The UK is home to world-class science, cutting-edge authentication technologies and a regulatory tradition that commands global respect. Yet, counterfeit medicines continue to infiltrate the country’s supply chains. Recent incidents reveal that even a country celebrated as a hub of anticounterfeiting innovation is struggling to keep ahead of the criminals.
A wave of incidents
The problem is far from abstract. For example, patients in Northern Ireland were recently hospitalised after taking fake weight-loss medicines, prompting a stark public warning from the Department of Health not to ‘fall victim to criminals’. In 2023, counterfeit Ozempic and Saxenda pens laced with insulin caused life- threatening hypoglycaemic shock. At the same time, a cybersecurity investigation exposed more than 5,000 fraudulent online pharmacies selling contaminated or entirely fake medicines to UK consumers.
The BBC’s ‘Rip Off Britain’ programme (November 2024) brought the crisis into the public eye, revealing how counterfeit weight-loss drugs are being sold openly online. Andy Morling, Head of the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) Criminal Enforcement Unit, warned that unlicensed medicines have never been assessed for safety, quality, or efficacy. His advice was blunt: do not take them, and report suspicious products via the Yellow Card system or directly to the MHRA.
Ironically, Britain remains a hub of anticounterfeiting innovation. It is home to some of the world’s leading global authentication players whose technologies are used for securing banknotes, ID documents, tax stamps, and products worldwide.
A recent example of such innovation is the FakeMedSensor, developed by researchers at the University of Brighton, which consists of a handheld electrochemical device that can quickly and affordably verify medicines.
In enforcement, the MHRA’s AI partnership with eBay has already blocked the sale of half a million counterfeit medicines and resulted in the seizure of £30 million worth of illicit products in 2023.
These examples demonstrate that the science and tools are available. But here lies the paradox. The UK has struggled to convert innovation into systemic safeguards. Is the government’s sole reliance on digitisation – rather than combining physical security with digital tools – a mistake? And, equally, is the industry doing enough to tailor its expertise for pharmaceuticals?
The answer lies partly in regulation. The UK’s withdrawal from the EU saw the disconnection of the UK Medicines Verification System in December 2024.
This system once allowed pharmacists to authenticate medicines instantly through pack-level serialisation. A domestic replacement was promised under the Medicines and Medical Devices Act 2021, but no consultation has yet begun.
This vacuum is striking. Without a national verification scheme, the UK has lost a critical safeguard at precisely the moment when counterfeiters are exploiting online loopholes and global shortages to flood the market.
Public awareness campaigns, such as #FakeMeds, and reporting tools like the Yellow Card app are valuable, but they are limited. They place the burden on patients and pharmacists to detect risks, rather than addressing vulnerabilities at their source.
And while Operation Pangea – the global enforcement initiative that Britain helped establish – has resulted in the seizure of over 25 million illegal medicines and devices in the UK – worth more than £84 million – counterfeiters nevertheless return every year, more agile and inventive.
The paradox is clear: Britain is at the forefront of anticounterfeiting research and technology, yet its regulatory frameworks have stalled. Its enforcement teams show ingenuity, but remain under- resourced compared with the scale of the threat. Industry has advanced tools, but its focus often lies in sectors other than pharmaceuticals. And patients are left carrying too much responsibility in a fragmented system.
The UK must close its regulatory gap by creating a robust national medicines verification system – one that integrates a phygital approach with serialisation, AI monitoring, and chemical or isotopic fingerprinting. Enforcement should be supported by smarter public–private partnerships, where industry adapts its expertise to healthcare challenges. And consumer reporting tools must complement, not substitute, systemic protection mechanisms.
Britain has the expertise to lead the world in fighting counterfeit pharmaceuticals. The challenge now is to ensure that innovation is not only developed but also deployed, and that responsibility is shared between government, industry, healthcare systems, and consumers.
Without this, the UK risks remaining a contradiction: a hub of anticounterfeiting technologies that still cannot protect its own patients from counterfeit medicines.
