STUPOR CAUSED BY INSULIN

Hokitika Guardian, 5 November 1930, Page 8

STUPOR CAUSED BY INSULIN

MOTORIST IN COURT. SYMPTOMS IDENTICAL WITH INTOXICATION. WELLINGTON, Nov. 3. Symptoms which the police considered were due to intoxication were attributed by the defence to the resah of tin overdose of insulin taken as treatment for diabetes in a case today in which Philip John Foster, described as a marine superintendent, aged fifty-eight years, was charged with lieing intoxicated in chargjs of a motor-ear early on Sunday evening, October 26. Mr R. M’Neil, S.M., heard the case. Accused pleaded not guilty. Constable' Gissett said that, shortly after seven o’clock on an evening last month, lie went to Rintoul Street, where some excavating had been done in connection with tramway works. A car vvajs in the excavation, and a tramway man was attempting to drive it out. Foster was in the back of the car, and at first denied that lie had been the driver. He afterwards admitod that he was the driver, hut refused for a time to get out of the car until witness threatened to force him out. His breath smelt strongly of liquor, and when he got out of the car lie was staggering. Questioned as to what liquor lie had had, accused said lie had not had a drop. He had said nothing about- the state of his health.

Four constables and four independent, witnesses gave corroborative evidence.

Mr W. Heine, counsel for accused, said that for six months accused had been. a diabetic under treatment by Dr Brtvd and on his doctor’s advice he had been taking insulin injections, one in the morning arid one in the evening. Under this treatment accused's condition had improved, and for a fortnight prior to October 26 he had omitted the evening injection. By means of his regular tests he found, on Friday or Saturday, that the sugar content of his system was more than it should be, and he resumed the evening treatment on the Sunday. He took an injection at 6.30, up to which time lie had had no liquor.

Feeling rather “seedy” after the injection. he took one small whisk\ . He had been told that anyone undergoing the treatment he was should he very abstemious, and he had kept strictly to the letter of that instruction. Later in the evening accused wap still feeling, ill. He had found that one whisky never affected him. Two friends of accused would be called to say that up to 6.30 p.m. he was perfectly solver. Accused had had a. very light tea, and Inter decided to go for a drive. His drowsiness becoming worse, lie decided to return home, and in Binton 1 Street he was practically overcome by stupor. He could scarcely remember what hapDened after that. An insulin injection, if not followed by a full meal, caused a state of coma which was described in the text hooks as being impossible to distinguish from the appearance of intoxication. Accused had had only a light meal and had been affected by the injection. Evidence was given along these lines. Dr J. Boyd said that, knowing, Captain Foster and knowing what had happened, he thought there could be no doubt that accused had suffered an •insulin reaction. He had taken an overdose of insulin, seeing that he had not had an evening injection for two or three weeks. The effect would bmt anywhere from four to eight hours. Apart from the smell of his breath, all Captain Foster’s symptoms were consistent with an insulin reaction. A similar reaction amongst his patients was fairly common. MY AT’Neil said: “Having heard the evidence of T>r Boyd as to the effect of insulin taken in a dose in which defendant has sworn he took it and the surrounding circumstances, I '>"( f ,onve to the conclusion that it would Ire unsafe to convict on the charge of bein'' intoxicated. Shortly. T am bound to say that the charge is not proved.” The matter, he said, did not rest there however. The fact that defendant after having taken insulin and feeling its effects, had allowed himself to get into the circumstances he did was gn act of negligence op ipS

part, and he would bo convicted oilin' charge of negligent driving. The question of the penalty laid to be considered, and the safety of the public had to be taken' into consideration. Dr Boyd had said the symptoms of the insulin reaction were practically the same as those of a preran intoxicated with the exception of the smell of the breath;.and that leing so. the danger must he. guarded against. It wnjs the duty of the Court to try to nrot^c 1- the public.

“Having believed defendant, that it was insulin that was the trouble and not liquor.” said the Magistrate, “I do not think it a matter for a heavy fine. Defendant will be fined £5, but. his present driving licence will be cancelled and lie will he prohibited from obtaining another for two years after the time the present one expires.” >