Compiled from the phrasing that most often triggers ad rejections and board complaints. Free to reference with a link. These are patterns that draw scrutiny, not a legal standard - see the note at the top of the page.
1Outcome guarantees
A promise about how treatment will turn out is a claim you have to be able to substantiate for every patient, and no clinical outcome works that way. This is the single most common reason healthcare ads get rejected.
Commonly flagged
- Guaranteed results
- Pain-free procedure
- Permanent results
- You will see a difference in one visit
- 100% success rate
- Risk-free
Safer instead
Describe what the procedure does rather than what the patient will get: "most patients return to work the next day" beats "pain-free", and it is a claim you can actually support.
2Superlatives with no cited source
"Best" and "#1" are objective claims in advertising law, not opinion. If you cannot point at the ranking, the award or the dataset, you cannot make the claim. Many state boards treat unverifiable superlatives as misleading on their own.
Commonly flagged
- Best dentist in [city]
- #1 clinic in the state
- The leading specialists in…
- Top-rated
- Voted best
- World-class care
Safer instead
Cite the source in the ad, with the year: "Rated 4.8 from 320 Google reviews" or "Voted Best of [City] 2025 by [publication]". If there is no source, cut the superlative rather than soften it.
3Testimonials that imply typical results
The FTC's endorsement rules treat a testimonial as a claim about what a reader can expect. A glowing quote or a dramatic before-and-after, shown without context, implies a typical outcome you then have to substantiate.
Commonly flagged
- See Sarah's amazing transformation
- Results our patients love
- Real patient, real results
- Before and after just 2 weeks
Safer instead
Say what the outcome depended on and how usual it is: "Individual results vary with age, skin type and number of sessions" placed with the image, not buried in a footer. Never use stock photos as patient results.
4Risk and side effects left out
Describing a procedure entirely in terms of benefits, with no mention that it carries risk or that it is not suitable for everyone, is treated as a material omission. It is what a regulator looks for first on an aesthetic or surgical ad.
Commonly flagged
- A simple 30-minute procedure
- No downtime
- Completely safe
- Non-invasive with no side effects
Safer instead
Keep the benefit, add the qualifier: "Most patients resume normal activity within 24 hours. Not suitable for everyone; risks are discussed at consultation."
5Credential and specialty claims
"Specialist" is a regulated word in many states and for many boards. Using it where the board does not recognise the specialty, or where the named clinician is not certified in it, is a direct advertising violation rather than a grey area.
Commonly flagged
- Cosmetic dentistry specialist
- Board-certified in [non-recognised specialty]
- Expert in…
- Award-winning surgeon
Safer instead
State the credential exactly as the board issues it, and name the board: "Board-certified in Orthodontics (American Board of Orthodontics)". Where there is no recognised specialty, describe the practice focus instead: "Practice limited to cosmetic dentistry".
6Price and insurance claims without qualifiers
A headline price or a coverage claim is read as an offer. If it depends on eligibility, a minimum purchase, a plan, or a window you have not stated, that is where complaints come from and where platforms pull the ad.
Commonly flagged
- Free consultation
- Covered by insurance
- From $99
- We accept all insurance
- No out-of-pocket cost
Safer instead
Put the condition next to the claim, not in a footnote: "Free 15-minute consultation for new patients; imaging billed separately" or "Most PPO plans accepted, coverage varies by plan".
7Comparative and regulatory-status claims
Comparing yourself against named or implied competitors needs evidence for the specific comparison. And regulatory clearance language means something narrow: a device may be cleared for a use, which is not the same as a treatment being approved, safe, or right for the patient.
Commonly flagged
- Safer than surgery
- More effective than [competitor]
- FDA approved
- The gold standard
- Clinically proven
Safer instead
Match the language to the actual status and cite it: "FDA-cleared for [specific indication]" rather than "FDA approved". For comparisons, name the study or drop the comparison.
