Huel advert pulled after watchdog rules it promotes "irresponsible" 100% diet

A Huel advertisement has been banned by the UK's advertising watchdog after regulators concluded that it could encourage or condone "irresponsible" eating habits by implying the brand's meal replacement drinks could stand in for all conventional food.

The ruling, published by the Advertising Standards Authority, centres on a sponsored Instagram post and YouTube pre-roll video in which brand ambassador Spencer Matthews recounts meeting a competitor at an ultramarathon who "only eats Huel" and who nevertheless won a 260km race "by miles, like literally just left us all in the dirt."

The ASA said that viewers watching the ad could come away believing that replacing every conventional meal with Huel products was "nutritionally appropriate" and entirely compatible with elite physical performance. Regulators ruled that presenting exclusive consumption of the brand in that context suggested the wholesale substitution of food was a safe and viable long-term choice.

Huel, which disputes that interpretation, said the anecdote was "not a recommendation or instruction" and that the purpose of the advert was to challenge the widespread misconception that its products could replace every meal.

The advertisement was filmed in a podcast-style format, with Matthews interviewing Huel founder Julian Hearn. The Instagram post carried the caption: "Here's how our founder uses Huel. Spoiler alert it's not for every meal."

In the video, Hearn explained that he consumes Huel products for breakfast and lunch during the working week, but returns to what he called a "traditional meal" when he gets home. He also conceded the underlying nutritional principle behind the ASA's concern, saying: "In an ideal world, you should have nutritionally complete whole food. Most people either don't do that or can't have the time to do that, and therefore that's where Huel fits in the gap."

Matthews, for his part, said that when he was competing in an ultramarathon he met a man who ate nothing but Huel, and that he was deeply sceptical the participant could sustain such a race. He recalled the competitor's dominance in memorable terms, saying he "won it by miles".

The ASA acknowledged in its ruling that the advert "did not explicitly recommend that consumers replace all conventional foods with Huel". Regulators nevertheless concluded that the anecdote could reasonably be interpreted as describing "an acceptable dietary practice" — and that by framing it as a remarkable real-world story, the ad implied the complete replacement of conventional food was nutritionally appropriate and placed no barrier to exceptional physical achievement.

A second limb of the ruling went further. The ASA upheld a complaint about health claims, determining that Matthews's story about the ultramarathon competitor "implied a beneficial relationship between consuming Huel and the ability to sustain exceptionally high levels of physical and endurance performance" — something Huel has never substantiated with evidence.

The watchdog received four complaints about the advert, all of which questioned whether its content was irresponsible. Two of the four complainants also challenged the health claims made in the video against the rules of the ASA's advertising code.

Responding to the complaints, the company said the advert "unambiguously positioned Huel as part of a balanced diet for occasions when preparing whole food was not practicable". It pointed to Matthews's visible reaction of "extreme scepticism and disbelief" at the idea of someone living solely on the products, arguing this signalled the story was extraordinary rather than routine.

"At no point in the ads did either speaker suggest that consumers should adopt a 100% Huel diet," Huel added. A spokesperson later told BBC News: "We do not position Huel as a complete diet replacement or claim that it improves athletic performance," adding that the company had complied with the ASA's ruling.

The decision is not the first time Huel has run into trouble with the regulator over how its products are presented as substitutes for ordinary food — a pattern that suggests the brand's marketing continues to sit close to the boundary of the ASA's rules on health and nutrition claims.

Context matters here, too. Huel is a Hertfordshire-based business founded by Hearn in 2015, and it is currently in the middle of a takeover by French food giant Danone — a deal worth around €1bn that has itself been cleared by competition watchdogs. The ASA's intervention therefore lands on a brand under corporate ownership, with a larger legal and reputational apparatus behind it.

The commercial backdrop is a booming category. The market for so-called complete nutrition products, sold largely to time-poor and health-conscious consumers, is thought to be worth about $5.9bn (£4.4bn) globally — money that helps explain why the language of total dietary replacement is so central to advertising in the sector.

That promise has drawn sustained criticism from nutrition professionals, some of whom have questioned the effectiveness of substituting meals with nutritionally rich drinks. Regulators have now taken that debate a step further, deciding that at least one advertisement crossed the line from describing a product to normalising a practice it considers irresponsible.

For Huel, the practical consequences are clear: the ad is withdrawn, the ASA's findings are on the public record, and any future marketing will have to reconcile the brand's founding pitch — a convenient gap-filler for busy weeks — with the growing official insistence that whole food remains the nutritional benchmark.