With increased regulatory action by the GPhC and others, we look at the issue of weight loss medicines and prescribing best practice.

The rapid growth of online clinics, social‑media marketing and direct‑to‑consumer supply for injectable and prescription weight‑loss products has triggered intense scrutiny from regulators. Concerns focus on products being prescribed or supplied without adequate clinical oversight, the circulation of unlicensed or counterfeit injections, and business models that prioritise volume over patient safety. These risks make weight‑loss services delivered remotely a regulatory priority for enforcement and professional investigation.

How fitness to practise concerns arise

Fitness to practise concerns in this area commonly stem from inadequate clinical assessment, superficial remote prescribing, poor record‑keeping and weak arrangements for monitoring and follow‑up. Supplying unlicensed or suspicious products, failing to verify prescriber credentials, and participating in unsafe supply chains also prompt referrals.

Allegations often centre on whether a registrant’s professional judgement or conduct placed patients at unnecessary risk.

Recent regulatory activity and enforcement signals

Regulators have stepped up seizures of suspect weight‑loss injections, increased the number of professional concerns reported about practitioners linked to weight‑loss services, and taken decisive action where systemic failings were identified.

These actions include suspensions and practice bans in cases where governance and prescribing standards were persistently deficient. The combined enforcement and seizure activity signals that regulators are prepared to pursue both product safety and professional accountability.

Specific risks for pharmacies and pharmacy professionals

Pharmacies face distinct risks when involved in remote or online weight‑loss services. Accepting prescriptions without satisfactory evidence of a valid clinical relationship, dispensing injectable or high‑risk medicines without ensuring safe storage and counselling, and supplying products with unclear provenance all raise regulatory exposure. Pharmacy branding or endorsement of remote prescribers with poor governance increases reputational and fitness to practise risk.

What regulators examine in FTP investigations

Investigations focus on clinical decision‑making, adherence to professional standards, adequacy of record‑keeping, participation in unsafe systems, and whether the registrant’s actions show an impairment of fitness to practise.

Regulators look for contemporaneous records demonstrating why decisions were made, evidence of appropriate checks on prescribers and products, and clear arrangements for monitoring, escalation and follow‑up.

Practical steps to reduce regulatory risk

Strengthen clinical governance for remote prescriptions by requiring documented evidence of valid clinical assessments and monitoring arrangements before dispensing. Verify prescribers’ credentials and retain auditable records linking each dispensed item to the clinical record.

Tighten checks on supply‑chain provenance and refuse to supply medicines where authorisation or traceability is unclear. Ensure correct storage, labelling and patient counselling for injectable products and confirm who holds responsibility for follow‑up between prescriber and dispenser. Review advertising to avoid promoting services that bypass appropriate clinical pathways, and train staff to recognise red flags and escalate concerns.

Responding to complaints and investigations

Maintain comprehensive, contemporaneous records of clinical rationale, prescriber checks, patient information and follow‑up arrangements. Act promptly on safety signals by suspending supply if doubts about a prescriber or product arise, and document the decision and reasons. Cooperate fully and promptly with regulators and enforcement agencies, and seek legal or professional advice if your pharmacy is implicated in a problematic service model.

GPhC guidance and practical resources

The General Pharmaceutical Council’s guidance for registered pharmacies providing distance and remote services sets out expectations and practical steps to help pharmacies manage remote prescribing, advertising and the safe supply of prescription medicines. Apply that guidance to align local policies with regulatory expectations, particularly for high‑risk and injectable weight‑management products, and use its checklists to reduce the risk of fitness to practise action.

Remote supply of weight‑loss medicines presents clear and immediate regulatory risks. Pharmacies and professionals must prioritise rigorous clinical checks, robust governance, clear records and prudent refusal where safety or provenance is uncertain.

Following the GPhC distance‑services guidance, documenting decisions and treating patient safety as the core business requirement will substantially reduce the likelihood of regulatory action.