Dragons’ Den star Steven Bartlett has taken a swipe at the Advertising Standards Authority after it upheld a complaint against Zoe.
Bartlett, an investor in the personalised nutrition firm, took to LinkedIn to highlight what he considers a bizarre ruling after a member of the public complained about a September 2024 Facebook ad.
The ad was for a new product named Daily30 which Bartlett said was for “basically 30 plants in a bag that you sprinkle on your food to help you to improve your gut”.
The ad included the following quote from Bartlett: “This is a supplement revolution. No ultra-processed pills, no shakes, just real food. Steven Barlett [sic].”
The complainant, a professor in nutrition and food science, challenged this, claiming that it misleadingly implied that the product did not contain any ultra-processed ingredients.
In response, Zoe referenced the NOVA classification system, intended to demonstrate the effects of high UPFs consumption when products are formulated from substances extracted from foods or derived from food constituents – such as snacks, drinks and ready meals.
It explained the classification system was not designed to be applied to individual ingredients, but rather an entire product, and said “UPFs [are] typically calorie-dense foods with few valuable nutrients that lacked fibre, contained high levels of unhealthy fats, refined sugar and salt, and whose ingredients had been altered”.
Zoe said that in producing Daily30 – which includes vegetables, fruits, seeds and mushrooms – it restricted the amount of ingredients that were finely ground to retain the food matrix of its ingredients. The only liquid ingredient was chicory root inulin, while nutritional yeast flakes, a form of heated yeast, were also included. It said both had proven health benefits.
It therefore considered that Daily30 did not fit the NOVA classification criteria.
The ASA said that it considered that the product as a whole would not fall within the NOVA classification of UPFs – but nevertheless upheld the complaint and ordered Zoe not to repeat the claim.
“We considered consumers would understand the claim ‘Daily 30+ is a… wholefood supplement’ to mean the product comprised solely of wholefood ingredients. They would understand wholefoods to be those foods that were either unprocessed or had undergone minimal levels of processing,” it stated.
“Consequently, consumers would expect that the ingredients used in the product were all very close to their unprocessed form, and therefore those ingredients and the product as a whole were not UPFs… the ad contributed to that overall impression.
“At least two ingredients, chicory root inulin and nutritional yeast flakes, were not whole foods and had been through more than a minimal level of processing. Nutritional yeast was manufactured, and chicory root inulin was extracted using an industrial process.
“While some of those processes were relatively simple in isolation, we considered the number of stages used in processing went beyond what consumers would interpret as minimal and we considered they would likely understand chicory root inulin as UPFs.
“We considered it was unlikely that consumers would be aware that the NOVA classification or other scientific definitions of UPFs referred to the whole product rather than individual ingredients.”
In response, Bartlett wrote “entrepreneurs and marketers should read this…” at the start of a slideshow summarising the situation – and invited people to comment below his LinkedIn post.
“I’m really really confused,” he wrote in the slides. “Despite there being only one compliant [sic] by a member of the public, the ASA ruled against Zoe, asked them to remove the post and gave early access to this story to the media.
“I genuinely support having an organisation like the ASA to protect consumers from harmful advertising. However, I do believe that the ASA has lost its way… it is more focused on publicity than protection.”
Citing what he believes to be the greater damage done by deepfake ads – Bartlett says his team has reported more than 50 impersonating him in the last 30 days alone – he added: “I wish we had an organisation that would do more to protect the public from these types of ads.”
He concluded: “Zoe has spent millions of pounds on rigorous clinical studies, scientific rigour and extensive public education. They have contributed more to improving health awareness in the UK than any company I know… I really think we should be supporting companies like Zoe.”
Bartlett buys out co-founder of firm behind Diary of a CEO podcast
Zoe’s co-founder Professor Tim Spector said: “We categorically reject the idea that this advert is misleading, or that Daily30+ – or any of its ingredients – could be classed as ultra-processed.
“The ad clearly states that Daily30+ doesn’t contain ultra-processed pills or shakes. That’s because it doesn’t. It is made entirely from whole food ingredients, and is designed to be added to meals – not taken as a pill or a shake. The claim is factually accurate and irrefutable.
“The ASA itself has already acknowledged that Daily30+ doesn’t meet the NOVA definition of UPFs. So this ruling is entirely baffling.”
Last year adverts delivered by Bartlett himself for Zoe and Huel were banned after the ASA said they were misleading.
The Diary of a CEO podcast host promoted the products on Facebook without disclosing that he was an investor in Zoe and a director at Huel.
In February of this year, Bartlett stepped down as a director at Huel.
‘Why did he think he’d get away with it?’ Bartlett slammed over banned Huel, Zoe ads