Sanofi Releases a Deadly Vaccine

One of the countries that purchased the
Dengue vaccine was the Philippines. The Philippine government mandated that
830,000 school children get the vaccination. Once the vaccination process was
well underway, some of the children began to fall very ill and ended up dying. Because
of these deaths, the vaccinations were immediately suspended and the Philippine
government reported it back to Sanofi. Once the reports of the deaths reached
Sanofi, they then released a side effect of Dengvaxia that was previously not
made public. The side effect was that if an individual were to receive the
vaccination with no prior exposure to the Dengue virus and then later on came
in contact with it, they would be at an elevated risk of developing one of the
more severe strains of the disease. Sanofi failed to release this information
before it released the actual vaccine. When this information was made public
worldwide, Dengvaxia was banned for sale, distribution and imports from there
on out.

The people of the Philippines felt as
though they were taken advantage of and used with no remorse as to what could
happen. Leovon Duneyro, a father whose youngest son was given the vaccine at
his school, claims that Sanofi knew about the risks all along. “We weren’t told
it was not safe… they made my son and other students as their guinea pigs,”
said Duneyro. He also made some accusations that Sanofi could have possibly
conspired with corrupt Philippine officials to circumvent regulations, but
Sanofi denied all these claims.
In this case there are several stakeholders. They include Sanofi Pasteur, pharmaceutical companies, the Philippine government and the country as a whole, the families of the children vaccinated along with the children themselves, and other people withe Dengue around the world. Sanofi Pasteur is the biggest stakeholder because their reputation on
all aspects is now ruined. They will be known for sending out a vaccine that
clearly was not ready to be used and killing innocent schoolchildren in the
process. On a pharmaceutical level, companies that would normally purchase
vaccines from Sanofi might now find another company to buy from since they may
believe that the vaccines they are purchasing might not be as safe as Sanofi
claims they are. The Philippine government is also affected in this situation
because it is there people who were injected with a vaccine that they purchased
and mandated. Another stakeholder in this case would be all the families of the
children vaccinated and they children themselves. Those children were given a
vaccine in confidence that it would help protect them and it ended up doing the
exact opposite, it made everything worse. The final stakeholder in this case is the
people in other parts of the world that have Dengue. These people witnessed
what happened in the Philippines and now if a new vaccine ever does surface,
they will always have this disaster lurking in the back of their minds.
This specific case will be analyzed using four ethical theories. The first theory used is individualism. Individualism focuses on maximizing profit as much as possible as long
as the law permits it. Within individualism there are two different
perspectives: Milton Freidman’s and Tibor Machan’s. Freidman’s view states that
there is only one goal of a business and it is to generate as much profit as
possible for its owners and stockholders. Friedman says that something is wrong
if it does not fall within the law or “within the rules of the game”. Tibor Machan shared the same view when it came to maximizing profits; he
believed that maximizing profits was by far the most important thing however a
business can have other goals that are not exactly aimed at profits. In both of these perspectives, the main goal is to maximize the profit while still abiding by the law. When applied to the Saonfi case, these perspectives say that what Sanofi did was not right. They were trying to maximize profit, but they did not do it within the
law. Sanofi released a vaccine that had severely detrimental side effects to
solely maximize their profits. They knew that because Dengue is such a popular
disease, countries would be willing to pay a lot of money to get their citizens
a vaccine that would protect them. Sanofi advertised that this vaccine would do
that, but it did the opposite.

Kantianism is the third ethical theory that is being used to analyze this case. Kantianism is all about giving people what they need in order to make
their own rational decisions, nothing should be hidden from or influencing
someone making a decision. The Formula of Humanity states that people should treat other people as
equals, never treat someone as if you are superior. It restates Kant’s main
ideas about treating people with respect and giving all the information needed
to make decisions when decisions need to be made. A Kantian would not agree with what Sanofi did. Sanofi hid a crucial
piece of information that would have drastically changed the decision-making
process of the Philippine government when they were deciding whether or not
they wanted to purchase the vaccine. They hindered the decision-making process
which according to Kant is morally wrong. Sanofi also did not treat the people
of world suffering from Dengue the way they would have wanted to be treated.
They used the people of the Philippines with the disease as lab rats and used
them to maximize their own profits. If the Sanofi officials were the ones with
a possibly life-threatening disease, they would have wanted people who were
working their very hardest to find a cure, not people who were working their
hardest to earn a bigger pay check.

After analyzing the case thoroughly, it is
clear to me that what Sanofi did was extremely unethical. What Sanofi did
should never have been done by any company and should never be done by any
company again. They deliberately hid an important piece of information about
one of the side effects of the vaccine Dengvaxia. The side effect was that if
the vaccine was given to an individual who had never been exposed to the
disease Dengue and was then later exposed to the disease post vaccination, they
would be more likely to develop the severe strain of the disease which could
lead to death. Sanofi did this because they saw an opportunity to maximize
their profit; they didn’t take a step back and think about the consequences of
their actions. What Sanofi did was selfish, disrespectful, and overall very
unethical.

Along with instating a new mission statement,
Sanofi should reevaluate their core values. Some ideas for new core values
could be honesty, customer safety, and selflessness. Honesty should be a core
value because after everything that happened, Sanofi is going to need to regain
their customers’ respect. They lied about a crucial piece of information
regarding a vaccine’s side effects thus regaining their customers trust should
be a number one priority. The willingness of their remaining customers to purchase
new vaccines from them will be slim so it is important that Sanofi starts
working towards that honesty. Customer safety should be another value because
of how many of their recent customers in the Philippines were hurt or killed.
Even if the people of the Philippines didn’t directly buy the vaccine from
Sanofi, they were still recipients of something that Sanofi created thus making
them their customers. Having customer safety be a core value will remind the officials
working that the first priority should always be the customer, never themselves.
The third core value that Sanofi should instate would be selflessness. During
the recent case with Dengvaxia, Sanofi was pinned as a selfish company that only
thought of themselves and ignored the well being of its customers. Adding selflessness
to the list of things to work on would show the world that they are trying to change
for the better and they do in fact realize that what they did was wrong.
In
order to prove to the public that the company is trying its best to better
itself, drastic changes should be made. To start, the company should let go of
any executive employees that had majors roles in the decision to put the
vaccine Dengvaxia on the market. Once all problematic employees are gone, new
ones should be hired. In the hiring process there should be an ethical examination
to ensure that these new employees won’t fall into the same traps that the old
ones did. Next, all employees that were lucky enough to keep their jobs should
have to go through the same ethical examination. If they do not meet the
standards set but higher executives, there place in the company will be taken
away. These ethics examinations should be made a regular thing that employees must
pass; this will be a constant reminder to all employees to make sure that they
are doing the right thing. While all this is going on, the marketing department
should be publicizing these new advances to prove to the pubic that they are
doing everything in their power to fix what is broken within their company. The
marketing department should also focus in on Sanofi’s new mission and their
core values.
If all of these things do occur and have the
hoped outcome, Sanofi should be able to correct their poor image. The marketing
will be a crucial part in the whole situation because they are really going to
have to emphasize that the company is trying to reinvent itself. Once the company’s
image starts to get fixed, profits will start to increase. The plan solely focuses
on bettering the company and improving their image and making sure that a disaster
like the Dengvaxia incident never happens again.
Gabrielle Delos
References:
Caliwan, Christopher Lloyd. “Dengvaxia Caused Deaths of Vaccinated Children: PAO Chief.” Philippine News Agency
Caliwan, Christopher Lloyd. “Dengvaxia Caused Deaths of Vaccinated Children: PAO Chief.” Philippine News Agency
RSS,Philippine News Agency, 6 June 2018, www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1037745
“Dengue and Severe Dengue.” World
Health Organization, World Health Organization, 13 Sept.
2018,
www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/dengue-and-severe-dengue.
Grady, Denise, and Katie Thomas. “Drug
Company Under Fire After Revealing Dengue
Vaccine
May Harm Some.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 17 Dec.
2017,
www.nytimes.com/2017/12/17/health/sanofi-dengue-vaccine-philippines.html.
“Mosquito.” Kids' Games, Animals,
Photos, Stories, and More, 1 Mar. 2014,
kids.nationalgeographic.com/animals/mosquito/#mosquito-closeup.jpg.
“We, at Sanofi, Are There beside People in
Need, as a Health Journey Partner.” Sanofi, a Global
Biopharmaceutical
Company Focused on Human Health - Sanofi, Sanofi Pasteur , 2004,
www.sanofi.com/en/about-us.
Salazar, Heather. The Business
Ethics Case Manual: The Authoritative Step-by-Step Guide to
Understanding
and Improving the Ethics of Any Business. Utilitarianism and Business
Ethics
sp 09 [Compatibility Mode]/2
No comments:
Post a Comment