New findings condemn decades of medical conduct
A veteran Singapore physician, Dr Wong Yoke Meng, has been suspended for 36 months after a disciplinary tribunal found him guilty of professional misconduct related to inappropriately prescribing hormone replacement therapies (HRT) to patients who had normal hormone levels and showed no symptoms warranting such treatment. The decision highlights serious concerns about patient safety, medical ethics, and the boundaries of “anti-ageing” medicine in Singapore.
The case at a glance
Dr Wong, who has more than 40 years in practice and a history of prior convictions, faced 40 charges under the Medical Registration Act. Eighteen charges related to the inappropriate prescription of HRT to 18 patients between 2013 and 2015. The remaining charges centered on inadequate medical records for these patients and four others.
The Singapore Medical Council (SMC) presented a comprehensive case showing a pattern of insufficient physical examinations and histories, with HRT started even before blood test results were available. Among the 14 men and four women affected, hormonal therapies included progesterone and testosterone in contexts not supported by current clinical guidelines.
What was prescribed and to whom
Several key details emerged from expert testimony:
- Three men received progesterone replacement therapy via topical cream—an approach not supported by scientific evidence for males.
- Four women were given testosterone replacement, largely outside typical indications, since testosterone therapy in women is generally limited to certain sexual-desire disorders in guideline contexts.
- Ten patients received more than one hormone, creating potential for adverse interactions and ambiguous attribution of side effects.
Experts noted that hormone interactions can be unpredictable, and the addition of multiple hormones without consistent evidence raises the risk of harm to patients.
Harm and consequences
The tribunal found evidence of actual harm in at least three cases: a female patient experienced tremors in her hands, and several male patients showed elevated testosterone levels beyond the normal range. The judgment stressed that such harms are not merely theoretical and reflected a broader pattern of risky medical practice.
In its 162-page decision grounds, the tribunal described the conduct as egregious, given the number of patients involved and Dr Wong’s past disciplinary history, including convictions in 2011, 2015, 2024, and 2001. It stated that Dr Wong appeared motivated by financial gain—administering costly wellness packages (about S$12,000 to S$10,000 per year, excluding medication costs)—with questionable benefit and a lack of proven efficacy for anti-ageing or wellness claims.
Standards and the court of public opinion
The tribunal underscored that prescribing hormones for anti-ageing or general wellness is not an accepted medical practice in Singapore and that there is no universal medical consensus on the supposed benefits of anti-ageing medicine. With no clear benefit, the primary beneficiary appeared to be the physician’s own finances rather than the patients’ health.
The tribunal’s final stance
While the SMC had proposed a 72-month suspension, the tribunal—chaired by Associate Professor Roy Joseph—imposed a 36-month suspension from Oct 8, 2025, to Oct 7, 2028, noting the severity and number of victims. The decision also reflected concerns about Dr Wong’s honesty and remorse, especially in light of a 2024 conviction for false declarations to the SMC about past convictions in Hong Kong courts.
As of now, checks on the SMC register did not reveal an active practicing certificate for Dr Wong. The case serves as a cautionary tale about the necessity of evidence-based practice, rigorous patient assessment, and transparent record-keeping in the medical profession.
What this means for patients and practitioners
For patients, the case reinforces the importance of ensuring that hormone therapies are evidence-based and tailored to legitimate medical indications. For clinicians, it underscores the duty to avoid prescribing treatments lacking robust support and to maintain thorough documentation and patient histories. The medical community in Singapore will be watching closely how the signals from this case inform future guidelines and enforcement against inappropriate wellness therapies.
