Your fact-checks will appear here
Australian media company
Regulators have increasingly used the ’s consumer‑protection powers to target deceptive marketing for weight‑loss products and programs—particularly telemedicine GLP‑1 marketing—issuing orders, settle...
Regulators treat as a longstanding enforcement priority: the and state attorneys general use a familiar toolbox—stop orders, monetary refunds, injunctions, corrective advertising, and bans—to punish a...
Over the last five years the has returned money to consumers through multiple case-specific refund programs tied to deceptive health-product and health-plan marketing — notable examples include refund...
has moved from guidance to hard rules and active enforcement to punish firms that deploy fake-review websites to sell : it issued a final banning the sale or purchase of fake reviews, has begun sendin...
The Federal Trade Commission has operationalized consumer restitution in health-claims enforcement by repeatedly using court orders, consent decrees and separate refund-claims processes to return mone...
Federal regulators have recently redoubled enforcement against deceptive medical marketing: the Federal Trade Commission has pursued cases and settlements against health-product marketers and teleheal...
Enforcement actions by the Federal Trade Commission and, in joint operations, the Food and Drug Administration have long targeted weight‑loss supplements and marketers for deceptive claims, fake revie...
Available reporting shows federal and state scrutiny of telehealth and digital mental-health companies — most prominently Cerebral — for advertising, privacy, billing and prescribing practices; the FT...
Online vendors offering injectable tirzepatide show a wide spectrum of reliability: several telehealth-first companies and compounding-pharmacy networks present transparent workflows and licensed pres...