An online medicinal cannabis prescriber has acknowledged it falsely told patients and practitioners that its entire product range had been approved by Australia's medicines regulator — but the company is refusing to commit to informing its own customers about the correction.

Medicinal Organic Cannabis Australia (MOCA), which lists a Sydney address on its website, had published statements from its managing director, Alessandro Sorbello, declaring the company's "complete product range is approved by the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) and is ready for practitioners to prescribe to patients in Australia." The site also described an "approved medical cannabis product range" covering capsules, sublingual oils, isolates, vape pens and whole cannabis flowers.

In fact, those products — while legal — are unapproved therapeutic goods that have not been assessed by the TGA for safety, quality or effectiveness.

What the TGA Actually Approves

Australia's Therapeutic Goods Administration maintains the Australian Register of Therapeutic Goods (ARTG), which lists only two cannabis medicines as fully approved products: Epidyolex, an oral solution prescribed for specific forms of epilepsy, and Sativex, a mouth spray used to treat multiple sclerosis-related spasticity. Together, these two products represent less than one per cent of all medicinal cannabis products available in Australia.

The remaining more than 99 per cent of medicinal cannabis products on the Australian market have not been assessed by the TGA for safety, quality or effectiveness. However, this does not render them illegal — doctors can lawfully prescribe certain unapproved products through regulatory pathways such as the Special Access Scheme.

The Therapeutic Goods Act 1989 explicitly prohibits advertisements that imply a therapeutic good has been approved or recommended by the government or a government authority.

MOCA Removes Claims But Hedges on Patient Communication

Confronted with the discrepancy, MOCA acknowledged in a statement that its wording "did not accurately reflect the regulatory status" of its products and confirmed the language had been removed from its website. The company said it was also conducting a broader review of its site to ensure product information and regulatory descriptions were "accurate and consistent with current requirements."

However, when asked directly whether it would contact patients to explain the changes, MOCA stopped well short of any commitment — saying only that it "will consider whether any further communication is appropriate" as part of its review process.

The TGA, for its part, said it could not confirm whether the identified content constituted unlawful advertising without a detailed case-by-case assessment. A spokesperson nonetheless reminded businesses of their obligations, stating: "Businesses are responsible for understanding and complying with their regulatory obligations when advertising and supplying therapeutic goods, including advertising through online platforms."

Broader Industry Concerns

Experts have raised wider concerns about the language used across the online medicinal cannabis sector, noting that MOCA's claims are not an isolated example. A pattern has emerged of clinics and online retailers using terminology that could lead prospective patients to believe their cannabis products carry full regulatory endorsement — when they do not.

The Royal Australian College of General Practitioners (RACGP) has already taken formal steps on the issue, writing to the TGA earlier this year to call for reforms to the way medicinal cannabis is prescribed and regulated in Australia.

The episode raises pointed questions about patient-informed consent in a fast-growing sector where many consumers may not understand the distinction between a fully TGA-approved medicine and a product that is merely legal to prescribe. Whether regulators will act on the specific case — or push for industry-wide reforms — remains to be seen.