national consciousness. in the first days michael wolff's "fire and fury inside the president's white house" is a juggernaut of harry potter proportion. already in the 11th printing.
it is number one on "new york times" and amazon best seller list. it has orders for 1.4 million copies. t effects are far and wide. michael wolff joins me now. michael, i'm not sure what is left to ask. you have been absolutely everywhere. is there anything in the book that you thought would get more attention than it has thus far? >> one of my favorite lines is when trump calls hr mcmaster a beer salesman. he says he looks like a beer salesman. why do i have to talk to him? and i always like that line because i have no idea what a beer salesman actually is. you know, and that's -- there is a kind of thing with trump that it is as though he is from another generation, two generations ago, three
generations ago. there is something peculiarly trapped in time about him. i think this is part of the immigration debate that's been going on since yesterday. i mean he really does. and in many situations, i have found him talking about, you know, why aren't -- why do we limit immigration from europe? why do we have these other people? he says things like isn't anyone in america anymore? it's that kind of thing. so an odd thing is that trump in the end is kind of like your old grand father. >> i've tried to keep abreast of the many interviews that you've given in connection with the book release. something that you said to savannah guthrie piqued my curiosity. roll the tape. >> your former editor at vanity fair said he wasn't surprised you had written the explosive
book. he was surprised they let you in the door at the white house. are you surprised? >> you know, no. i'm a nice guy. i go in. >> did you flatter your way in? >> i certainly said what was ever necessary to get the story. >> michael wolff, what did that mean? i said whatever was necessary to get the story. >> well, i don't know. i went in and i was -- i did not say, you know, i hate you and i'm opposed to you and good riddance to you. as much of the media has basically said. i went in and said actually what i believed which was show me what you're doing. tell me what you want to do. let's see how this works. let's see if this can work. so i think that i projected to
the white house an amount of honest openness, frankly. >> honest openness. did you ever misrepresent your objective or your feelings about the president? >> never -- never once. never in any way. i went into the white house and i told them i want to write this book from your point of view. i don't want to be someone looking in. i want you to tell me what you think. and that's really what the book is. the book is not my impressions of this white house or the president. it is the -- in the voices of the people in the white house. >> did you tell them that your objective was to humanize the president, that nobody was doing that, that you personally like the president, that you'd be able to change perceptions about the president, that you hope to interview him in a relaxeded state? >> i probably said, yes, that i
wanted to humanize the president which i wanted to do. >> were all of those pledges accurate when you made them? were they all honest? do any of them embarrass you to day? >> not in the least. as i said, it sounds like you have something on your mind here. >> i do. i do. >> i went into this white house saying i want to write it from your point of view. tell me. i'm completely open to this. if i could write a book which -- in which i found that the president was contrary to all opinions a potential success, i would have been delighted to write that book. >> is it fair that you presented yourself as sort of the beacon to combat media bias against the president and that that was the way in which you were seeking the interview? >> i didn't much present myself in any way. and nor did anyone particularly
inquire as to my point of view or where i was going or what this book was going to be. to be perfectly honest, nobody was that interested. >> what i'm really after is not so much a policy or position interview with the president but an opportunity to humanize him. honestly, i don't think there is anybody out there who is doing this or it seems who cares about doing this. but i think you know that i like him and i believe i can show him in a way that might actually change perceptions of him. chatted about this yesterday with bannon who suggested doing something in the residence. i'm open to anything but the more relaxed the better. i asked the question because it sounds like you're presenting yourself as an individual who has his best interest at heart, likes him, wants to show a more humanizing side of him and for that reason you should be given access. it becomes relevant because many of us who read the book and i read the book, are trying to
understand where the white house denies it well what's true and what's not true? and, therefore, your level of veracity in walking in the door becomes significant. >> and i'm missing -- so what are you implying here? i mean that's the way -- that is exactly -- no. that's exactly what i had in mind to do. it was open your kimo in. k kimono. i'm willing to write any story here. give me the story. i wrote the story what i got. i wrote what i saw and what i heard. >> how much access did you have to the president? were there any interviews at all for the book? >> i have said from the beginning i have spent about three hours in one-on-one conversations with the president during the campaign, the transition, and in the white house.
>> okay. because from the paper trail that i've seen and i've tried to become more knowledgeable in anticipation of having you here, it doesn't seem like there was any interview you were afforded for the book per se. there is a hollywood reporter interview that you did. >> i think we should point out that i'm someone in the white house as obviously giving you e-mails that i sent which is perfectly fine. but, you know, the white house has been on a concerted attack on me since this book came out. by the way, a totally incompetent attack which so far has found a few typos and turned this book into the best-selling book in the world. but you are now doing the job of the white house. just so everybody knows that. >> well, wait a minute, i read the book. i took the time to read the book. there it is. >> i know, but you have -- >> you're leer to discuss the book. i have questions. i have questions. >> i know this. let's -- >> i have questions as a reader.
they are this. go ahead. >> someone is giving you e-mails that i wrote. so, therefore, this is -- you're doing the work of the white house. to discredit this book. the white house wants to discredit this book. they seem to think that he says so the implication is he was polite. >> i raised two subjects thus far. i have more but i raised two subjects thus far that i think are legitimate areas of inquiry. wait a minute. let me finish. then you'll get to respond. >> what are they? >> the first is did you misrepresent yourself in an effort to gain access? and the e-mail trail that i have seen thus far i think raises that as a legitimate question. hey, i like donald trump. hey, i want to humanize donald trump. i'm the gli cuy that can change perceptions and combat the negative media bias about him seems the way in which you represented yourself to get in the door. i think that is a legitimate area of inquiry.
let me finish. i promise you'll finish. >> let's itemize this. >> and the second area of inquiry -- >> i have liked donald trump. i was interested in humanizing him. i was -- i do set out to change perceptions which actually i might have succeeded at. but, yes, go on. >> in other words, when you said i might be able to change perceptions of him, you meant to the negative? >> this is what a writer does. it would be of no value if i went in to this and i did not change perceptions. i might -- i was perfectly willing -- >> i don't know. >> i was perfectly willing to change perceptions in a positive way. >> you are a far more successful writer than i will ever be. i know that when i write e-mails seeking interviews, my word choice is to say, i will treat the individual with dignity and respect. i never go so far as to say let
me humanize. you know like the person. i'm the one who can change the perceptions. i just found it unusual. you get the final word. >> this is -- read my book. that's all i have. that is my final word. >> okay. and i did and i just think it bigs interesting questions as to on what grounds were you able to pull up that sofa in the west wing. >> i thought you were just giving me the final word. >> okay. >> anyway. so now let me take the final word. >> go ahead. >> it's just the book. i have written the book. you either like it or you don't like it. so far it quite seems that many, many, many, many people do like it and it speaks to them. final word. thank you very much. >> michael, wait a minute. i read it. >> where is my final word? >> i enjoyed reading it. i read it and enjoyed it. can you do both. you can both enjoy reading the will book and question some of the content. that's my point.
and i thank you. >> yes. please. so you got the final word. >> okay. what are your thoughts? tweet me or go to my facebook page. i'll read some responses throughout the course of the program. what do we have, catherine? do you think trump did this to stop the coverage of the book "fire & fury"? lane, i don't think he is seeking to stop the coverage of the book. i think the only thing more upsetting to the president than a tell all book about him is a tell all book that's about somebody else. up ahead, the president deemed inexcellent health by his physician friday. many are diagnosing his meantal health from afar. i don't think that's fair. i'll discuss what the head of the american psychiatric association that has his own theory. when you're running for president, i think you have an obligation to be healthy. i just don't think can you do the work if you're not healthy. as you get older. s but prevagen helps your brain with an ingredient originally discovered... in jellyfish.
in clinical trials, prevagen has been shown to improve short-term memory. prevagen. the name to remember. here's the story of green mountain coffee roasters sumatra reserve. let's go to sumatra. the coffee here is amazing. because the volcanic soil is amazing. so we give farmers like win more plants. to grow more delicious coffee. which helps provide for win's family. all, for a smoother tasting cup of coffee. green mountain coffee roasters. let's team up to get the lady of the house back on her feet. and help her feel more strength and energy in just two weeks yaaay!
the complete balanced nutrition of (great tasting) ensure with 9 grams of protein and 26 vitamins and minerals. ensure. always be you. ♪ ♪ there are two types of people in the world. those who fear the future... and those who embrace it. the future is for the unafraid. ♪ all because of you ♪ ♪ we could go down what do you think?ney... ♪ whooo! yeah!
♪ mmmmm. want some? it's good, it's refreshing. ♪ this is what our version of financial planning looks like. tomorrow is important, but she's only seven once. spend your life living. find an advisor at northwesternmutual.com. and my brother ray and i started searching for answers. (vo) when it's time to navigate in-home care, follow that bright star. because brightstar care earns the same accreditation as the best hospitals. and brightstar care means an rn will customize a plan that evolves with mom's changing needs. (woman) because dad made us promise we'd keep mom at home. (vo) call 844-4-brightstar for your free home care planning guide.
doctor who vouched for him as the most fit person telephoner run for president. friday's exam came amid a national debate over the president's meantal capacity fueled in part by michael wolff's book and his recent behaviors. i suggest it's not a good idea to break the goldwater rule. and setting such a precedent could have catastrophic long term consequences. one of those who reached out to me about my commentary is dr. jeffrey lieberman, he's the chair of psychiatry at colombia university. he is the past president of the american psychiatric association. maybe trump is not meantally ill. maybe he's just a jerk. dr. lieberman, thank you so much for being here. tell me how you see this issue. >> well, it's an issue of concern because president trump is unconventional, you know, at the very least.
and his unconventional, sometimes erratic out of the box, offensive, vulgar behavior has sort of invited speculation as to what could be causing it. this is just the way he is coming from his background and his business role or is it possibly sign of something else including some medical condition of a neuropsychiatric nature? and the point that i think i've been making and debated that even if you have rarefied expertise as a doctor or psychiatrist, if you're viewing it from the public's perspective which is what is in the media, what is the public domain historically, that's not a basis for making a definitive diagnosis. if you want to express an opinion, that's fine. if you want to say it's more than that and should be used as a basis for enacting some type of action to remove him or constrain him from office, that's inappropriate. >> you wrote a letter to the "new england journal of medicine" pretty much saying what you just said here, "although moral and civic
imperatives justify people speaking out against injustices of government and the leaders, that does not mean that psychiatrists can use their medical credentials to brand elected officials with neuropsychiatric diagnosis without sufficient evidence and appropriate circumstance. to do so undermines the profession's integrity and credibility." by the way, for what it's worth, i agree with. that i think it sets a dangerous pre precedent if lay people become armchair psychiatrists. here's what puzzles me. as a thought experiment with seven colleagues, you kind of did exactly that for vice and for tonic. didn't you? you know what i'm referring to. "the diagnosis that seemed most plausible is dementia." what is the difference between the two positions i put forth that are both yours? >> i'm not a political scientist. i'm not anybody who is familiar with government policy. i'm not a journalist who has
expertise in this area. i'm a scientist and clinician. but i saw this coming back in the primaries. and certainly after the election that here's a guy who's going to do things in a very unconventional way. it's going to invite all kinds of questions about what -- he is craze qulik crazy like a fox or coming out of the rough and tumble world of new york city real estate or is there an underlying pathology? what is the logical remedy or process this will follow? and just listening and reading a little bit it became clear that there are constitutional mechanisms for constraining wayward or reckless or incompetent leaders. and they're called elections. they're called imimpeachment and there is the 25th amendment. it turns out that the section of the 25th amendment that applies here, the fourth one, when a president is incapable of fulfilling the responsibilities
of office, that would apply here. but it's never been invoked. given the fact that our president has not seen fit to map out what these steps would be, what is the process, what is the criteria, i took the initiative of trying to do a simulation. now the simulation in no way was intended to and i apologize it was perceived as that as branding the president. but if you have a 70-year-old man who is 6'3," 240 pounds, history of his with no serious medical illness, he doesn't use any substances, recreational drugs, what are the possibilities at his age? and we simply went through this as an exercise. but, look, let me just say one other thing. if this was, you know, jack welch or bill gates or stephen jobs or head of a major corporation and he began acting had in a way that invited concern, the board of directors would convene and make a decision of how to proceed.
they possibly get a medical evaluation. but because it's politically charged, we don't do that. apart from invoking some constitutional mechanism, the way to do it would be the physical that occurred yesterday. but i would bet dollars to donuts that a neurodoctor a thorough psychiatric evaluation is not part of that routine evaluation. >> and maybe it should be at the outset of all campaigns which would be my preferred manner of doing so so everybody gets both a meantal and physical clean bill of health. i just don't like doing it midstream. i think it becomes very arbitrary. thank you very much for your time. we appreciate it. >> my pleasure. let's see what you're thinking on my twitter and facebook pages. catherine, what do we have? why do you think attacking the president's meantal health is wrong? anybody defending this man at this point needs a checkup as well. and like you. see, that's the whole point. we deserve better. why stop with the president? why not pass judgement on my
meantal fitness and capacity? after the opening block of the program, many of you already are. how about a policeman? how about a high school principal? i just think it's unhealthy because it's unfair to those who are dealing with meantal health problems as we start tossing it around as a pejorative whether we don't know if they apply to the person. i would say this. think of an answer without regard to the current occupant of the oval office. whatever standard we set is going to apply to president elizabeth warren or whoever when it's a democrat. you get the point i'm trying to make, i hope. a major investor in apple is appealing to the company to address the impact smart phone technology is having on an entire generation. i'll talk to the worker. and the president declared the fight of oep oepioids a nationa emergency but is anything actually being done?
that might help. show me the carfax. now the car you want and the history you need are easy to find. show me used trucks with one owner. pretty cool. [laughs] ah... ahem... show me the carfax. start your used car search and get free carfax reports at the all-new carfax.com. and lose weight with contrave. it's fda-approved to help adults who are overweight or struggle with obesity lose weight and keep it off. contrave is believed to work on two areas of the brain: your hunger center... i'm so hungry. (avo) and your reward system... ice cream. french fries. (avo) to help control cravings. one ingredient in contrave may increase suicidal thoughts or actions in some children, teens, and young adults in the first few months. serious side effects are mood changes like depression and mania, seizures, increased blood pressure or heart rate, liver damage, glaucoma, allergic reactions, and hypoglycemia.
not for patients with uncontrolled blood pressure, seizure history, anorexia, bulimia, drug or alcohol withdrawal, on bupropion, opioids, maois, allergy to the ingredients, or pregnant. may cause nausea, constipation, headache, and vomiting. reduce hunger, help control cravings with contrave. now you an talk to a doctor online and get free shipping at getcontravenow.com. ♪ dad!
when it comes to using iphones, the kids might not be all right. an activist hedge fund and teacher's pension that are among the biggest investors are demanding that apple investigate the effects of digital technology on young people saying it's a public health crisis. a letter was sent to apple's board of directors by jana partners and the california state teacher's retirement system which combined have $2 billion invested in apple. the letter deplandz they take active steps on this issue, the same way it "prides itself on values like inclus ofness, quality education and environmental protection and supplier responsibility." the letter cites data from igen, a book that i said i found the
thoe most impactful of anything i read recently. the research found that in 2012 when the proportion of americans owning smart phones first exceeded 50%, there were abrupt and negative changes in teen behavior and emotional states. dr. twangy joins me now. she's a professor in personality psychology at san diego state university. she has studied generational differences for 25 years and she helped draft that letter. dr. twangy, welcome back. help me provide the cliff's note version of your book to my audience. >> yeah. so igen is the generation born 1995 and later. they are the first generation to spend their entire adolescence with smart phones. and that's had ripple effects across many areas of their lives. so they spend, of course, a lot more time on their phones and online. and they spend less time with their friends in person. and that's really not a great
combination for meantal health. >> the graphs from your book tell quite a story. i'm going to flip through them in rapid succession. less dating. less driving. less hanging out. less sex. which in and of itself might seem like a good thing from a parent's perspective, i would argue not in this context. less sleep. and here's the kicker, dr. twangy, more lonely. so despite the constant connectivity and the belief that, hey, you're in touch with your friends, the way that people my age are reconnecting with people they went to high school with, in reality, they're feeling more lonely. explain that. >> yeah. so that's the interesting thing. you'd think maybe that would be the exception. that even if we have some of the meantal health issues that perhaps social media helps us feel more connected to each other. but at least among teens, right around 2012 when smart phones
came kplon, the levels of lonliness just spiked upward very suddenly. and that followed the same pattern as clinical level, very serious depression and as feeling like you couldn't do anything right, feeling left out, feeling lonely, all of these things spiked right around 2012. >> you say that we are on the brink of the worst meantal health crisis in decades. i was happy to see the letter and particularly a paragraph that comes at the end where they say what they want is an expert committee, i won't read it, but they want you on the expert committee. i like that but i get nervous that we can't trust apple to tell us the truth about what they know of the impact of smart technology, smart phones on american youth. what do you hope to do? >> i'm really hoping that apple takes this opportunity to help
parents help regulate kids and teens smart phone and device use. because being on these devices for hours and hours a day, a the love teens now that's almost all of their leisure time is spent with screens. that is not a healthy way to live. and we know this from some many, many studies. its just one example. teens who spend five or more hours a day on electronic devices are 71% more likely to have at least one risk factor for suicide than teens who spend less than an hour a day. and that's just one example. so i'm hoping that we'll get more studies on this. more experimental studies, better data. and that maybe apple can help us find out more about the meantal health and other effects of spending five, six hours or more a day on these devices. >> final question.
when i was younger, people would say the same sort of thing about television. oh, the boob tube, how much time are you spending time watching the boob tube. does that 1970s era argument have any merit whether we're talking about smart phone technology? what's the difference? >> yeah. well, there is a key difference which is that smart phones are portable. so you can carry them with you everywhere you go. even when wrur seeing friends in person, for a the love teens, they're still on their phones. they can be carried into the bedroom. one reason why teens are now sleeping a lot less than they should. but, you know, with that said, we can't completely let tv off the hook. it is also correlated with mental health issues. but at this moment, teens are much whatting tv. yep that, is linked to more depression. but the effect for electronic devices is a lot bigger and a lot stronger. >> i love apple products. i'm a huge fan of the company. i like what i think they represent. this is an important step. and i hope that they will allow
you to continue your work from the inside looking out and parents ought to read your book. thank you dr. twangy. i really appreciate it. >> thank you. let me check in on your tweets and facebook comments. catherine, what do we got? one tweet? tv was bad for our health. rock music was bad for our health and yet i'm a perfectly healthy 40-year-old minute living in his parents' basement. look, more seriously, i did just address that with her at the end. because, you know, back in the day, we heard similar complaints. this is different. dr. twangy addressed it when she said you may have been in the rec room watching the boob tube but today that technology is with you everywhere. and she speaks in terms of correlation. built as a lay person, it's hard not to look at her data and say there's got to be cause iation this. still to come, how president
trump's battle is going against the opioid epidemic? that's next. he said he had the answer. what is it? and why not name the head of the dea or nominate a drug czar? les. essential for vinyl, but maybe not for people with rheumatoid arthritis. because there are options. like an "unjection™". xeljanz xr. a once daily pill for adults with moderate to severe ra for whom methotrexate did not work well. xeljanz xr can reduce pain, swelling and further joint damage, even without methotrexate. xeljanz xr can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections, lymphoma and other cancers have happened. don't start xeljanz xr if you have an infection. tears in the stomach or intestines, low blood cell counts and higher liver tests and cholesterol levels have happened. your doctor should perform blood tests before you start and while taking xeljanz xr, and monitor certain liver tests. tell your doctor if you were in a region where fungal infections are common and if you have had tb, hepatitis b or c, or are prone to infections.
i use herpecin l.re, it penetrates deep to treat. it soothes, moisturizes, and creates an spf 30 barrier, to protect against flare-ups caused by the sun. herpecin l. is the federal government doing all it can to combat america's opioid epidemic? a former commissioner of the food and drug administration says no. in october president trump declared a 90-day public health emergency saying he was mobilizing the government to liberate americans from the rise of addiction. the 90 days are up january 23rd and much replains to be done. there is no permanent head of the drug enforcement administration and the nominee for drug czar to run the white house office of national drug
control policy withdrew in october and no replacement has been named. overdose deaths continue to rise faster than ever killing some 64,000 people last year. what can be done, my next guest lays out a course of action in this "new york times" piece "how to fight the opioid" crisis. david kessler was the commissioner of the fda from 1990 to 1997 under president george herbert walker bush and president bill clinton. dr. kessler, what should the federal government be doing that it's not doing? >> well, there's a state of the union speech that is coming up and the president has an opportunity right now the federal agencies that are involved in substance abuse are spread across 16, 17 different organizations. we don't have, as you said, a head of the dea. we don't have a director of the
office of national drug control policy. the president has a real opportunity. i think he should say in that speech. he should say he's going to organize all the substance abuse agencies under one head. look, it's not -- this is a complex problem. needs a comprehensive solution. but there is a real opportunity for leadership. >> are you satisfied that the medical community, physicians, the front line are sufficiently knowledgeable now about the crisis that we face and are not falling into a trap of overprescribing? >> it's an excellent point, michael. we still have more to do when it comes to education. some of that education comes from our medical schools. it comes from the cdc. it comes from the fda. but if you have a one central
organization within the federal government, it can make sure that we do a better job not only to our physicians but also to our schools, our parents, to all of us. look, we need to see opioids in a completely different light. these are very powerful addictive drugs. you'll remember certainly in our parents and our grandparents' generations, it's different kind of drug, but nicotine. we used to view nicotine as something that was pleasurable and enjoyable. but we really have one of the great public health successes and part of the problem when it comes to addiction is that substance my friend or is it going to do me harm? so we have to change our national perception. >> dr. kessler, final point. it has to do with the issue of supply. i pulled something of significance from your essay in the times. we need to rethink how the federal government carries out this mission. the food and drug administration
in approving new opioid drugs puts more opioids in the marketplace because these drugs meet the standards for safety and edge kathics. but the more opioids in the marketplace, the greater the opportunity for abuse. what should be done about that? >> well, we certainly need to be sure that there are only the amount of opioids that are necessary to treat acute pain and cancer pain. so the fact is more drug that is produced, the more -- the more drug that is in the marketplace, the more abuse there will be. it's no the that it's perfectly linear, built that's the reality. and the dea has a responsibility to set production quotas. but it's fda that is putting the drug, approving the drugs.
so we need -- the white house is trying. the good people really trying to coordinate these efforts. but there's a real opportunity for leadership and centralization. this is a public health emergency. president can, i think, go the next step. >> thank you so much, david kessler. i appreciate your expertise. >> thank you very much. still to come, i'll look at some of your tweets and facebook comments. give me another one, catherine. what do we have? >> smerconish, for your consideration, my twitter has become a clearinghouse for -- this is eric bolling from fox, eric bollig, who tragically lost his son. slow down, guys. "for your consideration, my twitter has become a clearinghouse for # opioidcrisis
helping parents and troubled teens. we have thousands adding stories and ideas. we lost our only son to the epidemic." i know you did, my heart breaks for you, eric. "trying to turn profound grief into helping others. #opioid crisis." so glad you reached out. i'm back in just a moment. time . let's go to sumatra. where's sumatra? good question. this is win. and that's win's goat, adi. the coffee here is amazing. because the volcanic soil is amazing. making the coffee erupt with flavor. so we give farmers like win more plants. to grow more delicious coffee. that erupts with even more flavor. which helps provide for win's family. and adi the goat's family too. because his kids eat a lot. all, for a smoother tasting cup of coffee. green mountain coffee roasters. packed with goodness. we are the tv doctors of america, and we may not know much about medicine, but we know a lot about drama. we also know that you can avoid drama by getting an annual check-up. so go, know, and take control of your health. it could save your life.
cigna. together, all the way. it could save your life. i'm trying to manage my a1c, then i learn type 2 diabetes puts me at greater risk for heart attack or stroke. can one medicine help treat both blood sugar and cardiovascular risk? i asked my doctor. she told me about non-insulin victoza®. victoza® is not only proven to lower a1c and blood sugar, but for people with type 2 diabetes treating their cardiovascular disease,
victoza® is also approved to lower the risk of major cv events such as heart attack, stroke, or death. while not for weight loss, victoza® may help you lose some weight. (announcer) victoza® is not for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not take victoza® if you have a personal or family history of medullary thyroid cancer, multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if you are allergic to victoza® or any of its ingredients. stop taking victoza® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck or symptoms of a serious allergic reaction such as rash, swelling, difficulty breathing, or swallowing. serious side effects may happen, including pancreatitis. so stop taking victoza® and call your doctor right away if you have severe pain in your stomach area. tell your doctor your medical history. gallbladder problems have happened in some people. tell your doctor right away if you get symptoms. taking victoza® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may cause low blood sugar. common side effects are nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, decreased appetite, indigestion, and constipation. side effects can lead to dehydration, which may cause kidney problems. change the course of your treatment. ask your doctor about victoza®.
alright, i brought in high protein to help get us moving. ...and help you feel more strength and energy in just two weeks! i'll take that. -yeeeeeah! ensure high protein. with 16 grams of protein and 4 grams of sugar. ensure. always be you. there are 7 continents. 7 seas. but at celebrity cruises we'd argue, more than 7 wonders. for a limited time, enjoy two free perks like complimentary wifi and drinks, plus savings for everyone in your stateroom, when you book now. during the celebrity cruises sail beyond event.
attention." i'm not sure, tom ellis, what those colors might be. what's next? i want to get through a bunch, if i can. "smerconish, the only thing missing from that incredible smerconish/michael wolff show down was hair." it wasn't a showdown. i read the book. i tore through the book. i was left with questions. and i went in search of answers for those questions, like how did this best-selling author get such access? i'd never heard that significantly discussed in all the interviews i've watched over the course of the last week, and i wondered how much access did he really get to the president. and the questions that resulted were results of my curiosity. hit me with another one, please. "smerconish, michael wolff, when you give the last word twice, it ceases to be the last word." that's true, that is true. look, i treated him and i treat all my guests with dignity and respect. and i think he had plenty of opportunity to say the sort of things he wanted to say, and i
did likewise. one more if i have time for it. "thank you, smerconish, there are ways to describe the poor performance of the president without stigmatizing or insulting americans who live with mental illness. #endthestigma." that's my point. i delivered a commentary last week. i don't articulate that view to carry the water of the president of the united states. that's not my objective. i'm thinking of those who have been diagnosed with maladies, who deserve better than to have their diagnoses become political fodder bantied about by armchair psychiatrists and real psychiatrists who have never seen, much less treated, this individual that we're talking about. stick around, there is another great hour coming up on cnn. your brain changes as you get older. but prevagen helps your brain with an ingredient originally discovered... in jellyfish. in clinical trials, prevagen has been shown
don't wait until february. walk into a jackson hewitt, day or night, and you could get up to $3200. so why wait? you could get up to $3200 with a no-fee refund advance. go to jackson hewitt today. with a no-fee refund advance. ♪ [speaking french] ♪ this is what our version of financial planning looks like. tomorrow's important, but, this officially completes his education. spend you life living. find an advisor at northwesternmutual.com.
♪ ♪ i'm michael smerconish in philadelphia. we welcome our viewers in the united states and around the world. regarding those disparaging remarks about immigrants, president trump tweeted a partial denial, but in private bragged about them. i think i knew -- i know exactly what he's been doing in that regard, and i'll explain. look at what he's saying about it now, though, america first. this during a week that he also repeated no collusion, like a mantra. and giving dianne feinstein, one of his attack