AHPRA does not regulate dietitians or nutritionists. Neither title is one of the 16 registered health professions under the National Law, so Section 133 does not bind either of them. Four other rulebooks do: the National Code of Conduct for health care workers, the Dietitians Australia Code of Conduct, Standard 1.2.7 of the Food Standards Code, and the Therapeutic Goods Advertising Code. The catch is that the Dietitians Australia code instructs its dietitians to follow the National Law advertising rules anyway, in writing. Here is which rule governs which sentence on your website.
Does AHPRA regulate dietitians and nutritionists?
No. Neither one.
This matters because most advice written about AHPRA advertising for dietitians gets it wrong in the first sentence. It assumes a dietitian is a registered practitioner. A dietitian is not.
AHPRA supports 15 National Boards, and between them those boards regulate 16 registered health professions. Medicine, nursing, midwifery, physiotherapy, psychology, pharmacy and the rest sit on AHPRA's list of professions and divisions. Dietetics does not. Nutrition does not.
You do not have to take my word for it, because a government regulator says so directly. Queensland's Office of the Health Ombudsman publishes the list of workers covered by the National Code of Conduct for Health Care Workers. That code exists specifically for people who provide a health service and are not registered with AHPRA. Its published examples include "massage therapist, social worker, naturopath, counsellor, dietitian, assistant in nursing, dental assistant, sonographer, pharmacy assistant, support worker".
Dietitian is on the unregistered list. That settles the question.
What follows from this, and it surprises people. Neither "dietitian" nor "nutritionist" is a protected title under the National Law. Using the word is not, by itself, an offence the way calling yourself a physiotherapist would be. What carries weight is the credential behind the word, and that is issued by a professional body rather than a regulator.
So you went looking for the AHPRA rules for your dietetics practice. The honest answer is that none of them apply to you directly. Four other sets do. And one of them hands the AHPRA rules straight back to you. That is the interesting part.
If AHPRA does not apply, what does?
Four rulebooks, and they stack. A single claim on a homepage can sit under all four at once.
| Rulebook | Who it binds | What it controls | What happens if you breach it |
|---|---|---|---|
| National Code of Conduct for Health Care Workers | Anyone providing a health service who is not registered with AHPRA, in the states and territories that have adopted it | Unsubstantiated efficacy claims, claims to cure serious illness, misrepresenting your qualifications | Interim and full prohibition orders, and public statements naming you, from the state health complaints body |
| Dietitians Australia Code of Conduct | Anyone holding APD status whether or not they are a member, Dietitians Australia members, and members on the Accredited Nutritionist register | Advertising and professional representation, under clause 4.2 | Your credential, which is what most of your referrals rest on |
| Food Standards Code, Standard 1.2.7 | Anyone making a nutrition or health claim about a food product | What you are allowed to say a food does to a body | Enforcement by state and territory food regulators |
| Therapeutic Goods Advertising Code | Anyone advertising a therapeutic good, including a food advertised with a therapeutic claim | Claims about medicines, devices and supplements | TGA enforcement, up to civil and criminal penalties |
The Australian Consumer Law sits underneath all four and bans misleading conduct regardless of what you are selling. It has no health carve-out.
Why does the Dietitians Australia code import the AHPRA rules anyway?
Here is the finding that changes how you should write your website.
Dietitians Australia publishes a Code of Conduct for Dietitians and Nutritionists. It is a by-law, made under clauses 6 and 58 of the organisation's constitution. Clause 4.2 covers advertising and professional representation. Its first requirement says dietitians must:
"comply with legal requirements about advertising outlined in the National Law as if the dietitian were bound by the National Law (those requirements are explained in the AHPRA's Guidelines for Advertising Regulated Health Services), and comply with other relevant Australian state and territory legislation regarding advertising and promotion"
Dietitians Australia, Code of Conduct for Dietitians and Nutritionists, clause 4.2(a)
Read the middle of that again. As if the dietitian were bound by the National Law.
The profession has chosen to hold itself to a law it does not sit under. Dietitians Australia belongs to the National Alliance of Self-Regulating Health Professions. This is what self-rule looks like when a body decides to match the registered professions rather than sit below them.
The effect is that the AHPRA advertising rules do reach most working dietitians. They just arrive by a different road. The ban on testimonials applies. So does the rule against promising more than a treatment can deliver. So does the ban on misleading claims. All of it lands on an Accredited Practising Dietitian through their own by-law.
The code even carries its own definition, borrowed from the same source. It defines testimonials as "recommendations or positive statements about the clinical aspects of a regulated health service used in advertising, for example, client stories and experiences, success stories, or fake testimonials".
What actually changes is the forum, not the rule. An APD who publishes a client success story has not breached the National Law, because the National Law was never pointed at them. They have breached a by-law of the organisation that issues their credential. A regulator can fine you. A credentialing body can take away the letters that get you referrals. Neither outcome is one you want to test.
One housekeeping note before you cite clause numbers to anyone. The published version of the code records that it was implemented in April 2022, amended in February 2023, and due to be reviewed in April 2025. Check that you are reading the current version before you rely on a clause number.
So can a dietitian use client testimonials?
It depends on your credential, and not on the law. That is an odd thing to write about Australian healthcare advertising. It is also the honest answer here.
| Your situation | Are testimonials allowed? | The reason |
|---|---|---|
| You hold APD status, or you are a Dietitians Australia member, or you are on the Accredited Nutritionist register | No | Clause 4.2(a) of the Dietitians Australia code applies the National Law advertising rules to you as though you were registered |
| You call yourself a nutritionist and hold no credential from any professional body | Not prohibited outright, but heavily constrained | The Dietitians Australia code does not reach you. The National Code of Conduct still bans efficacy claims you cannot substantiate, and the Australian Consumer Law still bans misleading conduct |
| You are a dietitian who is also registered in an AHPRA profession, such as a nurse or a psychologist | No, for the registered service | Section 133 of the National Law binds the regulated health service you provide. The rule follows the service, not the funding or the job title on the door |
That last row is the same rule I have written about for NDIS providers who are also AHPRA registered. Holding two qualifications does not let you pick the softer rulebook. The Dietitians Australia code covers this too. It tells a dual-qualified dietitian to tell the client which discipline they are working under.
Want the full picture of what counts as a testimonial? I have covered it in what counts as a testimonial under AHPRA. Every line of it now applies to APDs by way of clause 4.2.
Where is the actual gap in the system?
The gap is not where the headlines put it. It is the nutritionist who belongs to no body.
An Accredited Practising Dietitian is bound by a borrowed copy of the National Law, whether they like it or not. Someone who uses the word "nutritionist", holds no credential and joins nothing is bound by none of it. The word is free to use.
What still catches them is the National Code of Conduct, and it has more teeth than most people expect. Two clauses do the work. I am quoting the Queensland version, published by the Office of the Health Ombudsman.
"a health care worker must not make claims either directly to clients or in advertising or promotional materials about the efficacy of treatment or services he or she provides if those claims cannot be substantiated"
National Code of Conduct for Health Care Workers (Queensland), clause 9(2)(c)
"A health care worker must not claim or represent that he or she is qualified, able or willing to cure cancer or other terminal illnesses."
National Code of Conduct for Health Care Workers (Queensland), clause 8(1)
Clause 8(2) does allow a claim about treating or easing the symptoms of those illnesses. But only if you can back the claim up. That word does a lot of work in both clauses. It means evidence you can produce on request.
One caution before you quote a clause number at anyone. Each state adopted the National Code into its own law, and the numbering moved in the process. The same efficacy rule is clause 9(2)(c) in Queensland and clause 10(3) in the New South Wales version, which sits in Schedule 3 of the Public Health Regulation 2012 and is published by the Health Care Complaints Commission. The cure clause is 8(1) in Queensland and 3(1) in New South Wales. Check your own state's instrument before you cite a number.
The enforcement is real. A state health complaints body can issue an interim ban order, issue a full ban order, and name a person publicly if they pose a serious risk. There is no register to be struck off. So the system reaches for the power to stop you practising instead.
The same structure applies to naturopaths advertising in Australia. They are also unregistered, and they sit on the same list of covered workers.
What can you claim about the food itself?
Everything above governs how you describe your service. Standard 1.2.7 of the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code governs what you may say about a food. If you sell a product, a meal plan with packaged components, or a supplement, this is your rulebook.
It sorts claims into three tiers, and the evidence bar rises sharply at the top.
| Tier | Example of the shape | What you must have |
|---|---|---|
| Nutrition content claim | A statement about the level of a nutrient in the food | The food must meet the conditions set for that claim in the Standard |
| General level health claim | A link between a food or nutrient and a health effect, short of a serious disease | One of the pre-approved food-health relationships in the Standard, or your own systematic review, notified to FSANZ before you make the claim |
| High level health claim | A link between a food or nutrient and a serious disease or a biomarker of one | A pre-approved food-health relationship from Schedule 4. There is no self-substantiation route |
The gap between those last two tiers is the number worth remembering. FSANZ lists over 200 pre-approved food-health relationships available for general level claims. For high level claims, there are 13.
Source: FSANZ, Nutrition, health and related claims. Schedule 4 of the Food Standards Code holds the 13 pre-approved high level relationships.
Two more conditions catch people out.
First, self-substantiation is not a private decision. Build your own general level food-health link and you must tell FSANZ before you make the claim. FSANZ runs that notice process without judging whether your link is any good. You also cannot borrow a link a rival has already lodged. You have to do the review yourself.
Second, there is a gate on the food. Health claims are only allowed on foods that meet the Nutrient Profiling Scoring Criterion. A product high in saturated fat, sugar or salt cannot carry a health claim. It does not matter how strong the evidence behind the ingredient is.
When does a food claim turn a product into a therapeutic good?
The moment you say it treats something.
Australia has no separate legal box for dietary supplements. A product is either a food or a medicine. What pushes it across the line is mostly how it is presented and what is claimed for it. The TGA publishes a Food-Medicine Interface Guidance Tool for this exact call. It weighs how the product is presented, what it claims, its dose form, what is in it, and whether it has a history of being eaten as a food.
Here is the part to hold on to. The Therapeutic Goods Advertising Code covers medicines, devices and sunscreens. It also reaches cosmetics, foods and other goods once a therapeutic claim is made in the advertising. Your product does not have to be a medicine for the Code to bite. Your sentence has to be a therapeutic one.
If you recommend or resell supplements, the rules for that are their own subject, and I have written them up in TGA advertising rules for supplements. The Code itself is covered in the TGA advertising code explained.
One sentence, four rulebooks: a worked example
Take a line that appears on a lot of nutrition websites. "Our program reverses type 2 diabetes." Now run it through each rulebook in turn.
| Rulebook | Verdict on the claim |
|---|---|
| National Code of Conduct | The cure clause is about cancer and terminal illness, so it does not bite here. The efficacy clause does, 9(2)(c) in Queensland. This is a claim in promotional material, so you must be able to substantiate it |
| Dietitians Australia code | If you hold APD status, clause 4.2(a) applies the National Law advertising rules to you. A claim of reversal creates an expectation of beneficial treatment that you would need to be able to stand behind |
| Food Standards Code 1.2.7 | If the claim is attached to a food product, it references a serious disease, which makes it a high level health claim. It would need to be one of the 13 pre-approved relationships in Schedule 4. Self-substantiation is not available at this tier |
| Therapeutic Goods Advertising Code | Representing a product as reversing a disease is a therapeutic claim. That can pull the product across the food-medicine line and bring the TGA regime with it |
One sentence. Four separate compliance problems. This is why "is it AHPRA compliant" is the wrong question for a dietetics practice, and why the answer to it is never just yes.
What should a dietitian's website say instead?
The same principle that works for every regulated practice I write for. Describe the service accurately and in detail, and stop trying to prove it works by showing that it worked for someone.
| Remove this | Publish this | Why the second version survives |
|---|---|---|
| A client story describing how much better they feel | What happens in a first consultation, minute by minute, and what you send afterwards | It is a description, not a claim about outcomes, and it answers what people actually search before booking |
| "Reverse", "cure", "heal" attached to a named condition | The conditions you work with, the assessment you run, and what a plan usually involves | It carries no efficacy claim to substantiate under the National Code's efficacy clause |
| "Australia's leading nutrition clinic" | Your credential, who issued it, and the year you qualified | Superlatives cannot be substantiated. A credential can be checked in a register |
| A before and after photo | Fees, session length, whether a referral is needed, and what is not included | Removes the outcome claim and answers the questions that stop a booking |
| "AHPRA compliant dietitian" | "Accredited Practising Dietitian" with the credential named properly | The first is not a status that exists. The second is verifiable |
That last row is worth sitting with. If your site currently advertises AHPRA compliance as a selling point, it is claiming a status that does not apply to your profession. It reads as authority and it is checkable, which is the worst combination a claim can have.
The broader playbook for this sits in my guide to the AHPRA advertising guidelines, and the profession-by-profession view is in allied health marketing. If you want this done rather than explained, the dietitians and nutritionists service page is the place to start.
What to do this week
Three jobs, in order.
One. Search your own site for the words "AHPRA", "reverse", "cure", "heal", "guaranteed" and "leading". Every hit is a decision you have to make on purpose.
Two. Work out which of the four rulebooks reaches you. If you hold APD status, you are effectively operating under the National Law advertising rules, so read them properly.
Three. If you sell a product, check whether any claim on its label or page is a high level health claim. If it names a serious disease, it almost certainly is, and the list of 13 is short.
