Supplement SEO services · Australian ecommerce brandsSupplement SEO for Australian brands built for TGA and YMYL scrutiny.

Only the indications permitted for your listing. A product listed as AUST L may use indications from the TGA permitted list, worded to the Therapeutic Goods Advertising Code: ‘supports restful sleep’ is defensible, ‘treats insomnia’ is a therapeutic claim you cannot make. We write inside those lines and flag whatever your own regulatory adviser should sign off. We do not give regulatory advice ourselves.

How much you are allowed to say. AUST L listed medicines use lower-risk ingredients and are limited to permitted indications, so the content strategy leans on ingredient evidence, forms and dosage comparisons. AUST R registered medicines have been individually assessed and can carry higher-level indications, which opens condition-led pages an AUST L range cannot safely publish. Either way the listing number belongs on the product page.

Often yes, by targeting the goal rather than the diagnosis. Collections and guides built around sleep quality, training recovery or everyday energy capture much of the same demand while staying inside permitted indications. What you cannot do is name a disease and imply your product treats it. The compliant version usually performs better anyway, because it matches how Australians actually phrase the search.

Not on your own product names alone, because large retailers will out-rank you for some of them whatever you do. You compete where aggregators are thin: cited ingredient pages, form and dosage comparisons, batch testing published as pages, and goal collections nobody else builds. That content also earns the brand mentions and links that lift the product pages you share with those retailers.

Because core updates re-weight exactly what this category tends to lack: evidence, named expertise and verifiable trust signals. A store asserting benefits with no references, no author and no review dates is carrying evidence debt, and each update collects a little more of it. Brands built the other way usually gain during the same update as thinner competitors fall away.

By making the people and the proof checkable. Named authors and reviewers with real credentials, a stated review process with visible dates, references to published research on every ingredient page, ARTG numbers on product pages, and lab testing shown rather than filed. All of it marked up in schema so the relationships are machine-readable. None of it works if any part of it is invented.

Publish it as pages. A crawlable testing page per product or batch — what was tested, by whom, against what limits, with the certificate linked rather than buried — does two jobs a footer PDF does neither of: it is a trust signal the buyer reads at the decision point, and it is content a ranking system can actually evaluate and cite.

Longer than average: three to nine months for meaningful movement, because trust accumulates slowly in scrutinised categories, though technical and claim fixes land sooner. Cost depends on catalogue size, how many actives need evidence pages, the platform, and whether we implement or advise. The number is scoped inside the free growth analysis rather than quoted on a first call.