The evidence given before the Committee shows that while reputable
chemists refer to a medical man patients coming to them for treatment
for venereal disease, and while these constitute the great majority of
the profession, there are still far too many cases of venereal disease
treated by chemists, herbalists, chiropractors, and other unqualified
persons. The treatment of venereal disease has become a specialized
branch of medicine, and many general practitioners prefer to refer such
cases to experts. The result of trusting to unqualified persons for the
treatment of such serious and difficult diseases is that the patient
usually drifts on uncured, and serious complications may occur. One
specialist in venereal disease informed the Committee that of 200 of his
cases whose cards showed particulars, 104 consulted chemists in the
first place and received more or less treatment from them. He was able
to give details of twenty-three cases showing the type of treatment
given. In several cases there were severe complications which could have
been avoided by proper treatment. There were also cases in which the
patient, after taking medicine for a time, had communicated the
infection to others. This witness further stated that some chemists
charged consultation fees in addition to charges for drugs applied, and
in certain cases charges for drugs were made which were little short of
blackmail.
The Committee recommend that, in place of section 7 of the Social
Hygiene Act, a more comprehensive clause from the West Australian Act be
adopted. This is to the following effect: "No person [other than a
registered medical practitioner] should attend or prescribe for any
person for the purpose of curing, alleviating, or treating venereal
disease, whether such person is in fact suffering from such disease or
not."
The Committee would suggest that if the Pharmaceutical Society were to
do all in its power to discourage its members from treating these
diseases it would have a good effect.