Pfizer woes reprised

It is hardly surprising that giant multinational giant Pfizer should find itself at the center of controversies once again regarding a discount card scheme that it launched three years ago. And three years ago, we already noted that Pfizer’s woes in this country would aggravate as a result of the drug price war which it is trying to fight with that discount card.

And as far as we are concerned, that new controversy hounding Pfizer may be too much ado about nothing.

It will be recalled that the giant has gone on an advertising blitz to tell the country that Filipinos are very happy with the 50 percent discount it is doling out on its expensive medicines, particularly its designer anti-hypertensive Norvasc. The Pharmaceutical and Healthcare Association of the Philippines (PHAP) is reportedly at odds with Pfizer over this idea, a row that has apparently caused the giant to leave the industry league.

The quarrel is not so much about Pfizer’s selective discount, but more about the “undue” advantage that the card scheme is giving Pfizer. The scheme apparently allows Pfizer to data-bank some 1.8 million cardholders, thus giving it vast marketing clout that beats what other multinationals have.

PHAP reportedly thinks the Pfizer scheme is unethical because it is “direct-to-patient” marketing which is a no-no when prescription drugs are involved. The group has also questioned Pfizer’s access to patient information which is apparently also frowned upon in Pfizer’s homeland, the United States.

But what is the point in this raging war other than compounding Pfizer’s woes?

Not much. At the end of the day, Pfizer’s 50-percent discount offer is no longer a big deal. There are more affordable anti-hypertension treatment available in the market today at 60 percent less that the Pfizer product. The affordability of the rival products is boosted by the senior citizen or drug store discounts. That makes these products that are just as effective at least 15 to 20 percent cheaper than the discounted Pfizer offer.

So, give Pfizer a breathing room guys. The firm is already in big trouble worldwide. It is still trying to recover from that botched experiment with a drug that was associated with some 82 deaths and which led to the resignation of its chairman Hank McKinnel. And given the deep recession in the US, the firm must be reeling under reduced patronage in that market.

So, if one has a quarrel with Pfizer’s direct-marketing information-accessing discount card scheme, then go for the many other more affordable options in the market. But leave Pfizer alone. It already has too many woes on its own.

Unusual interest

Two officials of the Department of Tourism have found themselves in hot water for allegedly ‘meddling’ in matters beyond the DOT’s jurisdiction.

The president of the Spa Association of the Philippines (SAPI), Marjorie Lopingco, has filed an administrative case with the Office of the Ombudsman against DOT Undersecretary Cynthia Carrion and director Cynthia Lazo for intervening in purely corporate affairs of SAPI, an act which violates not only the Administrative Code but also Republic Act no. 3019 or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.

RA 3019 penalizes a public officer for “causing any undue injury to any party, including the government, or giving any private party any unwarranted benefits, advantage or preference in the discharge of his official administrative or judicial functions through manifest partiality, evident bad faith or gross inexcusable negligence.”

Lopingco said the filing of a case with the Office of the Ombudsman is without prejudice to the filing of criminal charges against the two, who have manifested unusual interest in the corporate affairs of SAPIL She also asked for their preventive suspension pending the administrative investigation.

Carrion and Lazo, according to Lopingco, instigated and intervened both in an illegal membership meeting as well as a subsequent May 2 wild cat election of some of the SAPI members. In her complaint, Lopingco noted that as per resolution of the SAPI board on April 28, 2009, the annual elections of SAPI for purposes of electing the board of trustees and corporate officers to serve the term 2009-2010 were to be held on May 27, 2009.

In fact, Carrion even wrote European Commission ambassador and head of delegation Alistair MacDonald giving her and seeking the group’s recognition of a new set of board of trustees of SAPI and its new president Catherine Turvill in the hope of convincing MacDonald to lift the suspension on a SAPI grant. Carrion even mentioned that she administered the induction ceremonies of Turvill’s group.

SAPI is the lead grantee of the European Union to internationalize the operations of spas in the Philippines , Thailand, Malaysia, and Indonesia under an EU1.02 million grant. When the controversy between Lopingco and Turvill’s group broke, the grant was suspended.

Unfortunately, since the inception of the said grant, Lopingco noted that she and SAPI treasurer-trustee, Anthony Abaya, have never managed the fund which was under the full control of trustee Turvill and project director, Jomar Fleras, until trustee-treasurer Anthony L. Abaya, started to demand for the full accounting and audit of funds prior to the 2009 annual membership meeting.

Lopingco pointed out that SAPI is a private non-stock, non-profit entity that is not under the DOT and that any relationship between SAPI and the department had been purely one of collaboration on tourism-related projects of SAPI.

Carrion’s acts go beyond collaboration on tourism-related projects. Why her keen and unusual interest in SAPI affairs, short of choosing who she wants to lead SAPI, is beyond us. If she can intervene in corporate matters of the spa industry association, all the more she can insist intervention, say in purely internal matters of the hotel industry (because the DOT accredits hotels, unlike spas which are not subject to DOT accreditation). What would stop her from choosing the next president of the association of golf clubs, especially since tourists flock to the country to play golf?  

The EC grant was given to SAPI, not to the DOT. The spa industry, all the more SAPI, is not under the administrative supervision of the DOT, nor are spas required to seek DOT accreditation. Maybe, Carrion just loves to go to spas, to explain her dipping into spa affairs.

Why she had to go out on a limb to make Amb. MacDonald know that she recognizes Turvill’s group despite the fact that the latter is the subject of a criminal complaint for the violation of the penal provisions of the Corporation Code makes us wonder if there is more to this than meets the eye.

For comments, e-mail at [email protected]