Replies to LegCo questions
LCQ6: Regulation of hydrogen peroxide products
Following is a question by the Dr Hon Tang Siu-tong and a written reply by the Secretary for Health, Welfare and Food, Dr Yeoh Eng-kiong, in the Legislative Council today (March 10):
Question:
Will the Government inform this Council:
(a) whether it knows the total number of attendances at public hospitals and clinics arising from the misuse of hydrogen peroxide over the past three years;
(b) whether there is any legislation governing the publicity on and sale of hydrogen peroxide products; if so, of the provisions of the relevant legislation;
(c) if there is such legislation, of the respective numbers of cases relating to hydrogen peroxide products in breach of the legislation handled by the authorities through their inspections and public reports in each of the past three years; and, among them, the respective numbers of prosecution and conviction cases, as well as the penalties imposed; and
(d) whether the authorities have considered bringing hydrogen peroxide into the ambit of the Pharmacy and Poisons Regulations (Cap. 138, sub. leg. A) so as to strengthen the control over it; if so, of the outcome of their consideration?
Reply:
Madam President
(a) Ingestion of diluted hydrogen peroxide will cause mild throat discomfort, stomach pain, nausea, vomiting and diarrhoea, whereas that of concentrated hydrogen peroxide can cause stomach distension and for some rare cases, bowel perforation and gas embolism. At present, disease data are processed according to the "International Classification of Diseases (ICD) Coding System", a tool used internationally for classification of disease diagnosis. Hydrogen peroxide poisoning, the clinical symptoms of which are usually not specific, is not a unique diagnosis entity under the ICD Coding System. As such, there is no readily available figure on clinic and hospital attendance related to improper use of hydrogen peroxide.
(b) Hydrogen peroxide products, if used for medicinal purposes such as treatment or prevention of a specific disease or disease symptom, are classified as pharmaceutical products and governed by the Pharmacy and Poison Ordinance (PPO) (Cap. 138) and its subsidiary legislation. It is a statutory requirement for these products to be registered with the Pharmacy and Poisons Board (PPB) before they can be sold or supplied in Hong Kong. For the protection of public health, registration as pharmaceutical products will only be granted if the criteria of efficacy, safety and quality of individual products are met. The maximum penalty for possession and sale of unregistered pharmaceutical product is a fine of $100,000 and imprisonment for two years.
In addition, the Dangerous Goods Ordinance (DGO) (Cap. 295) provides for control over the manufacture and storage of hydrogen peroxide solution of a strength greater than 6 per cent by weight. A licence issued by the Fire Services Department is required if the quantity of such hydrogen peroxide solution stored in any premises exceeds that specified in the Dangerous Goods (General) Regulations (Cap. 295A).
As far as publicity is concerned, the Undesirable Medical Advertisements Ordinance (UMAO) (Cap. 231) prohibits the advertising of medicines, surgical appliances or treatments for prevention or treatment of certain specified diseases or conditions in human beings. Specifically, the UMAO states that no person shall publish any advertisement likely to lead to the use of any medicine or any treatment for the prevention or treatment of any disease or condition specified in Schedule 1 or Schedule 2 of the Ordinance. Such advertisements cover a wide range of forms including newspaper advertisements, circulars, notices and oral announcements, etc. An offence under the UMAO is liable to a fine of $10,000 upon first conviction, and upon subsequent conviction to a fine of $25,000 and imprisonment of one year.
(c) From 2001 to February 2004, the Department of Health conducted investigations on two cases relating to hydrogen peroxide products that were suspected to have contravened the relevant provisions of the UMAO and the PPO. The former case concerned a company advertising hydrogen peroxide for treatment purpose on a website, and a warning letter was issued to the company. As for the latter case, no prosecution was initiated as no illegal activities were detected during investigation.
Meanwhile, there were four conviction cases relating to contravention of the relevant provisions of the DGO during the aforementioned period. All of them concerned over-storage of hydrogen peroxide. The penalties imposed ranged from $3,000 to $20,000.
(d) As stated above, hydrogen peroxide for use as pharmaceutical product is already subject to the control of the PPO and its subsidiary legislation.
Ends/Wednesday, March 10, 2004
NNNN