American pharmaceutical giant Pfizer wrote in response to our column last week that challenged the company to make available its discount-card scheme for all patients.

Published last Monday as part of this paper’s subscription to the principle of fairness, the letter, signed by Pfizer country manager Albert G. Mateo, sought to defend the Sulit Card that seeks to give a 50-percent discount to patients buying Pfizer products. It is this Sulit Card we took issue with (Pfizer discount cards should be for all). The column cited the fact that the card discriminates against the poor patients since it is mostly available to patients that medical reps frequent in expensive hospitals.

Apparently peeved, Mr. Mateo took the column to task for “misleading and inaccurate data” even as he stretched the generosity of Pfizer by saying that there are now 1.9 million Filipino beneficiaries under the Sulit Card program. If Mr. Mateo only bothered to check the issues we raised, he would have not signed the letter that was apparently prepared by panicky subalterns who were disturbed by our take that the said Sulit Card is cheap gimmickry. And why not? Why should the card be available only to patients of expensive hospitals, those who go to doctors who are often visited by med reps pushing Pfizer products?

Pfizer’s rant glossed over two major points we raised. One, the discount- card gimmick, if Pfizer must be true to its corporate social responsibility, should benefit all Filipino patients, not just the Sulit-enrolled patients. Two, Pfizer’s cheap gimmickry should respect the senior-citizen discount which the Pfizer-card gimmick effectively took away. Mr. Mateo, or his copywriter, failed to answer the two issues which he dismissed as “misleading and inaccurate data.”

In an apparent attempt to skirt the issue, Mateo simply underscored the selectiveness of his discount-card gimmick. He reiterated that his card gimmick has “1.9 million Filipino beneficiaries.” But according to Social Welfare Secretary Esperanza Cabral, a respected cardiologist, there are more than 17 million hypertensive Filipinos who should have access to more affordable treatment. Unfortunately, they are not Sulit-enrolled.

The assertion that the Sulit Card “helped 1.9 million Filipinos” does not negate the fact that the discount is not for all Filipinos. Apparently, Pfizer failed to answer that point. Ergo, there is no way but to conclude that the card gimmick is exclusive and selective, and that’s not what we, Filipinos, are clamoring for. Mateo’s copywriter clearly wrote and boasted: “Pfizer has not taken away the senior citizens’ discount.” Really? With all due respect, this is outright misleading.

One only has to look at the Sulit-Card gimmick pack which the company and doctors gives to patients under its exclusive and privileged care. At the back leaf, one finds the “Terms and Conditions” imposed on these select and privileged cardholders. Term/condition No. 10 stipulates: “This CARD shall not be used with any other discount privileges, e.g. senior citizen card.” That, Mr. Mateo, is definitely taking away the senior citizens’ discount, including the discount which our countrymen Mrs. Norma Lipata and Mr. Danilo Principe are entitled to. Now, Mr. Mateo, who is misleading who?

Pfizer insists that it is “committed to meeting the country’s health-care needs by making our high-quality medicines available to patients from all walks of life.” If this is a genuine American generosity, then why not just cut the price by 50 percent and make the discount available to all? Why does it have to come at a price, i.e., patients’ personal information into Pfizer’s data bank?

Earlier, this column pointed out the difference in the pricing of Pfizer products in India and the Philippines. In fact, as borne out by research from the government’s Philippine International Trading Corp., India ’s drug price for Norvasc is a third of the Sulit Card-induced pricing structure. Pfizer’s rant, much like the cheap gimmicky of a Sulit Card should be expressed for what it is: a cheap shot at fudging the issues that the pharma giant just failed to address.

Pfizer should concentrate on offering cheaper prices, not the cheap gimmicky of a Sulit Card that is available mostly to the rich patients. And while it apparently has found mostly the voice to rant at the issues raised on the Sulit Card, it might just as well address the other important issue of the blandishments that it offers to doctors who recommend the Pfizer drug.

We appreciate the attempt at “clarifying” our column’s concerns about the discount-card gimmick. But we must candidly say that Pfizer’s designated copywriter has failed miserably in addressing such concerns.

It is alarming that the gimmick does not benefit all Filipinos, and that it has taken away the senior citizens’ discount. The ad copy has only served to confirm and aggravate our fears. At the risk of incurring American ire, we are constrained to say that the stern reply was a cheap attempt at further misleading the people of our country.

Thanks, nevertheless.

Thanks for the reply.

But not for the hypertension that the misleading portions induce.

E-mail: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it