Home / Explainers / Licensed, unlicensed, research use only
Regulation · 6 min read
Licensed, unlicensed, research use only
Every compound on this site sits in one of three categories. The category matters more than anything else you will read about it, because it tells you whether an independent body has ever looked at the product at all.
01Licensed medicine
A licensed medicine holds a marketing authorisation from the MHRA. To get one, a manufacturer must submit evidence on quality, safety and efficacy, and the regulator assesses it. The outcome is a Summary of Product Characteristics, the SPC, which states exactly what the medicine is approved for, at what doses, with what warnings and with side effects listed by frequency.
It also means the factory is inspected, every batch is traceable, there is a legal route to report harm through the Yellow Card scheme, and there is a mechanism to recall product if something goes wrong.
A licence is not a recommendation for any individual, and it is not a statement that the medicine is risk-free. It means the regulator judged that benefits outweigh risks for a defined group of patients used in a defined way. Whether it suits a particular person is a clinical judgement, and whether the NHS will fund it is a separate NICE decision with its own criteria.
In this register, semaglutide, tirzepatide, liraglutide and somatropin are licensed. All are prescription-only.
02Unlicensed medicine
An unlicensed medicine has no marketing authorisation. Nobody has submitted the evidence, or it was submitted and not accepted, or the compound is still in development.
Under the Human Medicines Regulations 2012 it is prohibited to sell, supply or advertise an unlicensed medicine for human use in the UK. There is a narrow exception allowing a prescriber to take personal responsibility for an unlicensed medicine for an individual patient with a special clinical need, which is a genuine and important route for rare conditions. It is not a workaround for supplying research peptides to the general public.
Being unlicensed does not automatically mean being a controlled drug. BPC-157 is unlicensed but not controlled. Growth hormone is licensed for specific uses and is also a Class C controlled drug, which carries much heavier penalties for supply. The two systems are separate and a compound can sit anywhere across both.
03Research use only
This is the label that does the work in the grey market, and it deserves close attention.
Chemicals sold for laboratory research are not medicines and are not regulated as such. That is entirely legitimate: researchers need reference compounds. The label "for research use only" or "not for human consumption" places the product outside medicines regulation.
It is a statement about the seller's legal position, not about the product. It does not mean laboratory grade, it does not mean tested, and it does not mean pure. It means: we are not selling this as a medicine, so medicines law does not apply to us. If the buyer then injects it, that is presented as the buyer's decision.
The contradiction is visible on the sites themselves. A product labelled not for human consumption, sold beside a dosing table, marketed with weight-loss or healing claims, to customers who are plainly not researchers. In April 2026 the MHRA opened an investigation into UK clinics making therapeutic claims about unregulated peptides.
A certificate of analysis does not close this gap. It is commissioned and presented by the seller, it applies to a batch you cannot verify you received, and it says nothing about sterility, endotoxins or whether the vial in your hand matches the one tested.
04How to tell where you are
| Question | Licensed | Research use only |
|---|---|---|
| Is there an SPC? | Yes, on the eMC | No |
| Are side effects listed by frequency? | Yes | No |
| Is the factory inspected? | Yes | Not for medicines use |
| Can you report harm officially? | Yellow Card scheme | No formal route |
| Can it be recalled? | Yes | No |
| Who is accountable? | Named authorisation holder | Nobody, by design |
The practical test is simple. Search the compound name on the electronic medicines compendium. If an SPC comes up, it is a licensed medicine and the SPC is the most reliable document about it in existence. If nothing comes up, no regulator has assessed it, and everything you read about it comes from somewhere with a lower standard of proof.