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
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=3d1684d4_1)
