Under s133 of the National Law it is an offence for any person, agencies included, to advertise a regulated health service with testimonials, misleading claims or unreasonable expectations. Cosmetic advertising has its own guidelines, and prescription medicines such as Botox may not be advertised to the public.
This is a working summary for marketing teams, not legal advice. Every rule below names the instrument it comes from so you can read the source rather than take our word for it, and so you can tell when something here has gone out of date.
Who regulates healthcare advertising in Australia
- Health Practitioner Regulation National Law, s133 (advertising) and ss113–119 and 115A (protected titles)
- Ahpra and National Boards, Guidelines for advertising a regulated health service (2020)
- Medical Board of Australia, guidelines for doctors who advertise cosmetic surgery (1 July 2023)
- Ahpra guidelines for advertising higher-risk non-surgical cosmetic procedures (2 Sept 2025)
- Therapeutic Goods Act 1989, s42DL, and the Therapeutic Goods Advertising Code 2021
- Australian Consumer Law and the Privacy Act 1988 (Australian Privacy Principles)
More than one of these usually applies at once. A campaign can satisfy the advertising regulator and still breach the data-protection one, which is the failure mode that catches most practices: the creative gets reviewed and the tracking does not.
The rules that actually change what you can publish
- No testimonials about clinical aspects of care in any advertising, including reviews reposted on websites or social pages (s133(1)(c)). Non-clinical feedback, such as on wait times, may be used.
- The maximum s133 penalty is $60,000 per offence for an individual and $120,000 for a body corporate.
- No claims of a superior service, guaranteed results, or “pain-free” treatment without acknowledging risk (s133(1)(a), (d)).
- Gifts and discounts are lawful only with their terms and conditions stated. Cosmetic surgery ads may not offer discounts, packages or financing (s133(1)(b); MBA 2023).
- Cosmetic outcome images must be genuine and unfiltered, carry a prominent “only relevant for this patient” warning, and may not show under-18s.
- Prescription-only medicines may not be advertised to the public, and indirect terms such as “anti-wrinkle injections” can count (TG Act s42DL).
- “Surgeon” is restricted to specialist registrants in surgery, obstetrics and gynaecology, or ophthalmology (s115A, since 20 Sept 2023).
- Advertisers are responsible for influencer content, and doctors may not give influencers free or discounted procedures (MBA 2023).
At a glance: tactic by tactic
| Tactic | Where it stands | What applies |
|---|---|---|
| Patient testimonials | Not permitted | Testimonials about clinical aspects of care are banned in advertising, including reposted reviews. Non-clinical feedback, such as on wait times, may be used. Source: Health Practitioner Regulation National Law s133(1)(c). |
| Asking for and showing reviews | Allowed with conditions | Patients may review freely, but republishing a clinical-outcome review is using a testimonial. Ask all patients neutrally; filtering out likely-negative reviewers has been held misleading. Source: Health Practitioner Regulation National Law s133(1)(c); ACCC v Meriton [2017] FCA 1305. |
| Before-and-after images | Narrow exceptions | Must be genuine, unedited and matched in lighting and angle. Cosmetic images need a prominent “only relevant for this patient” warning and may not show under-18s. Source: Ahpra advertising guidelines (2020); MBA cosmetic surgery advertising guidelines (2023); Ahpra non-surgical cosmetic guidelines (2025). |
| “Best”, “No.1” and guarantee claims | Not permitted | No claims of a superior service, guaranteed or “sure cure” results, or “safe” and “pain-free” without acknowledging risk. Source: Health Practitioner Regulation National Law s133(1)(a), (d); Ahpra advertising guidelines (2020). |
| Prices, discounts and offers | Narrow exceptions | Gifts and discounts are lawful only with plain-language terms and conditions. Cosmetic surgery ads may not offer discounts, packages or financing. Source: Health Practitioner Regulation National Law s133(1)(b); MBA cosmetic surgery advertising guidelines (2023). |
| Influencers and endorsements | Narrow exceptions | Influencer clinical testimonials are banned and the advertiser is responsible for them. Doctors may not give influencers free or discounted cosmetic procedures. Source: Health Practitioner Regulation National Law s133(1)(c); MBA cosmetic guidelines (2023). |
| A doctor promoting their own practice | Allowed with conditions | Allowed within s133. “Surgeon” and “specialist” are protected titles, and cosmetic ads must show the doctor's registration number and type. Source: Health Practitioner Regulation National Law ss115, 115A, 133; MBA cosmetic guidelines (2023). |
| AI-generated content | Narrow exceptions | No AI-specific rule. AI-written patient stories are “purported testimonials”, and AI-altered outcome images breach the genuine-image requirement. Source: Health Practitioner Regulation National Law s133(1)(c); Ahpra advertising guidelines (2020). |
| Patient images and data | Allowed with conditions | Image consent must be separate from treatment consent and withdrawable. Direct marketing that uses health information needs consent. Source: MBA cosmetic guidelines (2023); Privacy Act 1988, APP 7. |
| Regulator approval before publishing | Process | No pre-approval. Advertisers must self-check against s133 and hold acceptable evidence for every claim. Source: Health Practitioner Regulation National Law s133; Ahpra advertising guidelines (2020). |
How Branding Pioneers handles it
- We treat ourselves as an advertiser under s133 and keep written client sign-off on every asset.
- No clinical testimonials anywhere: ads, websites, landing pages, captions or video. Review tabs on client-controlled pages are turned off or moderated.
- Review requests go to every patient with no incentives and no filtering.
- Prescription-only medicines are never named or alluded to; we market a consultation for the concern instead.
- Before/after uses the practitioner's own consented patients, matched lighting and angle, no filters or AI, and the required warning.
- Every doctor is checked on the Ahpra register before a title goes into copy.
Tracking deserves the same scrutiny as copy. Analytics, pixels and remarketing tags routinely collect more than a healthcare provider is permitted to share, and the default installation of most of them is not compliant in Australia. Audit what your tags send before you audit your ad copy.
Before you run anything
- Can you substantiate every claim in the creative, today, from a document you can produce?
- Do you have written consent for every patient who appears, covering this specific use?
- Has the approval or licence this market requires been granted, and is its number on the creative where required?
- Does your tracking send anything that identifies a patient or their condition?
- Has someone qualified in Australia reviewed the campaign, not just the marketing team?
If the answer to the last one is no, that is the gap worth closing first. We work inside these rules daily and will tell you when something you want to publish is not worth the exposure, but we are a marketing agency, and a regulated market deserves a qualified reviewer as well.
Not legal advice. A planning summary of published rules, last checked on 11 October 2026. Rules change, so confirm the current text with the regulator or local counsel before relying on it.
