The exposure isn’t in your ads.
It’s in your creator content.
I’ve scanned the live Meta ads of 14 health advertisers against the 2026 policy rules. The pattern held in every single account: the copy the brand wrote was careful, and the violations were sitting in content a creator wrote on the brand’s behalf.
How it works
Every live asset, not a sample
I pull your complete set of active ads from Meta's public Ad Library. Complete matters: a partial pull gives you a rate that means nothing, and spot checks are exactly what let the six-live-ads case hide.
Scored against a written rule library
34 rules across 10 categories, severity-weighted. Each was written or revised against a real ad, including two added after live findings this summer. Every finding cites the rule and quotes the words that triggered it.
Measured, then reported
A judge scores each ad per rule. I validate it against ads I've labeled by hand, then correct for the judge's own error, so what you get is an exposure rate with a stated confidence interval rather than a pile of opinions.
Re-runnable
A re-scan costs a couple of dollars and a few minutes, which is what makes this monitoring rather than a one-off audit. Drift only shows up against a baseline.
What this is not. It isn’t legal advice, and it isn’t a regulatory opinion. I read what an ad claims and check it against advertising policy. Whether a treatment is right for a patient is your clinicians’ call, not mine.
Scan my account
Tell me the brand and I’ll send back what your live ads are carrying. Free, and there’s no pitch attached.