← Back to resources
Compliance guide

Testimonials in cosmetic clinic advertising: what the ban actually covers

By Brendan BarnhillPublished 1 January 2026Last updated 19 May 2026

Key takeaways

  • Section 133 bans testimonials in health service advertising outright, and no disclaimer makes one compliant
  • A testimonial is any positive statement about the clinical side of care: the symptom, the treatment, or the outcome, including praise of the practitioner's skill
  • Reviews on third party platforms you do not control are not your advertising, but embedding, liking, responding to or resharing them can make them yours
  • Comments about service only, with no clinical content, are not testimonials
  • Whoever publishes or authorises the advertising is liable, including the marketing agency

Testimonials are prohibited in all advertising of a regulated health service under section 133(c) of the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law. This applies to every cosmetic clinic in Australia, regardless of who wrote the testimonial, whether it is genuine, and whether it is positive.

Most practice managers know this rule exists. Most do not know how broad it is.

What counts as a testimonial

A testimonial is any recommendation or positive statement about the clinical aspects of a regulated health service. A statement has a clinical aspect when it refers to:

  • A symptom: the reason the patient sought treatment
  • A diagnosis or treatment: the specific procedure performed
  • An outcome: the result, or any statement about the practitioner's skill or experience

A patient saying "I love this clinic" is not a testimonial. A patient saying "I came in for treatment, the doctor was incredible, and my results are exactly what I wanted" is a testimonial and it cannot appear in the clinic's advertising.

The actions that constitute using a testimonial

  • Publishing a patient review on the clinic's website
  • Sharing or reposting a patient's social media post about their treatment
  • Sharing or reposting a patient's before and after result
  • Liking a patient's social media post about their treatment at your clinic
  • Responding to a patient's review on a third-party platform
  • Linking to testimonials on a third-party review site from the clinic's website or social media
  • Using a social media story format that contains a patient outcome, even if it expires after 24 hours

What the clinic is not responsible for

Patients can post their own reviews independently. The clinic is not responsible for content on platforms it does not control. A Google review on Google Maps does not need to be removed. A patient review on the clinic's own Facebook page does.

Award symbols and ratings

Publishing an award badge ("Top Doctor 2024") on the clinic website is generally not a testimonial, as long as the individual reviews the award is based on are not republished alongside it.

What to do now

Review every controlled channel (website, Facebook, Instagram, Google Business Profile, booking platforms) for any patient comment, review, story, or repost that refers to a symptom, treatment, or outcome. Remove each one. Disable reviews and comments functions on social media platforms where possible. Do not respond to or like patient reviews on any platform.

Skin Marketing audits clinic advertising against the complete AHPRA and TGA framework and produces a written report showing every breach found and the compliant fix. Request a free audit.

Brendan Barnhill - Founder of Skin Marketing

Brendan Barnhill

Founder & Head of Digital, Skin Marketing

I built Skin Marketing because that gap is fixable. As the person who creates and authorises the advertising, I am legally exposed alongside the clinic if content is not compliant. That tends to focus the mind. The rules exist. Most agencies simply have not read them.

Connect on LinkedIn