In Health & NHS news

Follow this topic

Bookmark

Record learning outcomes

An investigation by the consumer rights organisation Which? caught four online pharmacies selling weight-loss jabs without verifying patient information and details about their GP.

Which? sent an undercover reporter posing as a patient to buy GLP1 medicines having given a fake GP address and falsely claiming they had high blood pressure. Despite that, the reporter was sold jabs by Superdrug, MedExpress, Voy and ZAVA.

The General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC) says prescribers must independently verify information the person provides through “timely two-way communication” with that individual, by accessing their clinical records or contacting their GP, regular prescriber or a third-party provider. Which? said it gave the pharmacies “a genuine weight…overweight BMI” alongside the false information.

The GPhC told Independent Community Pharmacist (ICP) it was looking into the findings of the investigation. NICE guidance says obese adults who have weight-related health problems including hypertension are eligible for the jabs, which are licenced for adults who have a body mass index of 30 or higher.

ICP asked all four pharmacies why they failed to verify the health information and GP address before selling a weight-loss jab.

Superdrug said: "Our doctors made a prescribing decision using their clinical judgement based on the information provided by the patient. All Superdrug Online Doctor weight loss medication prescribing is based on guidelines from NICE and the General Pharmaceutical Council.”

Does not require every individual data point to be independently verified

Voy said it believed its “model is in line” with GPhC guidance on independent verification but suggested “it does not require every individual data point to be independently verified in all cases”.

“The guidance requires prescribers to obtain sufficient information to support safe prescribing decisions and to use appropriate verification methods where needed,” Voy said.

“For weight management treatments specifically, the guidance emphasises independent verification of weight, height or BMI. We do this through additional evidence requirements such as BMI verification via video call or a live photo taken at the time of consultation, alongside clinician review.

“More broadly, our clinicians assess the information provided, determine its reliability, and decide whether further verification or follow-up is required. Where necessary, two-way communication is available, and prescribing decisions are based on a holistic clinical assessment.”

Voy also insisted it asks all patients for their consent to inform their GP and advises each patient about the “risks of not doing so”.

“Where a patient does not consent, our clinicians make an individual risk-based decision on whether it is safe to prescribe, in line with the guidance,” it said, adding it “continuously” reviews its “processes through governance, audit and clinical oversight to ensure we are delivering safe and appropriate care”.

Sadly, false information was provided to our team

ZAVA said its “mandatory safeguards” includes “a comprehensive consultation and identification checking,” although it added: “We rely on the integrity and honesty of our patients when they provide personal health information.”

“As part of our consultation process, we require patients to confirm the truthfulness of the information they submit and this is also referred to in our terms and conditions,” ZAVA said. It said its terms and conditions state that “making a false representation or providing untrue or misleading information to us in order to obtain a prescription/healthcare service” is a criminal offence.

However, ZAVA said: “Sadly, false information was provided to our team against our terms of service and the law”.

“Our doctors review each case individually and take all relevant information across the consultation and patient record to make a clinical decision, within our guidelines and appropriate practice,” it added.

“Our regulated processes have been subject to and passed GPhC inspections. The guidance notes that where GP information is not available or where a patient does not consent to their GP being contacted, treatment can be provided in line with the doctor’s professional judgement.”

MedExpress did not respond when asked for comment.