I've had a look at their consultation paper(PDF/Word .DOC) and unlike the commercially available genetic/scanning diagnostic services it also covers, they aren't explicitly asking about regulating or restricting internet drug purchases.
They make reference to some of the risks, for example this FDA document concerning fake pharmaceuticals, but that's only a heads up/caveat emptor to consumers.
The unregulated internet pharmacies are all offshore, so there's no possibility of them being shut down, and any Government intervention involving arbitrary Customs seizures of everything labelled "Health Product" (or similar) would, I think, produce a political backlash from far more people than just our little community.
Personally, Inhouse has been an absolute Godsend, for various reasons, the thought of going the GIC full-time-without-treatment route scared me silly.
Nuffield's report is due Spring 2010, we may have to wait until then to find out if we have any cause to worry.
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2009-05-03 12:17 pm (UTC)They make reference to some of the risks, for example this FDA document concerning fake pharmaceuticals, but that's only a heads up/caveat emptor to consumers.
The unregulated internet pharmacies are all offshore, so there's no possibility of them being shut down, and any Government intervention involving arbitrary Customs seizures of everything labelled "Health Product" (or similar) would, I think, produce a political backlash from far more people than just our little community.
Personally, Inhouse has been an absolute Godsend, for various reasons, the thought of going the GIC full-time-without-treatment route scared me silly.
Nuffield's report is due Spring 2010, we may have to wait until then to find out if we have any cause to worry.