Apple Cider Vinegar – What can influencers legally say about health and medicine online in Australia?

Influencer marketing has long played a significant role in the health and wellness industry, often blurring the lines between legitimate advice and misleading claims.

Gwenyth Paltrow’s wellness brand “GOOP” has faced multiple lawsuits and over $145,000 USD in civil penalties, after the California Food, Drug, and Medical Device (FDMD) Task Force alleged her products (including essential oils advertised to prevent depression; and a “vaginal egg” said to balance hormones and regulate menstrual cycles) were characterised as false medical advertising claims. A new University of Michigan study found that wellness influencers continue to show higher rates of vaccine opposition on social media, highlighted by the discourse throughout the COVID-19 pandemic.

And in Australia 2015, now-disgraced health influencer Belle Gibson was outed for fabricating a terminal brain cancer diagnosis; a lie that underpinned her “holistic healing” wellness app and cookbook, ‘The Whole Pantry’. Claiming to have rejected conventional cancer treatments, Gibson instead declared to want to heal herself naturally through nutrition and alternative medicine.

She had also falsely promised to donate proceeds from her products to charity, with only a fraction of the funds reaching their intended recipients. In 2017, the Federal Court fined her $410,000 for breaching consumer law, a penalty that remains largely unpaid to this day in 2025.

The scandal, and the subsequent release of the now hit Netflix show “Apple Cider Vinegar”, serve as cautionary tales about the consequences of spreading health misinformation. They underscore the importance of regulatory oversight in the wellness industry, and highlight the need for influencers to adhere strictly to legal and ethical standards when discussing health and medicine online.

So, what has Australia done to ensure influencers cannot take advantage of vulnerable individuals through deceptive social media advertising?

In Australia, the promotion of therapeutic goods and health services is regulated to ensure consumer protection. The main governing bodies enforcing these protections are:

• Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA): The TGA enforces Schedule 2 of the Therapeutic Goods Advertising Code, which came into force in January 2022, and mandates that advertisements for therapeutic goods must be accurate, balanced, and not misleading. Advertisers are required to ensure that any claims made are substantiated and that endorsements or testimonials comply with specific guidelines, to protect the public from false or misleading advertising, and any subsequent risks posed to public health.

In fact, the TGA now has explicit recommendations for influencers, or anyone advertising through social media. If an influencer is posting content related to therapeutic goods on their social media pages, and this content is classed as ‘advertising’, then the influencer must follow the rules in the TGA Code.

• Australian Consumer Law (ACL): Administered by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC), section 18 of the ACL prohibits misleading or deceptive conduct within trade or commerce. This encompasses false claims made by influencers regarding health and wellness products or services. Both influencers and the brands they promote can be held accountable for breaches of the ACL- this is how Belle Gibson was pursued legally, accused of misleading her customers to believe that proceeds from her products were being donated to charitable organisations.

Australian influencers in the health and wellness sector must adhere to additional guidelines:

• Disclosure of Commercial Relationships: The Australian Association of National Advertisers (AANA) Code of Ethics requires influencers to clearly disclose any commercial arrangements or sponsorships with brands. This ensures transparency and allows consumers to distinguish between genuine content and paid promotions.
• Prohibition of Unapproved Health Claims: The TGA prohibits advertising therapeutic goods for uses that are not approved, particularly such as claiming to cure “serious conditions” without scientific evidence. Influencers must also avoid making unverified health claims that could mislead consumers about any “serious form of condition, ailment, disease of defect” which requires a health professional to “diagnose, follow-up, or treat”.

“Apple Cider Vinegar” embodies a fascinating case study, that also brings to light the challenges regulators continue to face in curbing health misinformation spread via influencers online.

• Enforcement Difficulties: Gibson’s case illustrates the challenges in enforcing penalties for deceptive conduct, especially when fines remain unpaid years after being imposed.
• Need for Stricter Regulations: The series underscores the necessity for more robust regulatory measures to prevent similar incidents. This includes clearer guidelines for influencers and more stringent enforcement mechanisms to ensure compliance- which Australian authorities and governing bodies have embraced, intensifying scrutiny of influencer marketing practices, and cracking down on misleading and deceptive conduct.