Amazon and Google read your claims with AI. We read them first.

We read your public pages from outside, read-only, the way a shopper sees them. We never change anything in your Seller Central, store or ad accounts. The AI pass sends the text of your copy to Anthropic’s API, which runs the Claude models that make the first ruling. Files you send us, like label PDFs, ad creative or email exports, go through a private upload link tied to your audit, with no account needed. They are stored on our own server in a folder for your audit only, and no public web address serves them. Your report and findings sit on a dashboard behind your own login. The rest is in our privacy policy at claimsverified.org/privacy.

Processors publish what they will not carry, and supplement marketing is on the list. Stripe’s prohibited businesses include nutraceuticals that “make harmful claims”, businesses that make outrageous claims or use fake testimonials, and trials with hidden pricing. Square’s terms name suspended payouts and reserves as what it can do. Since standards v1.3 we rule your copy against those published rules too, so the file answers a processor’s question in one attachment: who reviewed your claims, against what, and when. The processor makes the call. You answer with evidence instead of a scramble.

You pay the same fee and you get that in writing: a signed, dated pass on letterhead that cites the standards applied. That is the version your competitors cannot produce, and it is why the fee never moves with the verdict.

What Amazon, a processor or a buyer asks for when money is on the line: a dated file listing every claim, the standard it has to meet and the strongest wording the rules allow, signed by a licensed pharmacist. Notes you wrote about your own copy do not answer them. The document is the product. The free findings show you the quality of the work before you buy it.

Tell us. We take it to the pharmacist who signed it, who can go through the reasoning with us, and if you have substantiation we have not seen, the rating changes. Revisions within thirty days of delivery are included.

We publish our corrections. Every finding we have withdrawn or amended is listed at claimsverified.org/corrections with the date and the reason, including mistakes nobody outside the company would have seen. Disputes work as in the question above, and revisions within thirty days of delivery are included.

No. You decide, and the severity rating makes the decision fast. Critical findings are the lines that can stop a listing or an ad, draw warning letters, and get caught first by the platforms’ AI. Fix those first. Schedule the rest, or keep them knowingly with a signed file that shows you made the call on the record.

No. We review your marketing language line by line against the published rules, and we do not represent you before any agency. What you get is the file counsel would otherwise bill you to build. You can hand the report straight to your lawyer, which is usually cheaper than having counsel produce it.

Yes. Most of the work is US law. Every standard we apply is drawn from the published rule that governs the surface: FDA structure/function rules and the FTC substantiation standard for the US market, Amazon and Meta policy for the platforms, and Health Canada rules only where a brand sells into Canada. Your file cites the US rule by name, which is what an Amazon reviewer, a processor or a US buyer reads.

No, on any of our services, and a brand that says it would be making exactly the kind of claim we are paid to find. Our reviewer reads the wording of your marketing against published rules and never evaluates the product, the formulation or the evidence behind it, so they cannot approve it. What you can say, and it is stronger: "marketing claims reviewed by a licensed pharmacist". Your verification page states exactly what the mark means, which is the version a retailer will actually read.

No, and that is the point. The seal is issued only to brands that pass, it is never sold, it comes with monitoring at no licence fee, and it is revoked if the copy behind it stops passing. That is what makes it worth showing a retailer. A pass also creates your verification page and directory entry, the public record that answers “is this brand legit?”

Especially. Before you publish, up to three products are $650 as Launch Clean: listing copy, label text and the first ad set, rewritten to the rules in five business days, with your FDA structure/function notice drafted for you to sign and file. A claim changed while it is still a draft costs a text edit. The same claim changed after Amazon’s AI flags it costs a suppression and often a reprint.

Yes. Skincare, topicals, foods and pet products fail the same way supplements do: “repairs” and “stimulates cell renewal” are drug claims under FDA rules. The review is identical and the price is the same $2,000.

Yes, and your clients get a signed file while you keep the relationship. Agencies, copywriters and manufacturers can run our audit under their own name with the client. You present the findings. We hold the signature and the methodology, which is what makes the file stand up when Amazon or a buyer asks who reviewed it. Volume terms are quoted on scope. The pharmacist’s signature stays on every file and is never white-labelled away.

No, and that is exactly why our file carries weight. We are the independent reviewer. We never sell growth services to the brands we grade, and that separation is what makes the seal and the signed file worth showing anyone. What the audit does for growth: rewrites that keep your keywords, and rank-safe copy on every channel. Ranking work stays with your agency.

An ASIN or product URL, and access to whichever ad accounts and email flows you want in scope. About ten minutes. No call unless you want one.