'Misleading' Huel shake adverts banned

Huel adverts that suggested people could save money on food bills with its products have been banned for misleading customers.

Huel markets its vegan shakes and bars as “nutritionally complete food” that contain a “balance of all 26 essential vitamins and minerals, protein, essential fats, carbs, fibre, and phytonutrients in a single product”.

In August and September 2022, during the UK’s cost of living crisis, an advert seen on Facebook claimed that the plant-based food firm “helps keep money in your pockets”.

“Want to save money on food?” it asked, adding a month’s worth of Huel products works out to less than £50.

A second advert said “eating healthy doesn’t break the bank” and to read on “for five ways you can save money on your food, while also getting all the good stuff your body needs to thrive”.

However, the Advertising Standards Agency (ASA) has said the company did not actually show that its products were cheaper than traditional foods.

The watchdog said it was not made clear that the saving was based on consuming one Huel product a day, and “not the equivalent to a month’s worth of food covering all meals”.

Huel said it would take steps to remove or update the adverts and “review all live ads”.

Huel ‘regrets’ confusion caused

The company said its mission since launching in 2015 has been to make “convenient food that was affordable”.

Its products are pitched as being good grab-and-go alternatives to preparing traditional meals.

While its strategy “had not been a response to the financial crisis”, the ASA said Huel “understood that it was a significant consideration to consumers” when the offending ads were published.

It added that the less than £50 a month claim was based on a cost of £1.51 for 34 meals a month – which it said equates to just over one meal a day.

One portion of Huel contains 400 calories – well short of the recommended daily intake for men and women.

For the five or six portions needed, it would cost around £350 a month for women and possibly more for men.

The adverts did not advocate the substitution of all meals, the ASA said, but did not make clear a “traditional” diet could not be replaced by Huel portions.

“We concluded the ads were also irresponsible,” the ASA said in its ruling.

Huel told the ASA if its products were used to substitute more expensive convenience foods that had a similar nutritional profile for one meal a day, then it would reflect a cost saving.

It said it did not think the ads were misleading, but “regretted” any confusion they may have caused.

Read Entire Article