Letter: Unfair to men

Address Supplied
Friday 29 January 1999 19:02 EST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Sir: Whilst a retired doctor in my 60s I had come to accept impotence as part of normal ageing.

Soon afterwards, widowed and enjoying a new relationship, the bogey of erectile dysfunction confronted me again. After psychiatric counselling, a trial of the latest new remedy, still unlicensed in the UK, proved unhelpful.

Later, a uroandrologist established organic causation amenable to treatment. He recommended androgen replacement. Testosterone on its own failed to restore potency. Next, painful injections into the penis of another costly remedy, freely available under the NHS, proved too repugnant to tolerate.

The latest reputedly "magic" cure became available eventually to nominated specialists. Before prescribing it, my uroandrologist sought psychiatric reassurance about the relationship with my wife. Before our joint appointment, Viagra became freely available abroad.

Tablets bought over the counter in Switzerland and taken in a low dose restored normal potency immediately, after 15 years' impotence. The benefits to the remarriage of a retired doctor in his early 70s and his pre-menopausal wife do not need to be spelt out.

The uroandrologist recommended continuation of hormone replacement plus Viagra and the joint prescription was implemented by my GP. Later, having studied official advice, she felt bound to discontinue the Viagra; it seemed that the androgen could continue to be prescribed, but Viagra should be sought privately.

I sought reconsideration of her decision and, after reviewing my extensive specialist investigations, she resumed NHS prescription of testosterone with Viagra, pending the Health Minister's advice and the BMA's response.

It is anomalous that a joint NHS prescription, demonstrated as curative for a seemingly irremediable organic condition, is apparently to become impermissible once again, unless the proposed "list" is reviewed sensibly and promoted on an advisory basis. It should not deny doctors the right to exercise clinical discretion individually.

NAME AND ADDRESS SUPPLIED

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in