Reading the product
Everything in this chapter reduces to a small number of factual questions with short answers. This article collects them and explains what each one is actually testing.
Before any question about results, there is a set of questions about the product itself: what it is called, who makes it, what regulatory route it took, what is in it besides polynucleotides, where it was bought, and what the manufacturer's instructions for use say about the area being treated and about your particular circumstances.
All of those have short factual answers that a practitioner either holds or does not. They are not a test of the practitioner's skill and they are not adversarial. They test one thing only: whether the person injecting you has engaged with the product as a medical device with documentation, or has taken a supplier's word for it.
1.6.1Why start with the product rather than with results
Because product questions have verifiable answers and results questions do not. If you ask what results to expect, you will get an answer shaped by the practitioner's experience, their optimism and their commercial position, and you will have no way to check it. If you ask who manufactures the product, there is a right answer printed on a box.
This is a general principle for assessing any service you cannot evaluate technically. Ask the questions where a wrong answer is detectable. The pattern of responses tells you a great deal about the responses you cannot check.
1.6.2The six questions
What is the product called, and who manufactures it?
The minimum. A practitioner should know both without looking. If the answer is a treatment name rather than a product name, that is a marketing package rather than a product, and the underlying question is still unanswered.
Does it carry a UKCA or CE mark, and may I see the packaging and the instructions for use?
This establishes that the product has a legitimate route to the UK market and an identifiable manufacturer with post market obligations. Refusal is unusual. Reluctance, or an explanation of why the mark is not necessary in this case, is worth taking seriously.
What is in it besides polynucleotides?
Combination products exist and are perfectly legitimate. What matters is that you know, because a combination product has a different composition, a different regulatory file and a different reaction profile, and because any result cannot be attributed to one component.
What do the instructions for use say about the area you are treating?
Manufacturers specify intended use, and treating outside it is not automatically wrong but is a decision that should be conscious and disclosed. The periorbital area in particular is one where the instructions for use, the practitioner's experience and your own risk tolerance all need to be in the same conversation.
Where do you buy it?
A named distributor is a good answer. Vagueness here is the single most informative vagueness in the list, because it is the point at which a supply chain either exists or does not.
What does the documentation say about my situation specifically?
Pregnancy, breastfeeding, autoimmune conditions, immunosuppression, anticoagulation, active infection, a history of keloid scarring, a fish allergy, previous injectables in the same area. Each of these is addressed somewhere in a product's documentation or in general good practice, and each is a legitimate thing to ask about by name.
1.6.3What the answers tell you
There are broadly three response patterns and they are easy to distinguish.
- Fluent and specific. Names, marks, composition, distributor, and a direct answer about your circumstances. This indicates someone who treats the product as a regulated medical device.
- Fluent but general. Confident reassurance, brand enthusiasm, no documentation, and answers that are about the category rather than about the product. This is not necessarily unsafe practice, but it tells you the practitioner is working from supplier training rather than from primary material.
- Evasive. Questions treated as odd or as a lack of trust. This is the response that should end the consultation, not because evasion proves anything, but because you are about to consent to an irreversible injection and the consent has to rest on something.
1.6.4What you should be told without asking
A good consultation volunteers a good deal of this. You should be told what the product is, that it is fish derived, that there is no reversal agent, what the realistic range of outcomes is including no visible change, what the recovery looks like, what the complications are and what would be done about them, who to contact out of hours, and what the total cost of the proposed course is rather than the cost of one session.
If none of that is volunteered and all of it has to be extracted, the consent process is already thinner than the professional guidance on consent contemplates. That guidance, from the General Medical Council and from the professional bodies for other registered groups, is public and is written in plain language.
1.6.5Keeping your own record
Write down, at the time or immediately after: the product name and manufacturer, the batch number if you can get it, the areas treated, the volume used, the date, and the name and registration number of the person who injected you. Photograph the box if you are permitted to.
This takes two minutes and is the single most useful thing you can do for your future self. If a problem develops weeks later, if you need to see a different clinician, or if you need to make a report or a complaint, the difference between having that record and not having it is the difference between a specific account and a vague one. Clinics keep records, and you are entitled to yours, but retrieving them at a distance is slower than writing six lines in a note on your phone.
1.6.6The point of the exercise
None of this is about catching out a practitioner, and a good practitioner will not experience it that way. It is about establishing whether the person treating you relates to the product as a regulated device with documentation and obligations, or as a branded service with a supplier's leaflet behind it. Both exist in this market. The questions in this article distinguish them in a few minutes, and the distinction is worth more than any amount of reading about mechanism.
Questions
Is it rude to ask to see the box?
No, and a practitioner who treats it as rude has answered a different and more useful question. You are consenting to an injection of a product that cannot be reversed. Knowing what it is is the minimum basis for that consent.
What if the clinic says the product is used off label for my area?
Then you have been told something important and you should thank them for it. Treating outside the manufacturer's stated intended use is not automatically wrong, but it should be a conscious, disclosed decision with a reason attached, and it should be recorded in your notes.
Should I be given a batch number?
It is good practice to record it in your notes, and it is entirely reasonable to ask for it. It is what makes a later report about a specific product traceable rather than approximate.
What if I have already been treated and asked none of this?
Ask now. Clinics hold records and you are entitled to yours. Requesting your treatment record after the fact is normal, and data protection law gives you a route to it if a clinic is unhelpful.
Does a practitioner have to tell me there is no reversal agent?
Professional guidance on consent requires that material risks and the nature of the intervention be discussed in terms the patient can act on, and the absence of a corrective option is plainly material. Whether it is always volunteered in practice is a different question.
- GMC, Decision making and consent
- Medical devices: regulation and safety, gov.uk
- MHRA Yellow Card scheme
- Joint Council for Cosmetic Practitioners
- Information Commissioner's Office
Links to regulators, professional bodies, legislation and research indexes. They are cited because they are public and checkable, not as endorsement of this publication. No source listed here has any commercial relationship with us.
Revisions to this document
This reference is revised when the evidence changes. Subscribe and you will be told what was revised, what the verdict was before, and what it is now.
One email when this document is revised, with what changed and why. Any sponsor line is labelled as such and can never influence an evidence verdict. Rates are published on the newsletter page. We do not sell, share or rent the list. Unsubscribe from any email.