Huel ad banned for suggesting its products could replace all meals

A recent ad for Huel's meal replacement shakes has been taken down by the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) for promoting what the watchdog deemed "irresponsible" dietary habits. The advertisement showcased Huel ambassador Spencer Matthews recounting a story about a participant in a long-distance race who claimed to rely solely on Huel for sustenance.

The ASA was concerned that viewers might wrongly believe that consuming Huel exclusively is both "nutritionally appropriate" and conducive to elite-level physical performance.

Huel defended its position, stating that Matthews' anecdote was not meant as a direct recommendation or instruction for consumers. The brand argued that the purpose of the ad was to dispel the notion that Huel could replace every meal. Their video ad featured Matthews speaking with Huel founder Julian Hearn, discussing how Hearn incorporates Huel into his own diet, but only occasionally for breakfast and lunch during workdays, reserving full meals for the evening.

Hearn revealed that he once encountered an individual who claimed to consume Huel exclusively, which led Matthews to initially doubt the feasibility of such a diet. However, Matthews then recounted how this individual managed to win an ultramarathon, remarking, "He won it by miles, like literally just left us all in the dirt."

Hearn clarified that, in an ideal scenario, a fully nutritious whole-food diet would be preferable for most people. He explained that Huel serves as a practical solution for those who lack the time or resources to maintain a fully balanced diet. Huel, based in Hertfordshire and now under Danone's ownership, is part of a $5.9 billion market for complete nutrition products, targeting time-poor, health-conscious consumers.

The Advertising Standards Authority received four complaints regarding the ad, questioning whether the health claims were irresponsible and whether the content recommended that consumers replace all conventional foods with Huel. The ASA acknowledged that while the ad did not explicitly suggest this, it could still be interpreted as promoting such a practice.

The ruling emphasized that by presenting this anecdote, the ad implied that replacing conventional foods with Huel was nutritionally appropriate, potentially misleading viewers about the implications for physical performance.

The ASA upheld complaints about the health claims, stating that Matthews' anecdote about the ultramarathon athlete implied a positive relationship between consuming Huel and sustaining high levels of physical endurance. Huel argued that the advertisement clearly positioned Huel as a supplement to a balanced diet, specifically for situations where preparing whole food was impractical.

The brand highlighted Matthews' initial skepticism towards the idea of someone eating only Huel, emphasizing that this was presented as an exceptional case, not a common practice or a recommendation. Huel affirmed that neither Matthews nor Hearn suggested consumers should adopt a 100% Huel diet.