The San Francisco-based telehealth provider Hims & Hers Health, Inc., which built its reputation on convenience and discretion, was sued by the Federal Trade Commission on July 29, 2026. The FTC’s complaint, which was joined by Utah and Los Angeles County acting on behalf of California, claims that the company gave advertising platforms like Meta and Snap access to users’ most private health information while promising to keep it private. That same afternoon, the stock fell more than 11%.
It’s the kind of situation where there seems to be an abnormally large discrepancy between what a business promises and what it actually does. People who visited Hims & Hers with inquiries about weight control, sexual health, or hair loss didn’t anticipate that their information would be surreptitiously sent to a Facebook algorithm. That is not a small policy detail. That is a basic violation of the knowledge that the majority of patients bring to any medical encounter.
According to the FTC’s complaint, Hims installed third-party tracking technologies on its website that automatically sent advertising companies “Events”—user activity. In addition, the business allegedly gave Meta and Snap direct access to lists of particular clients. Meanwhile, Hims had been assuring users that their data was secure. That contradiction carries extra weight when the topic is something that people hardly ever talk about honestly, even with those they trust.
The accusations regarding billing are equally direct. The FTC claims that the majority of users who completed Hims’ online intake form were billed for a prescription subscription virtually instantly, prior to any consultation with a licensed healthcare professional.
Customers would consult a physician to determine the best course of action, according to the company’s marketing. Regulators claim that many actually received a charge on their card and a subscription they were unaware they had signed up for. In a straightforward complaint, a customer stated that they were informed that they would not be charged until after consulting with a medical expert, but they were then promptly billed.
It wasn’t easy to cancel either. The FTC claims that prior to 2023, the majority of users had to stop their subscriptions by calling, emailing, or chatting with customer support—a purposefully inconvenient process. Regulators claim that even after the company added an online cancelation option, the button was hidden behind multiple steps and only showed up after a user navigated a series of screens and clicked through an irrelevant option. This type of design is not accidental.
Hims & Hers swiftly retaliated. The business called the lawsuit “baseless” in a post on X, accusing the FTC of fabricating allegations while disregarding evidence provided during what it described as a nearly three-year investigation. The business revealed a $15 million probable-loss accrual in May and claimed to have even made a settlement offer. The lawsuit filed on Wednesday included new claims in addition to the previous ones, suggesting that the settlement did not stand up.
For Hims, the case comes at a challenging time. The business has developed into one of the more well-known brands in the telehealth industry, providing direct delivery of prescriptions for erectile dysfunction, weight loss, and mental health drugs. It gained notoriety earlier this year due to its Super Bowl commercials and its participation in the market for compounded weight loss medications. Investors who bought into that growth narrative are now keeping a close eye on things, and some of them have already filed a class action lawsuit against the company’s leadership in September after the stock fell.
The outcome of this case is still unknown. The lawsuit was filed in the Northern District of California after the FTC voted 2-0 to approve the complaint. However, a verdict is not necessary to answer the deeper question it poses: how much do people really know about what happens to their health information once it enters a telehealth platform? That is the aspect of this case that appears likely to continue long after the court proceedings are concluded.
