Health for the wealthy

Health for the wealthy

Filipinos can live with the high prices of food supplements with no approved therapeutic benefits, which are popular among health buffs. People can also live with the high prices of drugs for non-life threatening afflictions, such as Viagra and Cialis. But why do Filipinos have to contend with the high prices of drugs for chronic illnesses and even ordinary infections?

The House of Representatives committee on trade and industry, which is deliberating on a bill that will bring down the prices of medicine, reported that drug prices in this country are 22 times higher than those in India and five times higher than those in Pakistan. A 500 mg tablet of the popular painkiller Ponstan, for example, is retailed at P21.82 in the Philippines but only at P2.61 in India. An 80 mg tablet of the common antibiotic Bactrim costs only 69 centavos in India but P15.55 in the Philippines.

People can survive without ordinary painkillers. But what about a diabetic whose life could be shortened without maintenance drugs? A tablet of Diamicron, a drug for diabetics, is priced at P4.71 in India and P11.46 in the Philippines, the House panel learned.

There has to be more to the yawning price discrepancies than the fact that India has a flourishing local pharmaceutical industry – something that the Philippines has neglected to develop. The Philippines in fact imports from India several generic drugs sold in government health centers. But medicine prices are also lower in neighboring Asian countries compared to those in the Philippines. Congressmen pin the blame on what they describe as monopolistic pricing schemes of those in the pharmaceutical value chain.

House members are trying to address the problem by passing a new law that aims to bring down medicine prices – something that the 20-year-old Philippine National Drug Policy and the Generics Act have failed to do. Millions of Filipinos already lack the means to undergo complex medical procedures such as heart bypass surgery. Millions cannot afford even the expensive tests needed to determine cardiac problems. They should at least be able to afford maintenance drugs for common afflictions such as hypertension and asthma. It is often said that health is wealth. The government should avoid turning the country into a place where good health is only for the wealthy.

Reduce carbs or lose weight to lower cholesterol

Reduce carbs or lose weight to lower cholesterol

Reducing dietary carbohydrates can improve atherogenic dyslipidemia, even in the absence of weight loss. Weight loss also improves dyslipidemia, mainly in people who have not already limited carbohydrates. For patients already restricting carbohydrates, weight loss offers little additional benefit to their lipid profiles. To take the reduced-carbohydrate path, focus on avoiding high-glycemic starches and fructose. Associates randomized 178 otherwise healthy overweight or obese men to one of four diets: one based on standard dietary recommendations (made up of 54% carbohydrates, 30% fat, and 16% protein), a diet with moderate carbohydrate reduction (to 39%), or one of two low (26%)-carbohydrate diets. To keep calorie levels the same initially, the researchers increased protein intake to 29% of the reduced-carbohydrate diet, and in the lowest carbohydrate diets increased either saturated or monounsaturated fat intake.

After 3 weeks (which is enough to stabilize lipids with no weight change), they found a linear relationship between greater carbohydrate restriction and a change in the type of LDL cholesterol. Carbohydrate restriction converted men from phenotype B individuals (who had dense, small-diameter LDL particles that confer higher atherogenic risk) to phenotype A (with medium-to-large-diameter LDL that’s less risky). Investigators then restricted calories, and patients in all groups lost similar amounts of weight. The type of diet “didn’t make any difference as long as they learned to eat less. Lipid levels improved with weight loss, but less so in the low-carbohydrate groups that already had shown improvements.

The only significant reductions in LDL levels were seen with the low-carbohydrate, low-saturated-fat diet. This is certainly the most effective diet in terms of LDL lowering that we’ve seen just by manipulating fat. The reductions in small LDL particles from lowering carbohydrate intake were independent of saturated fat intake. Higher saturated fat intake did not attenuate the lipid benefits of lowering carbohydrates. Saturated fat intake “doesn’t make it any worse.” That’s provocative, but that’s what they found. Previous studies of the lipid effects of low-carbohydrate diets didn’t control for the effects of weight loss.

You can get there either way. If you want to get the optimal result, you can either lose weight or you can drop carbohydrates. If you drop carbohydrates, it may not be as critical how much weight you lose. Other studies are attempting to replicate the findings. A recent study randomized dyslipidemic patients to one of four diets for 1 year: the severely low-carbohydrate Atkins diet, the more moderately carbohydrate-restricted Zone diet, a diet based on standard dietary recommendations, or the low-fat, high-carbohydrate Ornish diet.

The four groups had similar success in losing weight. Patients on the Atkins diet had somewhat better changes in body mass index, compared with the other groups, and profoundly better effects on lipid profiles, notably increases in HDL cholesterol and decreased in triglyceride levels. Changes in the different types of LDL cholesterol were not measured in this cohort, but “there’s just no doubt this would correspond to the same sort of changes they had seen. The most effective diet probably will be one that patients are able to maintain. In the end, that will be the biggest test of whether or not this works.

Socialized Medicine: A ‘Sicko’ (1)

Socialized Medicine: A ‘Sicko’ (1)

The infamous low-bud-get and controversial movie producer, Mi-chael Moore, arch-critic of US President Bush, came out with a new docu-film, "Sicko," released July 27, 2007, denouncing the US Healthcare system and advocating Socialized Medicine. The title "Sicko," in my opinion, more aptly describes Moore and his concept than the current healthcare delivery in America.

Otherwise known as a "government, or nationalized, or state-sponsored healthcare system," Socialized Medicine provides what is supposed to be "free" medical care to the people. And this is a misconception, if not a myth. Actually, it is not free, because the funding comes from the massive taxes levied by the government on its citizens. The people are really the ones who pay for their healthcare, with the exorbitant taxes collected from them by the state through mandated steeper taxation. This government-controlled medical care delivery is akin to nationally-sponsored veterans hospitals or provincial/city funded public or charity hospitals in the Philippines, or in the United States.

What does the United States have?

The USA has a free enterprise, private, system of healthcare delivery, where its citizens have a choice, and the options include personal out-of-pocket medical expenses, private insurance coverage (like Blue Cross/Blue Shield, etc.) which they, or their employees, could buy for them, or thru an HMO or PPO, which they could join, and the government-funded Medicare entitlements for all citizens who are 65 and over. Unfortunately, the Democrats in general, exemplified by Hillary Clinton, are in favor of government-controlled, nationalized, or socialized medicine for the country. Thanks to the Republicans, this move has been (and will always be) rebuked and thwarted to protect the integrity of the health care for its people. The imperfections within the US health care system are a direct result of statism, government intervention, and not the failure of its current healthcare delivery system itself. While the existing US healthcare delivery system is not perfect, it provides prompt access to state-of-the-art quality medical care second to none, compared to socialized medicine, where a long wait for medical services is a rule rather than an exception.

Which countries have socialized medicine?

Some of the nations with socialized medicine include the Great Britain and other European countries, Canada, the former USSR, Australia, New Zealand, and Cuba. And practically without exception, the plague of socialized medicine has victimized the citizens of these countries, who are up in arms, vehemently complaining about their "sicko" government-sponsored/managed healthcare delivery system. Like the United States, the Philippines, and many Asian countries, have the fee-for-service free enterprise system of healthcare.

How do people like socialized medicine?

People in those countries who have experienced their government-sponsored healthcare delivery system are mostly unhappy and frustrated, because, while medical care is "free," access to such "free care" is difficult. Most patients have to wait in a long queue, often for weeks, if not months, to obtain the medical services they need. This inefficiency and delays, and the concern about quality of care, have led affluent people in those countries to outsource surgical services to the United States or to Asian countries, where Medical Tourism is a multi-billion dollar new and rapidly evolving industry today. Some of the serious disadvantages of socialized medicine are listed below and continued in this column next Saturday, together with a number of most revealing and critical news headlines in those countries printed and televised media condemning their nationalized government-sponsored healthcare system.

1. To begin with, to provide the so-called "free" healthcare to all its citizens, the government must get the money from somewhere, and act like a health insurance company. To fund socialized medicine, which is exorbitantly expensive, the government must collect inordinately greater taxes from the people. In essence, it’s actually the people who are paying for their own medical care, so in reality it is not "free" healthcare, after all.

2. The high taxes collected from, say, Peter, who is healthy, will be used to pay the medical care of Paul. And if the latter continues to abuse his health, by living an unhealthy lifestyle, and requires repeated medical care, Peter’s taxes will continue to drain from the government coffers. Since people can see a doctor or go to the emergency room, even for a simple cold or headache, because it is "free" and they do not have to pay, they abuse the system, leading to a very high cost of overburdened healthcare system. So, there is that abuse and inequity. In the free enterprise system, you pay for your own healthcare expenses, so if you abuse yourself, you pay for it, and other people do not have to be burdened to pay for your medical expenses. There is more equity, fairness, and responsibility in this system.

3. To begin with, to provide the so-called "free" healthcare to all its citizens, the government must get the money from somewhere, and act like a health insurance company. To fund socialized medicine, which is exorbitantly expensive, the government must collect inordinately greater taxes from the people. In essence, it’s actually the people who are paying for their own medical care, so in reality it is not "free" healthcare, after all.

The health of our hospitals

The health of our hospitals

NATIONAL Hospital Week came and went with many Filipinos wondering about the health of our public and private hospital system. It’s a mixed picture with many municipalities in the South missing it services while urban residents complain about expensive healthcare costs.

The Philippine Medical Association reported that the number of public and private hospitals in the country dropped by 55 percent in the past 20 years, from 2,000 in 1987 to only 890 in 2007.

The PMA’s committee on legislation cited a number of reasons for the decline, including a shortage of medical professionals, principally nurses, high costs of medicine, bankruptcy and insufficient government funding for public health care.

The chairman of the committee warned more hospitals would close because of a new government policy that makes it easier for indigent patients to settle unpaid bills and to secure immediate discharge.

The Department of Health has denied there has been such a drop. The chief of the department’s bureau of licensing and regulation explained that while some hospitals may have closed down, new ones have also opened in the past two decades.

Hospital Week tiptoed into the calendar with a report that the Philippine General Hospital has started limiting admission to its maternity section to decongest its nursery.

The PGH spokesman explained that the nursery currently has an active population of 90 babies a day, against a normal capacity of 45 to 60. Services could suffer and the quality of care could weaken if the trend continues, he said.

Current policy requires that babies born normal be placed beside their mothers and not in the nursery. The hospital has advised expectant mothers to visit other hospitals or clinics.

Close to the observance, some newspapers reported that the Dr. Jose Fabella Memorial Hospital, the country’s largest maternity hospital, almost closed down due to questions of ownership “and possible duplications of function.”

Secretary of Health Francisco Duque III, in a meeting with hospital professionals, employees and patients, assured everyone that the 87-year old hospital was in no danger of a phaseout and that its services would continue beyond the end of the Arroyo administration.

The best news was the centennial of the Philippine General Hospital last week. The PGH is the country’s foremost public hospital, providing above-standard care to the poor since August 17, 1907.

The PGH is an important part of the University of the Philippines system, particularly its medical and nursing departments. It provides world-class training to top healthcare professionals. Its research and development program compares favorably with the best in Asia.

Generations of well-known Filipinos who have served in government and the private sector were born at the PGH. Millions have been served by its staff.

In its 100 years, the hospital has become the hope for the sick and the distressed, a sanctuary for Filipinos who know that their poverty is not a hindrance to good hospital care.

We should have a PGH in each administrative region, or a hospital similar to it in the provincial capitals and in the most populous cities. The modern public hospital is a gauge of government priority and an earnest of its social conscience. As a civilizing institution, the well-funded public hospital is indispensable in the life of the community and the nation.

Beltran Boulevard

IF you can’t stop children, spouses and assorted relatives of politicians from perpetuating political dynasties, you could at least prevent the high and the mighty from naming public places and government programs after themselves or their kin up to the fourth degree of consanguinity.

House Bill 2026 points out that 20 years after the adoption of the Constitution, Congress has not passed an enabling bill to end political dynasties. Meanwhile blue-blooded families continue to rule Philippine politics.

What’s the next best thing? “Simply ban the naming of public properties, public services and government programs after incumbent officials and their relatives,” the bill says. “This would at least put a stop to one of the most despised practices of political dynasties.”

Why despicable? Because these programs, projects and services are funded by taxpayers. To claim credit for public works is “immoral and unethical.”

We agree with the authors—Reps. Satur Ocampo, Teodoro Casino, Liza Maza, Luzviminda Ilagan and Crispin Beltran. How often do we see posters and billboards advertising that a street-repair job is a project of Congressman Pedro Matakaw or see a city program named after Mayor Juan Mapi-ar?

The bill does not mention the popular practice of renaming roads, bridges and schools after a dead politician, a businessman or the uncle of an incumbent senator. The law says that no public space can be renamed without consultation with, or clearance from, the National Historical Institute.

House Bill 2026 is welcome, except that it will deprive us the pleasure of having a Satur Street, Anakpawis Avenue or a Beltran Boulevard. The Huk training school in Arayat, Pampanga, used to be known as Stalin University. That kind of public homage we will miss, too.

Cheap medicines bills explained

Cheap medicines bills explained

A few days ago, a front-page story in the Philippine Daily Inquirer reported that foreign pharmaceutical companies in the Philippines have put together a P1-billion lobby fund to kill the cheap medicines bills. I am inclined to believe this report. The local pharmaceutical market, after all, is worth P100 billion a year, 70 percent to 80 percent of it controlled by the foreign drug companies. What’s P1 billion to kill a bill that would drastically reduce their profits?

Look at these facts:

The Philippines ranked second to Japan as having the highest medicine prices in Asia. Filipinos spent for medicines the equivalent of $1 billion a year, from 1997 to 2001, the highest in Asean, notwithstanding that half of the Philippines’ 80 million population have no access to essential medicines. The cost of medicines here is 40 percent to 70 percent higher than in other Asean countries. For Filipinos who have access to medicines, their budget for total health-related expenses (not just medicines) is a measly P2,000 per person per year.

The government has tried to provide the people with cheaper medicines by importing them, through the Philippine International Trading Corp. (PITC). The efforts of the PITC, however, are puny and doesn’t even make a dent on local drug prices. In a P100-billion market, the PITC’s yearly import budget is only P300 million. What’s more, it has few outlets for its drugs. The two biggest drugstore chains in the country, Mercury Drug and Watson’s, refuse to sell medicines imported by the PITC.

How can the multinational drug companies get away with such profiteering? Mainly because of the law on patents and the Intellectual Property Code. These two laws allow pharmaceutical companies exclusive rights to manufacture and sell products they have developed. The multinationals have taken advantage of these laws by pricing their medicines for as much as the market can bear. They can price their products at any level because there is no competition. Any medicine importer, including the government, can be sued by the multinationals that do not like imported drugs to compete with their products.

The Philippines is clearly in the grip of a cartel or oligopoly. The medicine market is controlled by foreign companies who have their own association with plenty of money for propaganda and lobbying. Their products are manufactured here by one or two companies, also foreign-owned. They are distributed by only one foreign company and retailed by two drugstore chains, one of them (Watson’s) foreign-owned.

The Constitution mandates the government to prevent restraints in trade, such as cartels and monopolies, but lawyers say it is difficult to prove the existence of a cartel, hence government exerts no effort to enforce the ban although we have cartels not only in the pharmaceutical industry but also in cement, petroleum products and the power sector. What is obvious to the layman – cartels -- the legal profession refuses to see.

The government has tried to fight back with legislation. The first was the Generics Law wherein doctors are mandated to write the generic names of the medicines they prescribe and the drugstores to carry generic equivalents of branded ones. But many doctors still forget to write the generic names, and the drug companies have mounted a subtle campaign to make people believe that generics are less effective than the branded, and expensive, medicines. On parallel importations, they have a campaign painting imported medicines as “counterfeit,” even if these imported products are genuine ones manufactured by their sister companies.

Congress is counterattacking with two bills, one in the Senate and the other in the House. The Senate passed its version before the 13th Congress adjourned, but the House failed to pass its version for lack of quorum. The bills have been refiled in the present Congress. Their main authors are Sen. Mar Roxas for the Senate bill, and Rep. Ferjenel Biron for the House version.

Kapihan sa Manila invited the two lawmakers to explain the differences between the two bills. Biron was there but Roxas only sent his legal counsel Blas Viterbo. Former Health Secretary Quasi Romualdez and former PITC chief Obet Pagdanganan were also there.

The differences are quite simple. The Biron bill seeks to impose price controls on medicines, while the Roxas bill seeks to amend the Intellectual Property Code.

In a separate interview, Roxas outlined the provisions of his bill:

“1. Disallow another patent for new uses of an existing substance (already patented) so that drug manufacturers can immediately copy off-patent products without fear of lawsuit.

“2. Allow parallel importation and international exhaustion of intellectual property rights for patents. Parallel importation refers to the importation, without the consent of the patent holder, of a patented product that is marketed in another country. International exhaustion refers to the regime where the supply and price of a product is moderated by competition. Both would allow the Philippines to shop around for a quality product with a better price.

“3. Allow the ‘early working doctrine’ to enable generic drug companies to experiment and test generic versions of patented drugs before their patents expire. It will also allow them to produce and sell generic versions of patented drugs upon their patents’ expiration.

“4. Restructure provisions of government use. At present, the government is required to apply for a license before it can use patented medicines or processes for manufacture. The bill does away with this compulsory licensing, making it easier and quicker to respond to public health threats without fear of law suits.”

Affordable medicines

Affordable medicines

THE alleged drug firms’ lobby fund only highlights the need for congressional action to bring down the prices of medicine. How to reconcile the Biron bill (House) with the Roxas version (Senate) soonest is what our people expect.

We always look up to India, with more than a billion population, providing affordable medicines and consequently appropriate health care, for its people. In fact, studies reveal that Indian manufactured drugs are 1,000 to 4,000 percent cheaper compared to US brands. For instance, 2006 price records show that Hytrin (an anti-hypertension drug) sells for $ 4.20 for a month supply of the tablet in Bombay while the same drug from the same company costs $ 44.48 in Boston!

Why are medicines priced so low in India? This immense difference in prices of medicines, according to studies, may be attributed to some "discriminatory’’ features of the Indian Patents Act of 1970 which "provides for the grant of only ‘process’ and not ‘products’ patents in the pharmaceutical and chemical sectors.’’ Salil Panchal of Morpheus Inc. in Mumbai, in an article "Just what is a Patent?’’ (April 6, 2005), differentiates "process’’ from "product’’ patent by stating that: "A product patent allows rights (including exclusive manufacturing and marketing rights) relating to the object, while process patent relates to a means.’’ In other words, even if drugs have existing patents in the United States, Indian drug manufacturers can utilize the process of reverse-engineering to come up with a drug that is as effective as the patented one, bear the same brand name and manufacturer and yet may be sold at very low costs, and still maintain the legality of their acts under Indian Law. It is perhaps for this same reason that the Indian Pharmaceutical Industry is currently one of the world’s fastest growing industries that has expanded 30 percent more in the last 15 years. Data from the Community Development Medicinal Unit reveal that there are 15,000 pharmaceutical companies that are registered in India and that such growth has provided jobs for three million people in the fields of production, research and marketing. "Currently, the global output of the pharmaceutical industry ranks fourth in terms of volume and 13th in terms of value. . . The total size of the industry is estimated at $ 7 billion, with exports accounting for $ 2.5 billion.’’ (Patents Era: How Will Pharma Firms Cope by Salil Panchal – Mumbai, April 7, 2005).

In the introductory pages of the study conducted by Voluntary Organization in Interest of Consumer Education (VOICE) entitled "A Study on the Availability and Prices of Medicines in India’’ during the first quarter of 2002, it was stated that pharmaceutical industries in India were largely developed due to the "need for achieving self-sufficiency in medicines and ensuring abundant availability of essential medicines at reasonable prices.’’ This need paved the way for the formulation of the Indian Drug Policy of 1986 titled "Measures for Rationalization, Quality Control and Growth of Drugs Pharmaceutical Industry in India’’ and aimed at ensuring the availability and affordability of good quality, life-saving drugs, especially for the greater number of Indian living below poverty line.

According to the same source quoted above, even before the formulation of the Indian Drug Policy, the Indian government had declared a Drug (Price Control) Order in 1970 (the same year the Indian Patents Act was enacted) that was succeeded by similar orders in 1979, 1987 and 1995, adding more liberalized views with each amendment. "DPCO controls the domestic prices of major bulk drugs and their formulation with an aim to provide patients with medicines at affordable prices.’’ In August 29, 1997, the Indian government also established the National Pharmaceutical Pricing Authority (NPPA) as an independent body tasked among others to: "Fix/revise prices of pharmaceutical products, enforce the provisions of the Drugs (Price Control) Order; monitor the prices of controlled and decontrolled drugs in the country; and, recover the amounts overcharged by the manufacturers for controlled drugs.’’ All these policies and agencies have largely contributed to keeping the prices of medicines in India as one of the world’s lowest, not only for the benefit of combating diseases within the country but as well as for the rest of the world’s sick and poor nations.

Now that India has taken its initial steps towards a market economy that is guided by World Trade Organization policies, and as it shifts from a process patent regime to a product patent one (to meet its 2005 WTO deadline), the question of whether availability and affordability of life-saving medicines can still be assured (not only for India’s 1,080,264,388 [July 2005 estimate] people but for all the other communities around the world that depend on cheap drugs for disease treatment and survival) arises as a global concern. In a recently published article in the Asia Times written by a New Delhi-based journalist Siddharth Srivastava, the writer expresses a similar concern when he wrote: "The question is: While one understands the exigencies of multinational pharmaceutical companies needing to protect their patent right as well as profits, why shall medicines, whether in India or anywhere, be inaccessible to those who need them.

The Indian government has reportedly assured the public (and the world) that there would be no "tragic" in drug prices as "97 percent of the drugs sold in India are off-patent’’ and the "remaining 3 percent covered by the new patent regime all have alternatives that may be purchased at their previous cost.’’ Considering that the patent shift in India would have an impact in two years time, Indian pharmaceutical companies have now diverted their investments to research and development activities to keep abreast with multinational drug companies.

Drug price regulations would probably work, even in short-term horizon just as importation of cheaper drugs from India would, as the House and Senate versions would want to accomplish. But following the Indian model, we need to devote more resources to research and development including the upgrading and support to our cheaper herbal medicines such as ampalaya or even coconut oil. Perhaps Mr. Roxas and Mr. Biron can both study the creation of a state-owned national pharmaceutical company to focus on research and development as well as the importation of cheaper drugs. That is, if they can get their acts together.

Banana chips launched as healthy food

Banana chips launched as healthy food

THE regional offices of the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) in Southern Mindanao and the Department of Education (Deped) formally launched Thursday banana chips as a healthy nutritious snacks in all public elementary and high schools in the Davao City.

Paciente Cubillas, senior trade and industry development specialist of the Consumer Welfare and Trade Regulation Division (CWTRD) of the DTI-Southern Mindanao, told Sun.Star Davao that the launching is a regional campaign for school canteens to offer banana chips as a nutritious food snacks to all elementary and high school students.

"The processors will be the one to draw an agreement with the school canteens kung ilan ang isu-supply nila," Cubillas said, adding that the partnership on banana chips project between DTI and DepEd has been concretized after a year of planning.

"May mandate para sa lahat nga mga agencies sa government towards providing good nutrition sa mga bata.

Ang mandate naman sa amin is to produce jobs, so with this partnership, we can generate more jobs with the more demand of the products na isu-supply sa mga canteens," Cubillas said.

He added that they identified six banana chips processors in Davao Region that will supply banana chip products in school canteens.

"Most of the processors are into export, they can be assured of the quality and packaging," Cubillas said.

Campaign for dengue prevention

Campaign for dengue prevention

WITH the onset of the rainy season, the Department of Education (DepEd) has embarked on a campaign to ensure the protection of students against Dengue H-Fever. The DepEd drive seeks to keep the schools well informed on how to prevent the incidence and spread of the disease.

Dengue is caused by a bite from the Aedes aegypti mosquito that thrives and spreads rapidly particularly during the rainy months. The symptoms begin with a high fever, rash, severe headache, pain behind the eyes, in muscles, and in joints. The severity of the joint pains has given dengue the name "breakbone fever." Nausea, vomiting, and loss of appetite are common. A rash usually appears three to four days after the start of the fever. Most dengue infections result in relatively mild illness, but some can progress to dengue hemorrhagic fever (H Fever), which is characterized by the leaking of blood vessels, causing bleeding from the nose, mouth, and gums. If not promptly treated, the blood vessels can collapse, causing shock (dengue shock syndrome). Dengue H Fever can be fatal among children and young adults, in the absence of proper and adequate intervention.

School officials have been instructed to mobilize their personnel and health and nutrition staff to disseminate information on the prevention and control of the disease, and to practice the Four-o’clock Habit, an initiative of the Philippine government that requests residents to practice the cleaning of their surroundings and draining water containers to deny mosquitoes a place in which to lay their eggs, in support of the Dengue Control Program and the Malaria Control Program. DepEd officials urged schools to closely collaborate with parent-teacher community associations, local government units, and City/Municipal Health Officers in the conduct of the 4-S Strategy Against Dengue – Search and destroy mosquito breeding sites, Seek early treatment, Self-protection, and Say "No!" to indiscriminate fogging.

Let us all join the national and local government units and concerned private organizations in the intensified campaign against dengue.

Let those dreary jobs in

Let those dreary jobs in

TRUE, there are so many things that do-gooders and the usual crusaders can grouse and carp about the mushrooming of supposedly IT jobs such as contact centers and medical transcription firms that have taken the job market by storm.

For one, these night jobs are truly hazardous to the health. Some kids end up drug-addled just to cope up with the night shifts and the boredom. The young in these jobs often get an overdose of both caffeine and nicotine.

Second, these are not real IT jobs at all and the label as IT-related is a grand deception. Ten years as a call center agent won’t qualify one for an entry-level job at Silicon Valley or Bangalore for that matter.

A hard-core IT job involves the three fields of embedded technologies, programming and networking. If they don’t fall within the three, then what you have are IT-induced jobs but never the real thing.

Third, cast-off jobs from India are the ones coming to us. India has moved into the hard-core stage of programming and embedded technologies. They are into accounts bigger than hosting contact centers and medical transcription entities. There are still contact center jobs there but the transition to hard-core ICT technologies is being done at a very frenzied pace.

But tell us, what is the alternative? Right now there are none. These IT-enabled jobs are the stars in the employment galaxy, lowly they may seem in the real IT world. We can create them at the pace of tens of thousands a month with the proper training and an elementary technology backbone. They can be based anywhere, even in the strife-torn areas. An average IQ is enough and so is a decent-enough phonetics.

Why, we are now exporting contact center agents to places such as Dubai and Singapore, at salaries triple the local pay.

These IT-enabled jobs have propped up consumer spending and the real estate sector at the scope and magnitude that was even beyond the expectation of the major real estate developers and the mall operators. The “For Rent” signs that used to clutter Metro Manila’s business districts have been easing. From Muntinlupa up north to the Clark Economic Zone, one can find buildings upon buildings that host call center operations.

Commonwealth Avenue in Quezon City is having a building boom of sorts, thanks to the call centers along a particular strip.

The real spenders at the malls are workers in these IT-enabled jobs, who earn more than the average-wage earners and have—literally—money to burn.

The IT-enabled jobs, if one just probes deeper, do other wonderful things than giving decent-paying jobs to the young (who, without the jobs, would join the armies of unemployed Filipinos) and making the Sys and the Ayalas wealthier every day because of their sustained spending.

These jobs do their bit for the environment. This is for real, not twisted logic.

As more and more young men and women move from the provinces to the call center sites to work and get decent pay, the number of hopeless youth (who in their desperation would otherwise engage in slash-and-burn farming, charcoal gathering, and spraying their farms with lethal chemical and pesticides) diminishes. The pressure on the environment also eases.

As more and more young men leave the farms, the more area is left for the individual farmer to till. Instead of six young male kids tilling the three-hectare rice farm bequeathed by the father, one or two would share the land if all four can land jobs as contact-center agents in the cities.

Where there is less pressure to feed all six kids and force the land to produce more via lethal fertilizer and toxic pesticides, something good is done for the farmland and the environment.

Every sector of the economy, and even the patrimony, is better off because of these jobs.

So instead of carping and complaining about health hazards that these jobs impose on the youth, the do-gooders should better plan ahead just like India. Which is to prepare for the next stage after the IT-enabled jobs. This means training the young to work in the real thing” embedded programs, programming, and maintaining complex ICT networks.

With the real thing, we can grab a sizable slice of the technological innovations in Asia. And we all know what comes with being a technological powerhouse.

Spiked

Spiked

Forget about that story about siopao filled with cardboard mixed with meat. That has been exposed as a cheap stunt pulled off by a free-lance television reporter, who has since been detained by Chinese authorities. But not those chewy White Rabbit Creamy Candies, or at least not yet, even if the Chinese manufacturer swears by its products and threatens to sue the local Bureau of Food and Drugs for banning their sale.

The BFAD earlier this week ordered a stop to the importation and sale of the White Rabbit candies made by Guan Sheng Yuan Group Co., the Milk Candies of Romanticfish Food Industry Co., the grape biscuits of Dongguan Bairong Foodstuff Co. and Dongguan Yongkang Food Co. The BFAD said tests done on samples of these candies and biscuits imported from China indicated that they contained formaldehyde, a preservative often used by embalmers. It ordered distributors and retailers of these products to take them off the shelves within 30 days. Prolonged use of the chemical could lead to cancer of the lungs, according to health experts.

The manager of the candy-making firm, however, said independent tests had yielded no traces of the chemical. “Our products have passed tests with strict standards,” he said.

Maybe. But those White Rabbit candies were among more than 800 products imported from China being tested for contamination by the agency, and they were among the only four found to be laced with formaldehyde so far. So, why would the agency single out these particular candies and cookies for banning?

The fact is that thousands of Chinese products are now under the microscope in many countries, not only for shoddy workmanship but also for shady manufacturing practices that could prove harmful, if not fatal, to consumers. Questions about the quality of Chinese exports started to crop up after American motorists complained about the poor performance of tires made in China. Then, a total of 16 cats and dogs were reported to have died in the United States after being fed with pet foods imported from China. Tests later showed that the pet foods contained melamine, a substance used in lamination and adhesive materials.

Far worse was what happened in Panama, where 93 persons died from poisoning after drinking Chinese-made cough preparations. The medicines were found to contain diethylene glycol, a material used in refrigeration and air-conditioning. Ingestion of the chemical leads to kidney and liver damage.

Diethylene glycol has also been found in Chinese-made toothpaste sold locally, according to the BFAD. The sale of toothpaste from China is now prohibited in North and South America.

The situation is much worse inside China. Newsweek in a recent article quoted an Asian Development Bank estimate putting at 300 million the number of Chinese suffering from food-borne diseases every year. The magazine also reported several horror stories told by Chinese consumer advocates about food additives that lowered men’s sperm counts, soy sauce containing arsenic, and fast-foods spiked with hormones that resulted in 6-year-old boys growing facial hair, and 7-year-old girls developing breasts. Tainted infant formula has also been blamed for the death of at least 50 babies and left 200 others malnourished, Newsweek reported.

To their credit, Chinese officials seem to be keenly aware of the problem and are moving to address it. The Chinese agency tasked with ensuring product quality and safety has said that from December last year up to May this year, it had shut down 180 factories after discovering 23,000 food products that were either substandard or tainted with harmful chemicals. And as if to show how serious it is about enforcing quality standards, the Chinese government executed last week the first chief of the China State Food and Drug Administration for approving the sale of fake medicines in exchange for bribes.

Chinese authorities say they have made significant headway in enforcing quality standards, noting that the proportion of products that passed recently was the highest ever. An earlier government survey showed that less than 1 percent of food exported—but 20 percent of products sold in the domestic market—was substandard.

But a 99 percent passing mark is not good enough, especially when it comes to food. Indeed it should serve notice both to Philippine regulatory agencies and to the buying public to be doubly wary about buying Chinese foods, medicines, toothpaste and similar products. Until such imports are cleared locally, the rule should be: Better safe than sorry.

The Chinese Lesson

The Chinese Lesson

Cardboard in your siopao. Toxins in your pet food. Harmful ingredients in your medicine and processed food products. The “Made in China” label is taking a rough beating as reports of adulterated, contaminated, hazardous and generally substandard Chinese products continue to come out. Beijing, in an effort to reassure the international community that it is doing something about quality control, has executed a former top official who gave the green light for many of the products in question. Erring companies have been shut down and the owners arrested and prosecuted.

The Chinese economic juggernaut has survived complaints from the international community about unfair trade practices including blatant theft of intellectual property rights and violations of civil liberties in the name of economic development. But the scandal over the safety of products manufactured in China has hit the country hard, with demand for its products plunging worldwide. Chinese officials are scrambling to contain the damage.

While the world waits for that containment, Philippine officials should do their part in protecting the public from unsafe food products and medicine, whether for humans or animals. Because of corruption, incompetence and the weakness of the regulatory environment, the country has often been made a dumping ground for hazardous and even banned products from overseas. Substances declared by other countries to be unsafe for use or consumption by humans or animals or deemed bad for the environment continue to be sold in the Philippines until the supply runs out.

This time, with the global alarm over hazardous or defective products from China, Philippine authorities have no excuse to be sleeping on the job. Consumers must be protected and public health safeguarded. China has flooded the world with designer label knockoffs and dirt-cheap products, and among the biggest consumers of such products are the poor. Producing goods at bargain basement prices is fine as long as fair trade rules are followed. The products should also give value for money and should not endanger public health or the environment. Until China can reassure the world of the safety of its products, Philippine authorities should take a closer look at imports from China. It’s better to be safe than sorry.