First, I find it hard to believe that the events over the last few weeks are not a turf war brought upon by plastic surgeons when prominent members of the two associations repeatedly called for stricter regulations governing non-plastic surgeons.

Second, I am surprised that members of both associations chose to bandy about the 'rising numbers of serious complications arising from aesthetic surgery performed by non-plastic surgeons'. I assume that they are concerned because these 'rising numbers' in total are higher than their own community's.

According to the Ministry of Health's last estimation, there are 1,000 or so doctors in Singapore who practise aesthetic medicine. This outnumbers the small band of plastic surgeons offering treatments in Singapore.

It is advisable for the two associations to compare apples with apples and look at complication percentage rates which take into account the total number of treatments performed. More importantly, this rate of complications should be compared to the plastic surgery industry's own complication percentages to see if there is even cause for alarm in the first place.

Lastly, I feel it is unnecessary for the two associations to state that patient safety is paramount and for them to have a 'protect our patients' clause included in their Constitution. These are basic ethical tenets that are not unique to plastic surgeons, but are practised by doctors of all disciplines.

Singapore medicine is of the highest standards and every single one of our doctors 'protects our patients'. Using this moral high ground as a cover for turf protection is unbecoming of a band of highly educated professionals.

Lucy Loo (Ms)