Tony Hsieh, Zappos co-founder and CEO, 1973-2020

Last night, it broke on the internet that Tony Hsieh passed away after a tragic house fire took his life. We do not necessarily agree with the cult-like holocracy he advocated, but he brought employee engagement and customer service to a different high level altogther. We personally had a chance to visit his HQ in Las Vegas, tour the revival of a down-and-out area of the Silver State. Our company CEO got to shake hands with him and to listen to his ideas we can bring home to Sunfu Solution, Inc. (SSI). We pay tribute to him as a management man who defied convention to make corporations more human, more socially responsible, and to not simply chase numbers. Tony Hsieh, RIP.

Rapid Tests from a Perspective of a Seller

It is with some amusement (sometimes sadness) that there are calls for, literally, the hanging of sellers of rapid tests. And we have a populist government ready to cater to anyone who shouts loud enough, or shouts louder than our president. We now have MECQ (Modified Enhance Community Quarantine), which, from my perspective of going out every day for work, will cause more suffering to the general populace than Covid 19. The restaurants where I took (forced) my family to eat every weekend to support businesses have their people working five days in a month, rotating those who stayed on to have some income to survive.

Yet as some blame us sellers of rapid tests for the latest MECQ, nobody has really checked the claims of private hospitals that they are overflowing with Covid patients, and if the allocation of beds requested of them had been made real. Surely there is truth to front liners being overwhelmed and exhausted, but nobody asked how many front liners were added in the four months we were in lock down, how many portable xrays and ventilators were added by all the private and public hospitals during the lock down. Sure, PCR machines were (are? really? which one?) all the craze, but I am not sure there is anything beyond PCR that were being pushed as the “gold” standard, in spite of many reports of false negatives, and (let’s say it already) even false positives. You mean there is no economic interests behind all the push for PCRs? (Note: we also have PCR machines being sold by our company, so do buy from us, as we have economic interests in this too! Although I have never believed it is a “gold” standard test, it is a legitimate and helpful and expensive yet necessary tool to fight and understand Covid 19.)

I feel lucky that as a seller of rapid tests, our brand being the Abbott Panbio, very early in the process, before we got approval from FDA, which is when we were allowed to import, we already pledged publicly, to friends and DoH and even Abbott, all income from this endeavor will go to charitable health care initiatives. At least it gives me a certain ability to write about this, with less baggage of being accused of making tons of money: there are so many cheap and substandard tests out there ahead of the curve, making those tons of money is an illusion for us, and an impossibility, unfortunately.

The initial plan was to form some kind of think tank for health care, as I admit being impressed with the knowledge I saw on the internet that groups in the US were producing, but I consulted people like Kenneth Hartigan Go, MD of AIM, who matter-of-fact pointed out, the shortage of talent will be a very difficult hurdle. I also asked Acting Neda Secretary Karl Kendrick Chua if he had a speaker in mind from abroad we could connect the economic team to help understand the pandemic’s impact on the economy, and sadly when contacted, of course the resource person was afraid to travel. I also visited San Juan De Dios, thinking of what they need, and internally we even thought of doing a partnership with them for say their MRI or their ventilators, and the income can generate funds for projects for the Catholic Church. Earnings from the Abbott Panbio Rapid Tests will make it easier to be adventurous in exploring non-traditional businesses at scale, with profit the least of the worries.

I wish I could say this impulse is simply because our people in the company want to live our Catholic faith, and this is certainly part of it. But there are other reasons: likely the pandemic made many of us want to win some points on the Karma score board. But really, for me, it was listening as a boy to old Tsinoy businessmen discussing this or that business opportunity, and it struck me when an old man, successful in business, said he would never go into the funeral homes business, or pawnshop business, which are lucrative, but it benefits from the misfortune of people. That idea has never left me. To not benefit from the misfortune of other people.

Now that the anti-rapid tests movement and hysteria are on hyper drive, let me share my perspective as a seller. During day one of April, when the PCR campaign was at its high, and whatever else tests were there, echoing the global call, especially in the US, for testing: I sent a message to friends and customers, saying at that time that we were beyond testing. I am sure some of my good friends like Dr. Harvey Uy will be able to retrieve that message somewhere in their phones. All the hospital directors we served will have it in their phones and emailbox.

Why were we beyond testing April at the height of the panic? I thought we should all be sheltering, educating the public, and if there are funds, building bed capacity, learning and buying ventilators, making sure portable xrays are in the right places, especially isolation hospitals that should have been built as a 2nd and 3rd waves seemed likely even then. We should be social distancing at that time, and even then, after 30 days, I was already arguing the lock down was too long. There was no example yet of Vietnam in the Philippine consciousness in April.

Actually, because we are today in the post-lock-down stage, we should be testing however we can. April 1, I was already sending the link of the interview with Jay Bhattacharya, M.D., Ph.D. with the conservative and pro-market think tank Hoover Institute in Stanford University.
( )
One compelling argument is only antibody testing can give us a denominator to the numerator of positives coming out of PCR machines. We will get an idea the population’s infection rate if we have a numerator and a denominator, the number of people who already have the antibody within a given population. But I also pointed out in April, that to declare Filipinos negative, or immune, or of having antibodies will be counter productive, because no explanation of the situation, no education campaign was able to conceptually explain social distance yet in the vernacular. At hindsight, one could say, there was no viral video and song yet, on wearing masks, social distance, and the washing of hands; which they had very early, at hindsight, in Vietnam.

Imagine my surprise when a very good friend, a medical director, told me businessmen like myself whose overwhelming economic interests in rapid tests are giving Filipinos a false sense of security, thus the spread of Covid 19 today. (Of course medical doctors and their medical doctor kids never have economic interests – wink wink, let us not go there, please). Even he has my message about this “we are beyond testing” via text messages and email from me in the first week of April. I was surely aware of this problem before Abbott even reached out to us to distribute the Abbott Panbio Rapid Tests, and I have been very vocal about this false sense of security, whatever the tests, because the Philippines as a country just has no culture of science and of planning (certainly not at the level of scenario building). And finally, people who test negative in the PCR do not have the false sense of security that they can go out and have parties and basketball tournaments that rapid tests people do? Because they spent more? Because cross contamination never happens in the preferred laboratory? Education is the problem, not testing. Hardly anyone wants to educate, but everyone is pushing this or that “gold” standard. Most of the “gold” standard hardly qualify for bronze by the month of August.

I even have a month of April SMS to friends who write in Filipino to translate, in Filipino, the concept of social distancing.

But I was clear, to all friends and customers, and we have the emails and text messages for it: during the lock down, we should be in the capacity building and education stage: now that we are in the post-lock down stage, we should be opening the economy, we should be using all the tools available to test, to get the economy going.

In our belief that rapid tests are useful, the very first shipment of the 50,000 tests of the Abbott Panbio, we delivered 4,700 to the Department of Health as our support for its efforts, in support of the work of Secretary Francisco Duque, and then Undersecretary Rolando Domingo, now of the FDA as Director General. We also donated, at more modest quantities, to PGH and individual health workers and friends.

The claim of Abbott in its brochure is for finger whole blood, sensitivity is 96.2% and specificity is 100 %. These are, we just assumed, laboratory-controlled tests, and so let us give it a minus 10 % at least in actual use. Anecdotally, it has enabled our team to serve well in our work, installing and repairing medical equipment, and in moments of very scary situations when we feared exposure, or false negatives, and false positives in the PCR, the Panbio enabled us to have some kind of guidance on whether to keep the office open or closed. Assuming someone was exposed in the office, but the office people all 100 percent tested negative in the IgM, without these tests, we could have closed our office many times. So far, the swabs have shown that our decisions have been correct. One of the multinational companies we deal with had their engineers shelter for three months, without going out to help hospitals, and in July when they came out, three of their engineers tested positive; while our engineers, wearing masks, gloves, and face shields, worked every day in five months, have zero cases so far.

We should move as a community and society away from fear, and towards more understanding of the situation. The hysterical anti-rapid tests shouts are not helping anyone, except making those who shout feel good about doing something, but actually bringing us back to the stage of fear and confusion, and the 2nd Metro Manila and surrounding areas’ MECQ is part of that fear and hysteria.

There is no doubt there are flawed, imperfect, and even sham rapid tests: but the call to just totally push out or ban rapid tests is another emotional, flawed, hysterical reaction that brings darkness, not clarity. It is a misunderstanding of what stage we are in, and I argue, in the post-lock-down stage, we need a cheap, quick, mass testing capability that rapid tests offer. This moment of temporarily bringing us back to MECQ will prove to be a mistake, it mis-educates the public, and I have no doubt, it just killed hundreds of jobs that will just not come back. They just won’t. Being an entrepreneur, I also built a business from absolute zero, and the many restaurants and stores and other businesses pushed over the edge by this MECQ will condemn many people to years of poverty and hardship.

I have to say: every business, small or big, it breaks my heart to see them close. I know the blood, sweat, and tears to get a small enterprise going; never mind to get one earning. It is hell.

The LGU that uses the Abbott Panbio in all its checkpoints, including the airport, have as of today 30 Covid positive citizens, all in isolation, all part of the balik-probinsya program of the national government, and their health workers interviewed on the ground claim their decisive and imaginative leadership was helped by the Abbott Panbio. Other LGUs have more infected people in their communities and are glorified in media for their showbiz efforts. The PCR tests allocation of this LGU is used wisely, as they are not overloaded and blind, so they can allocate these expensive and limited PCR tests to those going back to their home province from Metro Manila, but also for health workers, political leaders, law enforcers who are needed to be serving, planning, and educating. (The photo at the very top of this essay of a child getting tested is from that LGU).

A former congresswoman/medical doctor in her facebook said LGUs just wasted their time contact tracing those who dealt with positives in rapid tests. Assuming these to be IgM positive, with what we know now, we isolate, and with the availability of PCR machines, we swab. We are assuming of course, they got an Abbott Panbio, or equal it. Assuming IgG, then there is nothing to fear, and with the Abbott Panbio, we have found near 100 percent reliability on those that also test positive in the immunology machines.

We adapt, we learn, we improve.

I get addressed as medical doctor sometimes in my dealings with people in the medical community, and I always have to, embarrassed, correct them: I am not a medical doctor, and humorously (I hope) add that although I do have a doctorate, it is a Ph.D in literature, and I have never been addressed as a doctor in my previous life, but I now write out medical prescriptions (haha! a lame attempt at Woody Allen humor). But with all the hysteria and shouting over rapid tests, one even proposing to hang a noose around my neck, I am just glad to have specialized in literature, more than any other subject that I eventually built a passion for, and I do have a passion for science and medicine now (I have read Siddhartta Mukerjee’s Emperor of Maladies on Cancer with great focus and enjoyment).

Albert Einstein is a convenient and respectable way to end this essay: “Imagination is more important than knowledge.” Why did this genius say that?

Indeed, in these times of Covid 19, our lack of imagination as a society and as a health care community is just plain obvious. Imagination, in fact, it is our only way out of this rut. Indeed, I cannot resist mentioning, it is the novels of national hero Dr. Jose Rizal that finally gave the fatal blow to the colonial foundations of Spanish Philippines: it is not his knowledge of medicine.

(please consider read reading these articles: )

The Nobel Prize in Economics 2019: Responsibility Amidst the Chase for Numbers

Abhijit Banerjee, Esther Duflo and Michael Kremer won the Economics Nobel Prize. It is “their experimental approach to alleviating global poverty” that is recognized by the Nobel committee. Development economics has many factions and debates, and the “randomistas” have their many critics, as this movement’s advocates are called, for their adherence to randomized trials, just like in medicine, to do specific and highly localized studies to see the impact of economic programs.
(This link is a great introduction to the critique of the methodology of 2019’s winners) )

We would like to point to their efforts at poverty reduction in the area of immunization. (See: ) Immunization from diseases is one of the cheapest and most effective anti-poverty approaches to helping the poor, as diseases punish the poor for their economic standing more than anything can, and to have a sick child in a family depletes whatever else the poor may have, preventing a move out of extreme poverty.

The Dengvaxi scandal has set back immunization efforts not only in the Philippines, but globally, feeding the anti-immunization movements with more energy than fraudulent data or pseudo-science has done. There is no need to discuss medical equipment placed in remote areas where there are no doctors who can use them, as that seems more obvious in the waste of resources. The immunization issue, or the Dengvaxia scandal, has focused largely on how dengue has come back to us in its seasonal surges with incredible vengeance, but that polio, that has largely disappeared, is back. But what is not told to us are the stories and data that will show, the misallocation of resources did not just hurt the poor with diseases, which endangers the whole global community (many countries are now starting to require proof of polio shots), but that those who are poor have become poorer, not only because of the sickness that has come to haunt the homes of countless families, the delivery of vaccines has become more expensive, with the need to allocate resources for campaigns to reverse the misconceptions about vaccines. The the low uptake makes the distribution higher in cost as well, as has been pointed out by this year’s Noble laureates in economics. (See: )

It is a good reminder for those of us in health care, its many moving parts: technical, policy, business, politics, logistics part of this incredibly complex industry, because it is an industry: we are all chasing numbers, and multinational behemoths constantly pushing for quotas not annually, but quarterly (every three months) must be re-calibrated.The technological advances in medical equipment and wonderful new breakthrough drugs are not in question: it is our chase for numbers that have made the poor so much poorer, and no one wants to talk about this.

The Lean Startup Conference 2018 – Las Vegas

We came to the startup movement through Steve Blank: he really has it canned, this how to build a business from nothing. It is almost like it is too easy, except he does tell you, whatever else you do, starting a business to scale will probably be the hardest endeavour you can ever do, and by the way, coming from a dysfunctional family helps if you are going to be a founder. In fact in a panel discussion at the 2018 Lean Startup Conference in Las Vegas, Eric Ries the author of the bestseller The Lean Startup expressed his wish that if he could do it all over again, he would have not made it sound too easy, which has become an entry point of criticism for the book in recent years, especially now that corporate America is trying to implement and learn from Ries and his team.

Eric Ries’ The Lean Startup book and company we can say are the crystallization of Steve Blank’s initial ideas as taught in his classroom and initial blog essays, combining it with the engineering methods and management systems of Toyota, thus transforming the concepts and anecdotes to a combination of Steve Blank and Toyota into a digestible language that has graduated into the world to consultants and annual conferences.

First off, in spite of the criticism the Lean Startup concepts and simplifications have received in recent years, our company is a testament that the ideas of Steve Blank, and the iterations of his ideas in the works of people like Eric Ries do work. We of course are no brand name in the startup movements that have sprouted all over the world in the last decade, especially those that have emerged from Silicon Valley. But we have grown from our beginnings of just starting as a scrappy two-people team, to a health care trading company contributing to health care solutions in the Philippines. Nearing our one-decade birthday anniversary in the market, to pull back and understand startups, to be reminded of our roots, to also take a break from the intensity of work for eight years: we decided to join the Lean Startup Conference in Las Vegas.

Largely, the venue of having it on the Zappos Campus is very interesting, because startup movements are always seen to be innovations in technology, and Zappos is a testament that innovations can come from business models, service orientation, to management styles. Zappos is the largest company to practice holocracy, which we find to be too utopian but nevertheless seems to be working for this Amazon subsidiary.

The conference did not disappoint: the plenary sessions were mostly of very high quality, and the breakout sessions we thought were revealing of the limits of the Lean Startup concepts when extended to philanthropy or big business. GE previously was touted to be the company that was using the Lean Startup methodologies, and the difference of just two years in the covers of Bloomberg below should be enough to summarize what had happened in 24 months since celebrating the transformation of GE to some kind of a Lean-agile-digital company.

March 21, 2016 Bloomberg cover versus February 18, 2018 cover

The big incentive for us to travel was also Reid Hoffman being part of the culminating plenary session, and he had approached business ideas previously with his background in philosophy, and his success in business and philanthropy made him a much sought-after speaker.

So with what Steve Blank’s ideas have contributed to our start and growth (we got to meet him and even had him autograph a book in 2016), thus the interest in Lean as a concept, Reid Hoffman attending to join a discussion on blitz scaling, and going to Las Vegas to visit Zappos: we were on our way.

Reid Hoffman is too big, and too present in youtube, to be interesting because what he said in the conference is basically out there already. And since he is a certified billionaire, he is likely very calculated in public discussions. This was all confirmed in seeing and listening to Hoffman on the last day of the conference. But in conferences like this, it is not the big name one is likely familiar with that makes attendance worth the effort. The discovery of new names not in our radar is really what makes these conferences worth the trip.

What we said about Reid Hoffman we can say the same about Tony Hsieh, what he had to say had been said by him many times, and easily can be found on the web, in articles and videos.

Hands down, Holly Liu was the best speaker for us, plus an education on the world of online games. She was articulate, staggering in achievement, and generous with her ideas. In fact, listening to her explained to us the weak breakout sessions or even one of the weaker plenary sessions. She basically says that there are abilities and ingredients to innovate and disrupt that are unique to startups. Some of the reasons are: nobody cares about your startup, nobody knows or likes your startup. This frees you up to be sharp, to be adventurous, and to dare to be different and exciting to rise above the rest. She did not exactly say large companies are hopeless in the areas of innovation and disruption, but that somehow the outlook will be different, or the ingredients just cannot be duplicated, and by implication, likely will need a whole different set of ingredients. In breakout sessions of the people in government who are currently tasked to bring in the spirit of the Lean Startup movement into these mammoth organizations, one does hear some of the speakers say they were hired because they did a startup and failed, so one qualification was they have tried out the startup world. There is much that has been said of being unafraid to fail in Silicon Valley, but the ability and the experience of those who have succeeded, like Holly Liu, are the reasons the gravitas to talk about innovation and persistence amidst the sea of failures is so convincing and more importantly, realistic.

Holly Liu in the conference

The other great speakers were Matt Johnson of the Frontier Project and Stephen Robert Morse of Observatory, on the importance of a compelling story, even biological and psychological reactions to it were discussed, with a powerful preview of a possible Netflix project by Morse on Colin Kaepernick. Liz Jackson of The Disabled List (she was even more compelling here than in New York last year with her 99U talk on design as she argued not for design this time, but for how business is doing it all wrong in approaching this segment of the market). Joel Spolsky of Stack Overflow did not only have a great story of making it in the world of online business, but more importantly he talked about countering a web business that monetizes what should be an online space that allows programmers to have a free and open discussion to help each other. In short, not everything should be monetized in the web, even if it is possible to monetize it: and Silicon Valley is under the microscope these days precisely because of this issue (Facebook is monetizing you).

The discussion titled Lean Startup Where You Least Expect It was well moderated by Hisham Ibrahim, and the founders Malcolm Handley of Strong Atomics, Jaya Rao of Molekule, Greg Piefer of Shine, and Claudia Recchi of EdSights were all articulate, and have been going through the hoops of running a startup. These are founders who are beginning or have attracted funding, but are still grappling with issues of how to scale. You could see and hear their passion and struggle to get not only proof of concept, but beyond, the struggle to scale in the area of nuclear fusion to software to help universities track students at risk of dropping out. This is in contrast to the Real-World Lessons in Scaling Innovation Inside Large Enterprises with Keith Berry of Moody Analytics, John Buhl of Liguori Innovation, Julie Foy of Proctor and Gamble, Jean Vernor of Munich Reinsurance America, and Lisha Davis of Vanguard. The most memorable anecdote here was how Procter and Gamble innovated with what is a leading sub-category product in the diaper category: the environmentally friendly disposable diaper, which is certainly important, but also maybe says a lot about the limits of what is possible in giants like Procter and Gamble, which certainly is known globally to aggressively recruit some of the best talent available out there, but is also being questioned in media outlets for how competition from smaller companies may be beating it in the area of innovation and in delighting customers.

Forms were given to those who wanted some time with Eric Ries, founder of the Lean Startup Conference. It was told to us that those who will get some time with him will be announced, but no announcement ever came, so some of us wondered if this did push through. Our question written in the form was: How do we bring this to the Philippines? It was a shot at having the Lean Startup team really connected to Philippine giant companies (with paid fees of course, and we would have helped in the legwork to get them connected), and to the small but real startup scene in the Philippines. Telecom conglomerate PLDT for example had Guy Kawasaki previously, and we think other conglomerates are also trying to understand the startup DNA. Metro Pacific and Ayala Corporation both have startup funding ventures looking for the next Alibaba. It will not be as exciting as say trying out the methodology and the Lean Startup team in say Procter and Gamble, or even GE for that matter: but with the efforts in non-profit, I think to launch this in a Third World country, in Asia, will add to the coffers and glamour and usefulness of the Lean Startup ideas, extend concepts, ignite new movements. But the Lean Startup team will need to be willing to see this market as worthy of its time (China and its cities like Shenzhen should be disqualified from the Third World category), as it tries to extend its influence way beyond the Startup world of say San Francisco, New York, and Berlin. The future of this movement and the Lean Startup team of Eric Ries can be found outside the centers of startups and innovation.

A full disclosure: we got to attend simply out of the kindness of the Lean Startup Conference rules, that allow participants who find the fees too prohibitive to go at a much reduced rate in exchange for a blog review of the conference. The conference is worth the trip and the time for anyone who wants to know how people are using, innovating, extending the Lean Startup concepts. Eric Ries did proudly say at the beginning that this conference had none of the PR-machine-polished talks, and except for two of the biggest names that had the feel of a PR-polisher having done work already long ago, Ries was largely correct, and this made the weaker parts of the breakout conferences all the more obvious, but at the same time it was what made the strong plenary sessions so fresh and compelling.

This Is Water by David Foster Wallace

We had a leadership meeting yesterday and we had a discussion of the graduation speech of the late young genius: David Foster Wallace. If you have twenty minutes, it is worth your time to listen to the audio that is available on the internet. It starts out with a parable: Two young fish are swimming when they meet an old fish going the other way. The senior fish asked the two young fish: “Good moring boys, how is the water today?” After swimming for a while, one of the young fish turns to his companion and says: “What the hell is water?” The quote below is the key take away of that parable, which was the point of our leadership workshop.

Former Health Secretary Paulyn Rosell-Ubial, MD (Public Health Advocate)

According to the Department of Health website, former Secretary of Health Paulyn Rosell-Ubial “is the daughter of former UP Professor Neon C. Rosell, and she finished her primary and secondary schooling in UPIS. She he took up BS Zoology in UP Diliman, and Medicine in the University of the East- Ramon Magsaysay Memorial Medical Center. Subsequently, she continued her studies, fulfilling her postgraduate internship in the UP-PGH and her Masters Degree in the UP College of Public Health.” Academic qualifications hardly give us an idea as to the scope and depth of experience of former Secretary Ubial in the bureaucracy and in solving the country’s health concerns. We usually only remember the importance of the Secretary of Health when a health crisis erupts. Ebola, AIDS, measles, name it, when it hits the headlines, we remember who is our current Secretary of Health. We got an interview with our immediate former Secretary of Health, a long-serving civil servant, largely wanting to talk only of evidence-based decisions of policies and nothing else. That creates problems, in a country highly political and highly politicized, which may explain her non-confirmation at the Commission on Appointments, but for sure, we have concluded, the country needs more policy wonks and bureaucrats with their heart like Secretary Ubial.

How long was your service in government Secretary Ubial?

My anniversary of entry was October 30, so it was a total of 29 years.

You are effectively out of government now?

Yes, because when I was rejected by the Commission on Appointments, I was effectively separated from the government.

Does this mean your are enjoying your GSIS already?

I can only get my GSIS at 60, so I have five years to go and I have to find something to do while I wait, and I am seeing academe and advocacy as avenues for productivity in the next five years. Government can rehire me as undersecretary, and there are offers of consultancies, but with all the controversies due to the Dengvaxia case, my husband and I came to the conclusion that it is best not to go back to government. I am working with the Philippine Council for Population Development, an NGO working on the population issue, and I hope to work with the UP College of Public Health. I am done as a permanent or regular employee of government.

You have worn a lot of hats in government, but which would you think is the hat that adequately describes who you are, you are most comfortable with?

I would like to believe I am public health advocate, meaning I advocate interventions that will prevent illnesses and premature death. Unlike clinicians who help people one at a time, public health advocates, when successful, can affect millions of lives at one go. I advocate vaccination, seatbelt use, cessation of smoking, road safety, suicide prevention. Bringing down firecracker injuries is always a challenge for secretaries of health, and during my stint in the department I am gratified to have been able to help bring this down by 70 percent the injuries for 2018, the first dramatic drop in 10 years, so from a stable rate of 1000 injuries per year, it went down to 300. Zero unmet needs for family planning facilities. Anti-smoking advocacy. The list goes on as to what the department is doing, and what I have been involved in.

Which one of your advocacies are you proudest of?

I was the head of the polio eradication unit when we staged one of the most successful national health programs: the Oplan Alis Disease. We were declared polio free year 2000 and Secretary Romualdez received the award in Japan. I am very proud of being part of that.

You mention Secretary Romualdez, considered one of the best secretaries of health of the nation for the germ of the idea of universal health care, which became Philhealth.

Definitely Secretary Romualdez is remembered to be one of the greats. The backbone of Philhealth and the idea of universal health care in the Philippines was indeed due to Secretary Romualdez. It evolved with Secretary Dayrit, another great Secretary of Health.

Another great perspective of Secretary Romualdez is we cannot reinvent the system, but we have to work with the existing system, so he had the vision of improving our health care that assumes that 50 percent is private and 50 percent is public, and he gave the vision to unify it with a national health program, so even if an indigent can walk in the private hospital. And if you are a private sector person, you can walk in a public hospital and get equal quality services. It is happening slowly now.

But it is also in the records that Senator Juan Flavier was a great public health advocate, and for me the greatest Secretary of Health of all time because his humour, jolly nature, his style really motivated the health workers to be productive. He was not a seasoned policy person, but his infectious personality, he was able to mobilize the program managers. I was with the immunization of polio during his time as secretary, and I consider that some of the best times I had in the department. He brought out the best in the people of the bureaucracy.

These are the top three I have in my list: Flavier, Romualdez, Dayrit.

The bureaucracy of the government we must value, we must hold dear, but it must be given the correct moral compass, and its leaders will determine that, as we have seen, with Flavier, the DoH people shined, values of efficiency and integrity really came out, proving once again that the people will only be as good as their leaders.

Your only child, a son, is now studying to be a doctor. Would you encourage him to enter government service?

It is very productive to be in government. I was with Gina Lopez and Judy Taguiwalo recently for lunch in Gina’s place, we realized we have done a lot in spite of our short stint in government as secretaries of our respective departments. You have the resources, Judy was saying, to really make an impact. It really has an impact on the marginalized to do things at the national level. Gina Lopez and Judy Taguiwalo were never part of the national government, so they saw the scope and reach of the national government. Before DSWD, for an indigent to get funds, a person must go through a patron or a local politician, now that is not needed anymore in DSWD or even in DoH. You just have to prove you are an indigent patient and you will be helped. The PDAF issue was an eye opener and a jolt to the system to move to a higher level. So there are many good things happening still in government.

The salary now is also competitive with the private sector. We benchmarked with government-owned corporations. With this, I encourage doctors to apply in government not just for training, but for a long-term career.

Government is still okay, so the short answer is yes, I do tell my son about government service, but it is his choice, it his prerogative as it is after all his life. His choice of a career in medicine is not because of us. It’s his life, we tell him that. He almost went into law, since he was a part of the debating team when he was studying BS psychology for his pre-med, and he was practicing on his father and mother at home for his debating skills (laughs).

Politics is intense in government?

Yes, but politicians and legislators are realizing they should not be in health, and that patronage politics should stay away from it. The recent controversies hounding our health initiatives and hampering our health initiatives are a reminder that the department is best left to professionals, bureaucrats, technocrats, policy people.

Maybe not just politicians but the Church?

In the issue of the Catholic Church in reproductive health, they have their dogmas and tradition. They have their role to play in all of these.

The Department of Health however must base its policies and decisions on science and evidence. Religion and science need not clash over policy. There is actually no conflict, or there should be no conflict. We are advocating birth spacing as a department. Birth spacing is a response to health issues, not just economic or demographic issues. Of course when you have the numbers you want, you should have the option to spacing and limiting birth. The Dpeartment does not try to control birth.

In our HIV AIDS programs, we work with the parish churches to promote abstinence, healthy lifestyles, and when all else fails, go to the health centers (laughs).

South America, Columbia and Brazil have successful population policies and they are largely Catholic countries.

The earth can hold around 15 billion. We are half that already. We really need to think of the population issue, because in 20 years it is an issue we will be forced to confront if we do not tackle this now. 2.1 is replacement growth for the Philippines, and we started with 6 in the 60s, now it is around 2.6 already, so by 2022 we want to achieve replacement level growth of 2.1.

The Health Department has a very strong anti-tobacco company stance. Its code of conduct simply makes it impossible for both sides to work together even for worthy projects. The pharmaceutical industry that has produced great discoveries and inventions are more the challenge. What should be done?

I agree, with pharmaceutical industries, it is more challenging. We have a code of conduct, but in the Dengvaxia case, you see the code of conduct would have worked, if followed, followed strictly, and there were obvious lapses the hearings and investigations are now showing. We need these investigations in order to correct the flaw and lapses. The FEC (Formulary Executive Council) and FDA (Food and Drug Administration) were compromised and we have to study this and learn lessons from that. The safety barriers and safety nets are enough if followed, as the guidelines and laws are in place.

One very important realization for the bureacracy, that since we have the money, we have the people: we must conduct our own clinical trials and studies to validate what is out there. We must form an independent research culture that is sustained and supported solely by the government. That is the big realization for me as Secretary of Health, and that is what the Duterte administration has shown us: that the government has the money. The country has the resources to do grand and ambitious projects and undertakings. We are proposing we do our own studies with RITM, UP, San Lazaro.

Other countries just increase sin taxes, but we allocated all our sin taxes to health, and not all countries do that. During the time of Secretary Ona the guidelines of the DoH was that 2 percent of our budget should be given to research and we have started to implement this during the time of Secretary Ona. Sin tax has given us the elbow room to outsource to academe. The need for research that the government totally control and is funded well is now considered not only important, but urgent.

You sound optimistic about what the Duterte government is doing in health, but what problems are we facing in actuality. I could imagine it must be still gigantic, considering the problems we are hearing about like the Dengvaxia controversy.

30 percent of our people are still not covered by Philhealth, that is 30 million: so we have some way to go to reach those in the hinterlands for example, those in disadvantaged areas, prisons, informal settlers, we still have a way to go. In my stint as DoH Secretary we call that the last mile we have to reach. But you are right that I am optimistic: our focus is the population that has no money for not just the hospital, but catastrophic we cover 80 percent of the medical expenses after the 20 percent of Philhealth. The president even added 2 billion for this. It is the collateral expenses, like transportation, that is also a problem. The DoH is trying to figure that out as well.

We have a president in President Duterte that is focused on health and education. We rose from 122 billion pesos including philhealth to 142 billion pesos in budget, and now it is 164 billion. It is the biggest increase in the budget of DoH. We were able to implement a lot of the programs, and more are in the pipeline that Secretary Duque will implement and have the vision and skill to execute. Immunization the previous budget was 3.2 billion pesos for vaccines, now 7.2 billion pesos is for that.

Our policies should just be guided by evidence. Secretary Duque will be reintroducing metrics and score cards, which he started during his first term as Secretary of Health, but that effort was waylaid by so many initiatives like the ISO to improve systems and documentation. Of course that gave us guidelines, and that is also good for quality, but metrics and scorecards give accountability and Secretary Duque will do well in that.

Before the national insurance circa 1995, quality as a concept was not institutionalized, so metrics and quality systems were needed to go beyond just the idea of service, but quality is a word needed there too. It cannot just be service without quality.

Yet we must see the statistics: There is a gap of 42,000 beds. We have one bed for 2000 Filipinos and the ideal is one bed for 800 Filipinos. Only in Metro Manila is it one for 591. I think that is a little off because I don’t think they factored in the high migration into Metro Manila in the mornings from workers and students coming in from the surrounding areas.

Any models outside the Philippines we can learn from?

We need a cadre of health workers, and since we can afford free university education, then we can hire health workers with a good salary. We deploy them. So for every 1000 Filipinos, like the Cuban model, there has to be a doctor monitoring them. We can have a nurse instead of a doctor and it will still work well.

The outcomes in Cuba in infant or maternity mortality are better than the US or any developed country, so 460 dollars per capita is invested in health in Cuba and in the US is 8000 dollars per capita, but it is the ratio of health workers taking care of a population at the preventive level that is the key. The system can prevent illnesses, and the Cuban model has a very strong primary care line of defense, so if you don’t come to the health facility, the doctor will go to your house. You have no choice but to get healthy. We see people in the streets in the Philippines with tumours in their face as big as a basketball, and that is because no one is getting them to a doctor, and this can easily be detected when the tumour was still the size of a marble.

Any teacher inspired or helped you in a big way when you were a student?

Joven Cuanang. Many teachers helped and influenced me, but he is the most memorable, and a brilliant artist as we saw when he drew the brain, as we did not have power point or transparencies then, so Dr. Cuanang would draw the brain in front of us when he was my teacher in anatomy. He is retired now and we still see each other occasionally.

How about books? Any you want to bring to the attention of our readers?

I like reading autobiographies, life stories, and it reflects my being a government personnel for so long that I have read the autobiographies of our presidents, especially from Marcos to the present, I have read them.

If I have to single out an author, I enjoyed and learned a lot from the books of Senator Juan Flavier. This again reflects my great admiration for him as a man, and for what he has done to our Department, and his contribution to our country.

Is there anything you want to say about the Dengvaxia experience of our country?

On my thoughts on the dengue vaccine, this was what I told DOH program managers when I learned about the pilot implementation happening just before the 2016 elections and the targeting of one million grade 4 school children: “Even if it were a good vaccine, no long-term safety issues, the fact that it is introduced before the elections, it will already be tainted, its rationale and purpose will always be doubted.” It was doomed to fail even before it started and the low uptake of only 67% of the target population is proof enough that the social preparation was not adequate and people had doubts as to the vaccine program’s real intention. It was problematic from the start, even before Sanofi made their announcement of a label change on Nov 29, 2017, which just confirmed the people’s doubts, because that vaccination campaign was rushed, even introducing it before completion of the phase three of the clinical trials. I was caught in a damage control situation, damned if I continued it, damned if I stopped it because 2.5 billion pesos worth of vaccines were already in our vaccine storage facility in RITM, and at that point the ADE (antibody-dependent enhancement) risk was only theoretical. Then all the pressure from Congress came in. It was a difficult time but I did all decisions with consultation and due process, plus there were an Expert Panel recommendation, Execom Resolution and an FEC imprimatur.