There has been talk about new regulations for aesthetics practitioners for some time, and now the government has released details of its intentions for the industry. This has been a daunting time for many, but it seems things might not be as bad as we feared…
The Department of Health and Social Care has broken the aesthetics industry down into several different sections. It first makes comments about what it considers to be high-risk procedures, such as Brazilian Butt Lifts, and then groups the likes of fillers and Botox into a separate category. It believes that by putting these measures in place, it will not only help to protect people but also save the NHS time and money from fixing botched procedures. Here, I take a look at the proposed changes and when they are likely to come into effect.
High-risk aesthetics procedures
The toughest measures that are being brought in relate to the high-risk procedures, such as the infamous non-surgical BBL or anything involving fillers being injected into breasts and genitals. We have all seen the headlines where these procedures have gone wrong with tragic consequences, so it is clear that some regulation in this area is necessary in order to save lives.
The government states that only qualified healthcare professionals will be able to perform these procedures. This means that specialised healthcare workers Are now the only ones able to carry them out and this must be done in a provider that is registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC). The aim of this is to crack down on those who have no medical training or are offering procedures in kitchens and spare rooms instead of clinical environments. By bringing them under the umbrella of the CQC, there can be more closely monitored and will be subject to CQC enforcement if they are found to be breaking the rules.
Changes for Botox and fillers
There have been a lot of question marks over the future of practitioners offering the likes of botulinum toxin (Botox) and dermal fillers. The regulations here still seem. A little murky as they have decided to put the responsibility on to a local authority licencing system. The claim is that practitioners will need to meet rigorous safety, training and insurance standards before they can operate, but it is not yet clear what these standards will be.
The 2023 consultation that was run by the previous government had suggested that these treatments might need to be overseen by a medical professional. Although it is not clear whether this will still be the case, it does look as though we might be moving away from this extra level of monitoring if the right training has been completed. It remains to be seen exactly what training will be required in order to offer these treatments.
Other aesthetics restrictions
There are a number of other restrictions and rules being brought in, with the most significant relating to under 18s. This will restrict anyone who is under the age of 18 from undergoing cosmetic procedures unless it has been authorised by healthcare professional – something that is difficult to argue against.
The aesthetics timeline
There is a temptation for the industry to go into a state of panic whenever regulations are discussed and assume that their life will be ripped to pieces overnight, but this is not the case. The government has stated that a consultation will be published early in 2026, aiming to seek the views of the public on a range of different procedures that should be covered under the new restrictions.
This means we are unlikely to see any changes until late next year at the earliest, however, more guidance on things like safety and training standards might be issued in the meantime.
What does this mean?
The aesthetics industry has always been split between medics and non-medics, with either side stating their case as to why they should be the ones offering treatments. I have remained on the fence with this for a variety of different reasons.
These new regulations are being brought in to tackle the issue of cowboy practitioners. These are the people who are not adequately trained in the treatments that they offer and are providing them in what could be considered to be unsafe environments. In those cases, it seems fair that regulation needs to be brought in to prevent this, as the public is at serious risk of harm from people like this.
However, it is important to remember that not all non-medic practitioners should be tarred with the same brush. There are many extremely talented and highly qualified individuals offering these treatments in clinical settings who are not healthcare professionals. I cannot back any moves that force these people out of the industry, but I also cannot argue against high standards being put in place to protect unsuspecting members of the public. Any new regulations need to strike a balance between getting rid of the cowboys and providing a route in which non-medics can offer safe treatments if the right standards have been met.
As usual, we are not really any further forward than we were before, but it seems that moves are being made to try and raise standards in the industry. There are still a lot of questions that need to be answered, so it is important not to panic yet and wait for further details to be announced.
You can read the full government announcement here.
