Note: This advice is given by the CAP Executive about non-broadcast advertising. It does not constitute legal advice. It does not bind CAP, CAP advisory panels or the Advertising Standards Authority.
BREXIT - The CAP and BCAP Codes include many rules which seek to reflect significant pieces of EU law or UK law that has been made to implement EU law. As far as CAP is aware, the same rules and laws will apply on the day after exit as on the day before. This CAP News Article explains the position further.
Products that are either medicinal by function (the product contains one or more active medicinal ingredients) or medicinal by presentation (the product is presented as being able to treat or prevent disease or correct, restore or modify physiological functions) should not be advertised to the public unless the marketer holds a valid licence, marketing authorisation or registration and the claims in the marketing communication conform to the authorisation (rule 12.11). Marketers should refer to the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) resources for additional advice.
Prescription-only medicines (POMs) are a specific class of medicine. A POM has to be prescribed by a doctor or other authorised health professional and it has to be dispensed from a pharmacy or from another specifically licensed place.
Don’t advertise POMs to the public
What counts as advertising a POM for the purposes of the rule?
Be mindful of how the rules apply to social media ads
What about landing pages from digital ads?
What about ads seeking models to help promote their treatments?
What about ads aimed at industry professionals?
Promote the “consultation” itself, rather than the product
Don’t feature health professional or celebrities
Don’t use before and after photographs
Don’t advertise POMs to the public
In very simple terms, prescription-only medicines (POMs) cannot be advertised to the public (rule 12.12).
The rule in the CAP Code applies to all non-broadcast media including more traditional media like leaflets, press ads, brochures and posters, as well as online ads including Google sponsored search ads, digital ads social media ads. There are some allowances in relation marketer’s own websites, but the prohibition will still apply to the website homepage and where permitted, POM references must be balanced and factual rather than promotional (see Healthcare: Prescription-only Medicines (websites). - ASA | CAP).
Ads for medicinal products or medical treatments available only on prescription are also prohibited in live broadcast media (BCAP rule 11.21.1).
As well as the more common medicines like Botox, Weight management POMs (including GLP-1) and POM treatments for erectile dysfunction, the ASA has investigated ads for other POMs including Vitamin B12, Kenalog (a hay fever medicine), Vitamin B12, Hyaluronidase, Sclerotherapy, Steroid injections and Injectable biotin.
As well as contacting the Copy Advice team for queries about non-broadcast ads, further information is available from the MHRA and its Blue Guide: advertising and promoting medicines - GOV.UK.
What counts as advertising a POM for the purposes of the rule?
The ASA considers almost every reference to a POM to be a ‘promotion’ of a POM and therefore a clear breach of rule 12.12.
Naming a specific POM is the most obvious way in which this Code rule can be breached. However, references to POMs can also be implied though content, including through text descriptions of products, visual imagery (such as images of iconically shaped tablets or images of injection pens) or a combination of multiple factors.
In 2021, the ASA ruled on a Google ad which included a price offer on erectile dysfunction treatments, including references to “tablets”. Whilst the service offered both POM and non-POM treatments in tablet form, in the absence of any information indicating that the 10% off promotion applied exclusively to non-POMs, the ASA ruled that the ad advertised POMs to the public (Pharmica, 3 November 2021).
Similarly, the ASA ruled on another Google ad which offered a discount on erectile dysfunction tablets. In that case, the marketer only offered prescription-only medicines and as such, the ASA ruled that the ad advertised POMs even though it did not name them in the ad (Vir Health, 3 November 2021).
The ASA investigated another Google ad for a “GLP-1 weekly weight loss injection” which featured in image of an unbranded injection pen. Although the ad did not include any reference to specific POMs, the ASA considered that the “GLP-1” reference, the reference to “weight loss injection” and the image of the injection pen both individually and collectively promoted a class of weight control POMs to the public and therefore concluded that the ad breached the Code (Juniper Technologies UK Ltd, 9 July 2025).
Be mindful of how the rules apply to social media ads.
CAP and the ASA has seen a rise in the number of posts on social media for POM products. Marketers should be aware that any reference to a POMs on their social media pages, including images and hashtags, are likely to be seen as an implied ad for a POM.
The CAP Compliance team have issued Enforcement Notices for multiple POM ads on social media including on Botox, weight management POMs and Kenalog.
What about landing pages from digital ads?
Even if a digital ad does not include content which promotes a POM to the public, if that ad links directly to website content which does, it still might be considered to breach the Code.
The ASA ruled against a social media ad that did not contain a direct reference to a POM, but linked to a landing page which featured an image of a medical injection pen with the word Mounjaro on it and stated “2. Choose treatment. Select from our recommended UK-licensed weight loss pens”. The landing page did not feature any other weight-loss treatments and there was a clear implication that Mounjaro or another weight-loss injectable pen, which were all POMs, would be the outcome of the online consultation. (Chequp Health Ltd, 9 July 2025, Chequp Health Ltd, 17 December 2025).
What about ads seeking models to help promote their treatments?
Ads requesting models for ‘treatments’ in general terms are likely to be acceptable, but if those ads refer to the modelling of treatments that include a POM, it is likely that they will breach the Code as it would still be seen to advertise POMs to the public.
The ASA investigated a Facebook ad for a clinic which included the claim, “UK AESTHETICS & BEAUTY MODELS WANTED” and which included references to the need for models for Botox and vitamin B12 injections, both of which are POMs. The ASA concluded that because the ad was accessible to the public, it advertised POMs to them and therefore breached the Code (Menar Jimmy Georgiou, 21 June 2023).
What about ads aimed at industry professionals?
While advertising POMs to the public is prohibited, we understand that they can likely be advertised directly to the medical, dental, veterinary and allied professions. Marketers would likely need to ensure that such ads are not also directed at members of the public.
Promote the “consultation” itself, rather than the product
Whilst references to POMs and POM treatments are prohibited, a reference to a consultation on the area of treatment is likely to be acceptable provided that reference is representative of the licence for that POM. For example, the claim “a consultation for the treatment of lines and wrinkles” (for POM injectables like Botox) or “a consultation for the treatment of erectile dysfunction” (for POM ED treatments like Viagra), is likely to be considered acceptable in ads, provided the POM itself is not referred to (directly or indirectly).
Don’t feature health professional or celebrities
While only suitably qualified health professionals should prescribe POMs, using health professionals or celebrities to endorse any medicine breaches rule 12.18 of the CAP Code.
In 2012, the ASA ruled on an ad for Botox treatments which included quotations from a qualified dental surgeon whose credentials were also included. The ASA ruled not only that the ad promoted POMs to the public but that the medicine was also endorsed by a medical professional (Anesis Spa, 11 July 2012).
In 2019, the ASA ruled against a blogger who had teamed up with a brand to promote a medicine for temporary sleep problems. Whilst the ad was not for a POM, the ASA considered whether the ad used a celebrity to endorse a medicine. In this case, the ASA found that the beauty blogger had influence over her 30,000 followers and that, for the purpose of the Code, she was a ‘celebrity’ because of that influence (Sanofi UK, 3 July 2019).
Don’t use before and after photographs
The use of before and after photographs is likely to be interpreted by the ASA as an advertising claim, which is not permitted for POMs (rule 12.12). Marketers of POMs should, therefore, avoid featuring any before and after images in their marketing communications. If the marketer also promotes non-POM treatments alongside their POM counterparts, the use of before and after images may be acceptable if they are clearly attributed to the non-POM product. General information about Before and After photos are set out in this CAP Advice on Before and after photos - ASA | CAP
Also see Beauty and Cosmetics: Botulinum toxin (Botox) products - ASA | CAP and Weight control: Prescription-only medicines - ASA | CAP.