Ad Policy Rejections: Writing Health and Income Claims That Pass

Here is an uncomfortable thing about rejected ads: a lot of the time, the reviewer is right.

Not about the exact policy line, necessarily. But about the claim. "Lose twenty pounds by June." "Make ten thousand a month from your laptop." If a reviewer flags a line like that, ask a different question than "how do I get this past the system." Ask "could I prove this to a skeptic?" If the answer is no, a rewrite is more than a workaround. It is the fix. This is educational guidance, not legal advice or a promise that any ad will be approved.

Why do health and income ads get rejected so often?

Because those are the categories where claims do the most harm if they are false.

The platform's side

Meta's Privacy Violations and Personal Attributes standard says ads must not assert or imply personal attributes, including physical or mental health and vulnerable financial status, or imply that the advertiser knows them. Its listed violations include "Do you have diabetes?" and "Are you bankrupt? Check out our services." Listed acceptable examples include "Depression counseling."¹ The difference is who the sentence is about. The violations speak to the viewer's condition. The acceptable one names a service.

Meta's Health and Wellness standard restricts statements of inferiority about physical appearance, bars before-and-after depictions for weight loss products and targets exaggerated or extreme claims.² These pages get revised, so read the live version before you write, not a summary of it from someone else, including this one. I covered one big shift in Meta Is Coming for Health Data.

The regulator's side

The FTC's health guidance is plain that health claims need competent and reliable scientific evidence, that advertisers are responsible for what consumers reasonably take from an ad and not only its literal words, and that testimonials do not replace substantiation.³ Testimonials showing results more dramatic than typical are likely deceptive, and a "results not typical" line will not cure it. The ad should disclose what a typical consumer can expect.³

How do you rewrite rejected claims?

Four patterns cover most of them.

Pattern one: talk about the service, not the viewer

The rewrite on the right says what you offer and to whom, without telling the viewer something about themselves. It also gives you an honest, specific hook, such as a start date.

Pattern two: replace outcomes with process

"Lose 20 pounds in 30 days" promises an outcome you cannot guarantee and cannot support for a typical customer. "A licensed clinician reviews your history and builds a plan with you. Book a consult" describes what actually happens. For health offers, outcome promises belong in a conversation with a clinician, not in an ad.

Pattern three: swap income promises for what the program teaches

"Make $10,000 a month from home" is an earnings claim. The FTC's business guidance says earnings claims need a reasonable basis, meaning reliable evidence of what the typical person in the audience is likely to achieve, and that it is deceptive to promote what participants may earn without also disclosing typical expenses.⁴ If you cannot show that, do not say it. Say what you teach.

Pattern four: handle proof carefully

The FTC's guidance lists images of houses, cars and luxury vacations as possible implied earnings claims, deceptive if participants generally do not achieve those results.⁴ A refund policy is not a defense for deceptive income or lifestyle claims either.⁴ If you show a client result, show the group it came from and the typical range, backed by records.

What is a repeatable review process?

Keep a claims file

For every ad, save the final copy, the evidence behind each claim and the date you checked. When something is rejected or questioned, you can answer in minutes. It is the same habit as the ledger in Client Results Tracking. It also stops the drift, where an ad that started compliant picks up a stronger claim with each edit.

What if your ad is still rejected?

Do not resubmit the same ad five times.

Read the stated reason, compare your copy and creative to the policy line, and fix the real issue. If you believe the rejection was a mistake, request a review once, with a clean version, and keep a log of what was rejected and why. Repeated attempts with the same problem go nowhere, and they teach you nothing.

The honest version wins more often

My working rule from more than a decade of ad reviews, including on client accounts, is simple: if a claim would worry me in front of a skeptical customer, it is a problem before it is a policy problem. Write the claim you can prove. It tends to be more specific, more believable and easier to approve.

Keep building.Ekai