More than 250 say prescription drug triggered gambling and sex addiction

More than 250 people contacted us describing impulsive behaviour side effects from prescription drugs. The messages, from patients and relatives as well as health and safety professionals, say a family of medicines commonly used for movement disorders triggered addictions including gambling, sex and shopping.

One patient, identified only as Emma, said she "had lost tens of thousands of pounds" after being prescribed Ropinirole - a drug manufactured by British pharmaceutical firm GSK. "After her symptoms worsened over the next few years, she was prescribed Ropinirole," the account says. Emma said she "began compulsively gambling and buying frivolous things, leaving her feeling like there was something 'that's controlling me'." She only recognised the connection after her husband found a recent BBC article and she "read it and went, 'Oh my God - that's me'." Emma also notes that when she books an appointment at her local GP surgery she is required to fill in an online form where she must list any medication she is taking.

Those who got in touch with this investigation span professional backgrounds, including "a police officer, nurses, doctors, and even a director of risk for a bank," illustrating that the reported harms affect people across incomes and sectors. The volume of contacts in a short period is notable: more than 250 messages from individuals reporting similar patterns create a statistical signal that goes beyond isolated adverse events.

The investigation also found records showing GSK learned of a case of paedophilia linked to its drug in 2000. In that case, "a 63-year-old man on Ropinirole had sexually assaulted a seven-year-old girl and been imprisoned." "This case was later included in a report about safety concerns in 2003 which described a link between Ropinirole and what GSK called 'deviant' sexual behaviour," the documents indicate. GSK says it shared its report with the UK drug regulator the following year and "had told it about the paedophilia case within days." The company learning of a criminal case in 2000 occurred, the materials note, "seven years before any warnings appeared about sexual urges."

The combination of individual financial devastation and the historical record raises immediate policy and market questions. For patients like Emma, "tens of thousands" in losses translate into long-term household financial strain and potential reliance on social safety nets. For GSK and the wider pharmaceutical industry, the existence of a serious criminal case cited in company reports years before public warnings could prompt renewed scrutiny of pharmacovigilance practices, disclosure timelines and regulatory oversight. Healthcare providers face pressure to update informed consent and medication review processes so patients and carers can spot behavioural side effects early.

Economically, the aggregate cost is hard to measure from current data, but even a small proportion of affected patients suffering large losses would create meaningful consumer harm and raise the risk of litigation or increased regulatory fines. Payers and insurers may also reassess exposure if behaviour-altering side effects are more common than previously recognised.

Key outstanding questions include the full contents of the safety reports referenced, the correspondence between GSK and the regulator in 2000–2003, and the broader incidence rate of these behavioural side effects across the drug family. Courts, clinicians and regulators will likely seek to verify the criminal case records cited and to assess whether prescribing guidance and patient warnings need revision.

Readers with additional information can contact investigations correspondent Noel Titheradge securely on Signal at +44 7809 334720, by email at noel.titheradge@bbc.co.uk, or via SecureDrop.