Dr. Victor Dzau

I met Dr. Victor Dzau at BIOHK2026. He was born in Shanghai, raised in Hong Kong, and left for McGill University in Canada at eighteen. He went on to serve as Chair of Medicine at Stanford and at Harvard's Brigham and Women's Hospital, as Chancellor for Health Affairs at Duke University and CEO of Duke Health, and as President of the U.S. National Academy of Medicine. He was the first immigrant to lead any of the three Academies that make up the U.S. National Academies. His research laid the foundation for ACE inhibitors. He pioneered gene therapy for vascular disease. He holds twenty-four honorary doctorates. He was named an Honorary Citizen of Singapore in 2019 and received Japan's Order of the Rising Sun in 2025.

Yet when I sat down with him, I found a remarkably humble and warm man. He speaks like an elder, telling the story of half a century as though it were nothing more than a small contribution to patients, to communities, to nations. That has been his north star. It is why he has always cared about equity and coherence in policy making, why he focuses on translating science into clinical care, and why he insists that scientists must tell the truth and not be swayed by politicians. He is delighted and proud to see the strength and the rise of China and Hong Kong in the life sciences. And he believes America, with its flexibility, its spirit of exploration, its deep understanding and support of innovation and research, its pursuit of truth, its democracy, and its good institutions, will continue to lead global innovation in the life sciences.

PharmaDJ: Dr. Dzau, thank you very much for giving me this opportunity. You have received so many achievements in your career. What is the most meaningful milestone in your career path, as a scientist, as the head of a university, and even as an innovator, especially when you are making policy, when you are shaping policies?

Dr. Dzau: I do not see achievement from a milestone point of view. I see it as a continuous effort to make a difference, to make an impact. There is no single acknowledgment, no single word or achievement, that I can say is the one I want. My entire life, I have been very lucky, having been given opportunities in research, education, and patient care. I feel the need to give back, to society and to human beings. That is why I find my life rewarding. I continue to have the opportunity to do something good for the public, and for the most vulnerable people, like patients. When I spoke at BIOHK2026 about global health, it is about everyone everywhere, rich or poor, older or young, whatever color, whatever race, whatever gender. Everybody should have the same opportunity. That is equity. What I do a lot is to ask, number one, how do I create innovation that can help others? And number two, how do I make sure everybody gets access to it?

PharmaDJ: You just mentioned how everything is your top priority, especially at the National Academy of Medicine. What is the hardest part when you are making health care policy? How do you make it fair to everyone, no matter whether they are poor or rich, or whether it involves money and politics, or culture, or anything else, especially during COVID-19, such a huge disaster in human history?

Dr. Dzau: First of all, there are principles and values. You can create policy around them. But as you can imagine, there are so many different forces that determine this issue. That makes it very difficult. So you do the best you can to bring the right people together to agree on what would be the best possible path. Take 2019, and let us take a vaccine as an example. The mRNA vaccine was developed in 300-some days. That is unheard of. Some governments were quite smart and said to industry that they are going to give industry funding to de risk them to manufacture, and guarantee procurement. That was a very good move.

However, the problem is that rich countries can pay a lot more than poor countries. This favored rich countries which can buy up much of the available vaccines.Furthermore, most vaccines are manufactured in high income countries. The world experienced Vaccine Nationalism. Many governments argue that they needed to protect their citizens first. They said that they had to buy up the vaccine for their citizens leaving little for other countries. Furthermore, certain countries blocked its manufacturers from shipping vaccines out of the country until all their citizens were vaccinated. For example, in India, the Serum Institute of India could make hundreds of millions of doses at low price and could provide them for low-income countries but the Indian government said, no. Nothing could leave the country. Nationalism over multilateralism is problematic. This is why we must speak up for everyone everywhere, so that their voices are heard and their needs are met. This is a matter of equity. With regards to vaccines, countries should prioritize vaccinating individuals at high risk such as the elderly, immunocompromised patients and front-line workers, following this approach, there would be enough left over to be shared with all others in need.

There is also a lot of geopolitics and other circumstances that make achieving equity difficult. Indeed, innovation, science, and technology are facing geopolitical hurdles that makes collaboration challenging. But we must collaborate, since when it comes to pandemics both developed and developing countries face the same enemy. Diseases know no borders. Whether it is climate or pandemic, scientists around the world have to work together to find solutions.  

Now, I think that globally there is still a lot of interest in multilateralism and solidarity and believing in public health and public good. By doing the right thing, you not only protect yourself but protect everyone. .Just take measles vaccination. If you do not vaccinate children in low-income countries, children are going to get infected. The disease can spread over to rich countries. So achieving equity is protecting everyone.

PharmaDJ: When we talk about COVID-19, although many Chinese people would prefer not to mention it, I truly believe that there are still many diseases like COVID-19 that can surge severely and suddenly, and that humanity still has great unmet medical needs. What is your definition of health? And since we may face another pandemic like COVID-19, what kind of lessons do you think we can learn from this disaster? Are humans ready to prepare for the next pandemic like this?

Dr. Dzau: You ask the right question. What kind of lessons have we learned? I think we have to look at what lessons learned from COVID-19, and then ask how we can be better prepared for the next pandemic and importantly, how we can prevent the next one? There are lots of effort globally addressing these issues. I am personally working on this. I co-chair the G20 High Level Panel on pandemic financing. Making sure there is enough money is very important. I also co-chair the International Pandemic Preparedness Secretariat (100 Day Mission) which addresses how can we ensure that vaccines, diagnostics, and therapeutics are ready within 100 days of an outbreak that is declared by WHO as one of international concern?

Groups of scientists and policy makers are trying to move things forward, with better investment and better preparation. I also co-chair the Regional Vaccine Manufacturing Collaborative which helps countries to establish vaccine manufacturing in low- and middle-income countries at local and regional levels to avoid dependency on manufacturing concentrated in high income countries.

With these kinds of effort, you have to keep trying to make it work. The good news is that a lot of people really believe in equity. But not everybody believes in it, and governments have different policies.

PharmaDJ: As a scientist and professor from the university and academic area, do you think it is difficult to work with the government? Just as you mentioned, the government should protect themselves. What is the position and role that you think scientists can play to elaborate their true ideas to the policy makers?

Dr. Dzau: Currently, there is increasing distrust in science. Scientists must be better communicators, and they must develop a single, unified voice to be sure that the public knows the value of science and the importance of scientific evidence for policy decision makers.

Also, scientists should not be dogmatic when the answers to problems are not clear. Scientists must engage as a body, to have a collective voice to say what is good for science, but also what is good for society. Scientists must work with other bodies, like civil society, patients, and others to unify the voice. Not alone. Their work must to be relevant to what the public needs, what society needs.

PharmaDJ: I think you can convey the voice from the community, science, and patients, so as to assure the government makes the right and precise decision. Thank you. Just now we talked a lot about policy and government. I would like to switch to another topic, like innovation. Because you mentioned that there is a lot of innovation just lying in the lab, but how to transfer it to clinical use? How to work with the industry, from the university and the whole community?

Dr. Dzau: I think that we look at the innovation as an ecosystem consisting of  different components – academia, universities, research laboratories, government and companies.Currently, these components are not well coordinated. They are not working well together. And the biggest problem is that not all innovations are reaching everyone. Companies have to look at their return on investment and that can create challenges in drug prices. That is why you need to align research, government, policy, players, and industry altogether to serve public good.

The number one question is, what is the most unmet need? When you have inventions and products that can really be useful to the public, you must think about how can we be sure that those products, when given to commercialize, will have the right price for public affordability and access?

I think it is important to have a long-range view. For example, if you have a prevention modality that with one time use, you can prevent a disease and almost eliminate the disease, then it is important to implement it. The problem is payment. For example, some governments and insurance companies have said that the one-time hepatitis B vaccine cost too much money and they do not have the budget. However, if one has a long-term view, then putting the money up front will save lives and save significant money years later. Sometimes politicians, insurance companies look in the short term, and are short sighted.  I am trying to change the dialog . I try to point the importance in investing in prevention, I try to write about this, and try to get people to understand the issue.

I think it is important to emphasize the mindset of true innovation. It must have a long view on the purpose and impact.

PharmaDJ: There are a lot of pharmaceutical companies, or even small start-up biotech companies. They also hire scientists, and they say we can also do oriented innovation. What is the difference between the innovation or science from academic areas between industry? What is the strength of being a scientist to do innovation?

Dr. Dzau: I think that the ideal setting for scientists and university communities is to be able to pursue whatever idea they have. And sometimes you make a surprising discovery or example, CRISPR-Cas9. University teaches you to think, to pursue ideas, to generate knowledge. It teaches you to be ethical, and to have scientific integrity. Industries are much more focused in getting results because they have shareholders, they need to create products that work, that there is return investment. Scientists in industry, even though they do not have to right grants anymore, they have to work on a project that has potential returns for the industry. And they are always judge on how well the project is moving and risk the project get killed because it is not going anywhere. I think increasingly, industry and the academia should come together to form partnerships where they can work on important issues. Then we will have more collaboration between laboratory, academia, and industry.

PharmaDJ: My last question. I am so curious about your personal life. As a pioneer in academia, as a scientist, innovator, and policy maker, when you look back on your career path, what suggestions would you give to young scientists and newcomers in industry? And what is your next plan for your life? Because I see you are so dynamic and energetic, and it seems you still have many dreams to pursue.

Dr. Dzau: When young people think about their career they often plan what they want to be and the steps to achieve it. .I tell them do not to engineer it. It is important to choose an area you love to work in, where you get great satisfaction, and you must have a personal “north star”- knowing what you want to achieve in life.

My north star is that I can make a difference in life. I can help patients; I can help people and contribute to the good of society. You must have passion and enjoyment in what you do. You cannot predict what opportunities there are ahead, do a great job and follow your passion. For me, I have always looked at what job do I have, what do I want to be now, committed to my work and how to do a great job. And  opportunities arise as someone will say to me ,Victor, maybe you ought to think about leading this initiative or this department. At that time, I can decide whether I want to do it or not. How does it fit my north star and passion? You have a choice, but once you do it, you walk into it with great commitment. You succeed. The next door opens, and the next door opens. To me, it is passion, commitment, value and opportunities.

The question is, whatever you do, you must do a good job, and then doors will open. For me, I have been so lucky. I came from Shanghai China, Hong Kong. I went to Canada at age 18, and I went to the United States. I would say, like every other immigrant, I felt very uncomfortable at the beginning. I did not know the culture, and the language was so different, even though I spoke some English. It is very difficult to feel confident and successful.

But there were a lot of good people who gave me a chance. And then I took the opportunities, and then I was able to give back. In what I do, a lot is giving back, and what I can do is give back to my profession, people who supported and to society.

PharmaDJ: That is a really good suggestion, contribute with yourself, and then you can give something back to the community. Where does your passion come from?

Dr. Dzau: When I was very young, we left Shanghai for Hong Kong during the civil war. It was a time of great poverty. I remember the suffering and the poverty around us, and I wanted to do something useful. I thought I wanted to be a doctor. But as I said, along the way, when you get your chance, you look at how you can use your knowledge, your expertise, and your passion to do even more. And that is really how it happened.

Later, more senior people said, "Victor, we need your advice. What about changing policy?" So I got involved in policy as well. There are so many options for young people. Money should not be the first thing. Money will come. I feel very good about what I have done.

PharmaDJ: I am so inspired and touched by this interview, because I am also very proud of our country. Just as you mentioned, there are many challenges facing a country like China, but look at us, making huge progress.

Dr. Dzau: Now China should be so proud. I am so glad to be involved with China. China has many reasons to be proud. America is  also a very great country. I have been given many opportunities as an immigrant and I am grateful. I look forward to bringing these 2 great countries together especially in science and health.  

Epilogue

The interview ended, and Dr. Dzau left for his next meeting. At eighty, his schedule remains full. His ties to Hong Kong and China run deep. He holds honorary doctorates from the University of Hong Kong and the Chinese University of Hong Kong, and a fellowship at CUHK now bears his name. He is an honorary professor at Tsinghua University and chairs the Tsinghua Medicine International Advisory Council. He received an honorary professorship from PUMCH. In 2019, he was elected a foreign member of the Chinese Academy of Engineering.

As we parted, he looked out at the Hong Kong skyline and said, "China should be so proud of what it has achieved." Then he added, "America will continue to take the lead."