The shaping of suppositories has traditionally suggested to practitioners that they should be inserted tapered end first. There is, however, a debate about this. Abd-el-Maeboud et al (1991) considered the anatomy and physiology of the rectum and believed that inserting a suppository blunt end first would facilitate its retention better than if inserted tapered end first. This caused a change in practice (Moppett 2000), but Kyle (2009) has questioned this change. Kyle (2009) considers that Abd-el-Maeboud’s trial had a dubious methodology; it particularly failed to differentiate between systemic and laxative suppositories. Abd-el-Maeboud et al (1991) suggest that if inserted blunt end first the anatomy of the rectum ‘sucks’ the suppository in as the sphincter closes. This means that it is not necessary to insert the administering finger further than pushing the suppository in. Kyle (2009) points out that the necessity for some laxative suppositories to sit against the rectum wall means that it is necessary to insert them 2–4 cm into the rectum. Abd-el-Maeboud et al (1991) believe that inserting a suppository tapered end first prevents the anal sphincter from closing properly. The manufacturers continue to suggest that tapered end first is correct in line with their product licence (Bradshaw & Price 2007). Johnson & Taylor (2000 & 2005) supported the idea that suppositories for systemic use should be inserted blunt end first while laxative ones should be inserted tapered end first. As Kyle (2009) suggests, if this issue is of considerable significance then further rigorous research is needed promptly. The reader should be aware of the devolving argument, any future studies and their locally agreed protocol.