Can a medical clinic advertise weight-loss or other prescription medicines to consumers?
No. Section 42DLB of the Therapeutic Goods Act 1989 makes it a civil-penalty contravention to advertise to the public any therapeutic good containing a Schedule 4 (prescription-only) or Schedule 8 (controlled-drug) substance. The provision applies to a clinic's website, paid search, social posts, influencer content and email — and to any health-service ad whose dominant message is the prescription product. The TGA enforces alongside AHPRA s.133, and the same campaign is routinely hit under both regimes.
Reviewed 2026-05-03Therapeutic Goods Act 1989 (Cth), s.42DLB(1).
A person contravenes this subsection if … the person advertises, by any means, therapeutic goods … and any of subsections (2) to (9) applies in relation to the advertisement. Civil penalty: 5,000 penalty units (individual); 50,000 penalty units (body corporate).
Source: Therapeutic Goods Act 1989 — s.42DLB (Federal Register of Legislation)
The substance, in plain English.
Schedule 4 prescription medicines cannot be advertised to consumers — full stop. Subsection 42DLB(7) brings any therapeutic good containing a Schedule 4 substance within the prohibition. The most-litigated 2024–2025 examples are the GLP-1 weight-loss agonists (semaglutide, tirzepatide — Ozempic, Wegovy, Mounjaro) and Schedule 8 controlled drugs (medicinal cannabis, S8 ADHD medications).
The TGA reads the prohibition broadly. A health-service ad whose dominant message is the prescription product ("weight-loss injections from $X / month", "GLP-1 program", a doctor pictured holding a Wegovy pen) is treated as an advertisement for the medicine, not for the service. The same logic applies to compounded versions of S4 substances — from 1 October 2024 the TGA removed compounded GLP-1 RAs from the compounding exemption, closing the workaround route.
Cosmetic injectables sit on the same prohibition. Botulinum toxin (botox), dermal fillers containing hyaluronic acid, and most cosmetic injectable agents are S4 medicines. The TGA's referring to cosmetic injectables in advertising guidance is explicit — the brand name, image of the product or unmistakable visual reference can each amount to advertising under s.42DLB.
On a single campaign the TGA and AHPRA jurisdictions overlap. The TGA polices s.42DLB (advertising of the medicine); AHPRA polices s.133 of the National Law (advertising of the health service). The TGA's compliance guidance and AHPRA's Advertising and the law page confirm the regulators refer matters to each other. Practices have been hit on both fronts for the same campaign — the InstantScripts, Midnight Health and Prime Medic actions all sat at the intersection.
The infringement-notice route is fast and cheap for the TGA. Most public action against medical clinics has come via infringement notices (per-ad fines without a court hearing) rather than civil-penalty proceedings. Between January and August 2024 the TGA issued more than 70 infringement notices to 19 entities totalling over $1 million, and requested removal of more than 13,700 unlawful ads in 2024–25.
Maximum penalty: Civil penalty up to 5,000 penalty units for an individual and 50,000 penalty units for a body corporate per contravention (1 penalty unit = $330 from 7 November 2024). Each non-compliant advertisement is a separate contravention..
Recent enforcement under this provision:
- 2025
Midnight Health Pty Ltd
TGA issued 10 infringement notices totalling $198,000 to Midnight Health for alleged unlawful advertising of prescription-only weight-loss medicines (tirzepatide and semaglutide) on its Youly, Stagger and hub.health platforms between June 2024 and January 2025; the company gave a court-enforceable undertaking.
TGA media release — Midnight Health Pty Ltd issued infringement notices for unlawful advertising
- 2025
Prime Medic Group
TGA issued infringement notices to Prime Medic for alleged unlawful advertising of Ozempic and Mounjaro direct-to-consumer between January and July 2025, with the public outcome forming part of the TGA's ongoing weight-loss-medicines enforcement program.
TGA media release — Prime Medic Group issued infringement notices
- 2024
InstantScripts Pty Ltd (later withdrawn)
TGA originally issued 45 infringement notices totalling $742,500 against InstantScripts for alleged unlawful advertising of prescription-only medicines; the notices were subsequently withdrawn as part of a settlement of judicial-review proceedings — the case underlines both the TGA's appetite for enforcement and the procedural pathways available to challenge infringement notices.
- 2024
TGA weight-loss-medicine enforcement program
Between January and August 2024 the TGA issued more than 70 infringement notices to 19 entities totalling over $1 million for alleged unlawful advertising of prescription-only medicines, with more than $300,000 specifically tied to weight-loss medicines; the program continued through 2024–25 with over 13,700 unlawful-ad removals requested from digital platforms.
TGA media release — TGA warns advertising prescription-only weight-loss medicine is prohibited
A worked example.
An online medical clinic offering virtual GP consultations launches a paid-social funnel: an Instagram reel of a doctor explaining "how GLP-1s work for sustainable weight loss", a landing page headlined "Australia's leading weight-loss program — semaglutide from $299 / month", and a Reddit influencer thread cross-linking to the same page. Three TGA exposures: the reel and the landing page each name (or unmistakably reference) a Schedule 4 substance, and the influencer post is an indirect advertisement caused by the clinic. AHPRA also has jurisdiction under s.133 because the program is the health service. A typical TGA outcome — based on the Midnight Health and Prime Medic precedents — is multiple infringement notices in the $13,000–$20,000 each range, ad-removal demand on Meta and Google, a court-enforceable undertaking, and a public media release naming the entity. The fix: reframe the program around the clinical pathway (qualified consult, ongoing monitoring, allied-health support), remove all references to specific S4 substances, and gate any pharmacological discussion behind a logged-in patient portal.
The questions that come next.
Can I name the medicine if I'm only educating, not promoting?
Generally no. The TGA's advertising guidance treats the test as whether the content is intended or likely to promote use or supply of the medicine. Educational content from a commercial provider that names a Schedule 4 substance and links to a service that prescribes it is treated as advertising under s.42DLB.
What about compounded versions of GLP-1 medicines?
From 1 October 2024 the TGA removed compounded glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists from the compounding exemption — compounded semaglutide and tirzepatide are no longer permitted in Australia, and advertising them remains an unlawful advertisement of a Schedule 4 substance.
Does the prohibition cover cosmetic injectables like botulinum toxin and dermal fillers?
Yes. Most cosmetic injectables are Schedule 4 medicines and the TGA's referring to cosmetic injectables in advertising guidance treats brand names, product images and unmistakable visual references as advertising under s.42DLB. The crackdown on cosmetic-injectable advertising has been a stated TGA enforcement priority.
Is an infringement notice the worst that happens?
No. Infringement notices are an administrative-track outcome the TGA frequently uses, but s.42DLB is a civil-penalty provision capped at 5,000 penalty units per contravention for an individual and 50,000 for a body corporate. The TGA can also apply for injunctions, accept court-enforceable undertakings, and refer matters to AHPRA.
How do TGA and AHPRA jurisdictions interact on a single campaign?
They overlap. TGA enforces s.42DLB (advertising of the medicine); AHPRA enforces s.133 of the National Law (advertising of the health service). Both agencies can act on the same ad and routinely refer matters to each other. The Midnight Health and InstantScripts public records both involved dual-regulator scrutiny.
Read it for yourself.
Brief us with the regulator already in line one.