Introduction
Dear Philips executives in Mexico, I have no doubt about your professionalism and seriousness. You are undoubtedly aware of return policies and merchandise exchange procedures. You likely understand how product returns, such as defective shoes or faulty appliances, work globally. It’s highly probable that you’ve used Amazon services to return disappointing items like malfunctioning grills or barbecues. Given your knowledge and seriousness with your teams, I wonder why certain practices occur in Mexico that would never take place in the United States or Europe.
The Issue with Ventilator Recall in Mexico
I previously wrote about Philips’ E30 ventilators distributed in at least 255 public hospitals in Mexico, which turned out to be toxic and potentially cancer-causing. These ventilators are being withdrawn from hospitals and homes in the United States by your company. I highlighted the Mexican government’s criminal omission for not mandating a recall in Mexico, but I also acknowledged your company’s responsibility. New information reveals that Philips is indeed recalling these ventilators in Mexico, but without replacements. They collect the faulty equipment as trash without taking responsibility for the defect.
Investigation Findings
I accessed an investigation by journalist Frida Mendoza from emeequis, which includes direct testimonies from medical personnel at the National Institute of Nutrition and state hospitals. These testimonies confirm that Philips directly contacts hospitals to collect the defective equipment. However, this process lacks formal letters, protocols, or replacement offers. Sometimes, they don’t even acknowledge the problem; they merely want to destroy the equipment.
Comparison with US Practices
Would Philips operate this way in the United States? No, because they are not allowed to. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) classified this case as a Class I recall, the most serious. The federal government signed a Consent Decree with Philips’ company, obliging them to repair, replace, or refund each defective unit. The process is straightforward: any individual with an E30 ventilator contacts the seller, and Philips sends a new or repaired unit while collecting the old one with a prepaid return label. There’s no need to cover shipping costs.
A Call for Corporate Responsibility
Although the Mexican government does not compel Philips to act differently, it is expected that the company will uphold its standards. Philips should adopt the protocols already in place in the United States. Exploiting the complicit silence of ineffective Mexican health authorities to collect faulty equipment from public hospitals without proper documentation, protocols, or replacements is unethical.
Philips’ Role and Expectations
Philips is a private company with interests to protect, and no one expects heroism. However, we can expect responsible behavior from them. Using existing protocols in the United States is not asking too much. While the Mexican government may be unhelpful, indifferent, or complicit in criminal activities, more can be expected from Philips. The company’s logo should not become synonymous with impunity, corruption, and criminality.
Key Questions and Answers
- What is the issue with Philips’ ventilators in Mexico? Philips’ E30 ventilators, distributed in numerous public hospitals, have been found to be toxic and potentially cancer-causing. The company is recalling these ventilators in Mexico without offering replacements, collecting them as trash instead of addressing the defect.
- How does this compare to the US approach? In the United States, the FDA classified this case as a Class I recall, the most serious. The federal government signed a Consent Decree with Philips’ company, obliging them to repair, replace, or refund each defective unit. The process is straightforward and customer-friendly.
- What are the expectations for Philips’ behavior in Mexico? Despite the Mexican government’s lack of action, it is expected that Philips will adhere to its established protocols in other countries. Using existing procedures in the US, which prioritize customer care and responsibility, is a reasonable expectation.
