header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
07 January 2010 / Roger Birch
Issue: 7399 / Categories: Features , Regulatory
printer mail-detail

A class apart

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Roger Birch on the misperceptions in defining medicinal products

There are a number of serious misperceptions upon which products are caught by the definition of what is a medicinal product. This is a serious matter and leads to confusion among members of the public and those who sell such substances which they believe are not caught by the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, Sch 2.

The Medicines Act 1968 (MA 1968) seems to be forgotten when a particular product is being offered for sale and/or placed on the market.

Let us take the substance BZP as an example.

On the 20 March 2007 a press release was issued by MHRA. They stated that BZP (PEP) pills are dangerous and illegal The press release then states that “any other pills containing Piperazine…or its salts or derivatives would be classified as unlicensed…”.

There then appears in the Mail Online an article dated the 20 March 2007 where the MHRA state that “people are being bamboozled into thinking that BZP is safe because they are being billed

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

HFW—Simon Petch

HFW—Simon Petch

Global shipping practice expands with experienced ship finance partner hire

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Infrastructure specialist joins as partner in Glasgow office

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: No such thing as a ‘Welsh seat’
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
NLJ this week: Jury reform risks justice for efficiency’s sake
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
NLJ this week: Crypto fightback offers ‘new frontier for law’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
NLJ this week: Time to revive the duty to report crime?
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
NLJ this week: When are experts truly ‘necessary’?
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll