What regulatory actions has the FDA or FTC taken against social‑media health scams in the last five years?
Executive summary
Over the past five years the Federal Trade Commission has moved from public education to formal investigatory steps—issuing broad information‑collection orders to major social platforms and enforcing disclosure and consumer‑protection rules—while the Food and Drug Administration has updated guidance and paired targeted enforcement with new rulemaking proposals and interagency collaboration focused on misleading drug and health product promotion on social media [1] [2] [3]. Both agencies rely largely on existing authorities—FTC on deceptive‑advertising and endorsement rules, FDA on drug‑advertising and labeling laws—but critics say regulators still lack tailored, binding rules that directly address influencer and platform behavior [2] [4].
1. FTC’s pivot from warnings to platform subpoenas and orders
Facing a surge in scams on social channels, the FTC in 2023 issued 6(b) orders seeking detailed information from eight social media and video platforms about how paid commercial ads and sponsored content are screened and restricted—explicitly aimed at deceptive health‑care products, counterfeit goods, financial scams and other frauds [1]. The agency pairs these investigatory orders with longstanding consumer education and enforcement tools: public alerts about scams, rulemaking on endorsements and testimonials, and targeted actions such as the 2021–2024 era enforcement that centers on disclosures and false claims, consistent with the FTC’s mission to protect consumers [1] [5] [6]. The FTC has also applied existing privacy and breach rules to health‑adjacent digital products, warning health app makers to comply with the Health Breach Notification Rule, signaling the agency’s willingness to treat data‑driven harms as part of the social‑media health ecosystem [7].
2. FDA’s guidance updates and targeted warning letters
The FDA has updated and expanded its recommendations and guidance to help companies voluntarily counter misinformation related to approved products and to clarify how promotional content on interactive media should be handled, building on earlier draft guidance about character‑limited platforms [3] [8] [9]. In enforcement practice, FDA has worked jointly with the FTC to send warning letters—most notably to sellers of nicotine‑laced e‑liquids for their social‑media marketing practices—demonstrating coordinated agency action when product safety and youth exposure intersect [10]. Agency officials and commentators have also pointed to final rule changes adjusting standards for direct‑to‑consumer prescription drug ads, reflecting a broader regulatory focus on how risk information is presented in digital formats [2].
3. Gaps critics highlight: authority versus technology
Observers and advocacy groups argue that while FDA and FTC actions have increased—guidance updates, joint letters, platform information orders—they have not yet produced comprehensive, platform‑level mandates such as routine data collection or specific obligations for influencers and telehealth advertisers; recent analyses say additional restrictions or reporting requirements have not been applied to manufacturers, influencers, or platforms for prescription‑drug promotion on social media [2]. Advocates have asked the agencies to formalize partnerships and to require platforms to surface paid promotions and ad metadata so regulators can track sponsored prescription ads and misleading influencer content [4] [2].
4. Legislative and regulatory tightening underway
Beyond agency action, Congress and executive initiatives have begun to close perceived loopholes: bipartisan legislation proposed in 2025—such as the Protecting Patients from Deceptive Drug Ads Act—would direct FDA to target deceptive prescription‑drug promotions by influencers and telehealth firms, reflecting a political push to extend FDA authority into digital marketing channels [11]. Separately, broader administration review and proposed rulemaking seeks to limit practices that hide risk information in digital ads, signaling that regulator action could shift from guidance and orders to binding rules [12] [13].
5. Bottom line: enforcement rising but structural solutions still pending
In sum, within the last five years the FTC has escalated to formal information orders and continues classical deception enforcement, while the FDA has issued guidance updates, sent joint warning letters, and participated in rule‑level changes aimed at digital DTC advertising; both agencies are coordinating more closely and are being nudged by Congress to plug digital gaps—but neither has, from the public record available here, imposed a comprehensive regime forcing platforms or influencers to collect and report ad‑level data by rule [1] [3] [10] [2]. Reporting limitations: this account is based on agency releases, legal commentary and policy reporting provided; it does not purport to catalog every enforcement letter or private settlement not disclosed in these sources.