Steven Bartlett has hit back after a nutrition brand he has backed was again censured by the Advertising Standards Authority today.
Zoe has been reprimanded by the ASA for the second time since last August, this time for an ad claiming a supplement did not contain any ultra-processed ingredients.
The Facebook ad, which featured Bartlett, was for a product, Daily30+, described in a slide shared by the Dragons’ Den star on LinkedIn today as “basically 30 plants in a bag that you sprinkle on your food to help you improve your gut.”
A single complainant, reportedly an unnamed professor in nutrition and food science, took exception to the ad’s claim that: “This is a supplement revolution. No ultra-processed pills, no shakes, just real food,” however.
They complained to the ASA, which today banned the ad in its current form.
Zoe, which Bartlett invested $2.5m in in 2023, offers health testing and diet advice, alongside supplements, and was invested in by Bartlett in 2023.
The ASA ruling said at least two ingredients in the Daily 30+ supplement – chicory root inulin and nutritional yeast flakes – are not wholefoods and had been through more than a minimal level of processing, meaning the company’s claims about not containing any ultra-processed foods (UPFs) were not true.
Zoe disputed that, saying the processes used on the inulin and nutritional yeast flakes could be replicated in a small-scale home kitchen, and so were not typical UPFs.
It also said Daily 30+ was not ultra-processed, unlike other supplements, because it did not contain any artificial flavours or additives, and there was nothing “unhealthy” about either ingredient because they made up only a small percentage of the overall product.
READ MORE: Former Bauer chief lined up to launch new STV commercial radio station
The ASA, while acknowledging there was no universally accepted definition of UPFs, said the term “wholefood supplement” would be interpreted by the consumer to mean the product comprised solely of wholefood ingredients.
“Nutritional yeast was manufactured, and chicory root inulin was extracted using an industrial process. For the latter, the extraction process included slicing and steeping, purification using carbonated water as well as evaporation, partial enzymatic hydrolysis (adding of enzymes) and filtration.
“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.”
Zoe co-founder Professor Tim Spector and Bartlett himself have both hit back at the ruling.
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.”
He added: “To go after a product that is designed to improve health whilst doing very little about the harmful marketing and advertising of unhealthy junk food to children and vulnerable individuals is nothing short of disgraceful.”
Responding on LinkedIn, in a post that has already had well over 1,000, largely supportive, reactions, Bartlett said:
“I am confused.
I should preface this by saying, the ASA has not contacted me regarding this ruling. The advert in question wasn’t posted by me, nor did it appear on any of my channels. I do not speak on behalf of Zoe Ltd, who are the targets of the ruling.
“I genuinely support having an organization like the ASA to protect consumers from harmful advertising and to hold the marketing industry accountable. However, I do believe that the ASA has lost its way. This ruling is the result of one complaint, by one member of the public on one Facebook post last year, about one phrase that the ASA admits has no widely accepted definition.
Last year, in May, the ASA ruled against a well known entrepreneur, causing major headlines after she promoted her own products from the company she’s known as the founder of on her own page seemingly because she didn’t say in the post that she was the founder.
“When I saw this, not only was I scared about the precedent this sets for all entrepreneurs, I began to believe the ASA is more focused on publicity than protection.
Every week, hundreds of you message me about alarming deep fake ads and scam ads using public figures. In the past 30 days, including today, we’ve reported more than 50 deep fake adverts impersonating me on platforms like Meta and X, and we have spoken with several victims of these scams.
One individual said on Good Morning Britain two weeks ago that they lost £140,000 to an AI generated scam advert that they thought was Martin Lewis. I wish we had an organization that would do more to protect the public from these kind of events.
“Zoe is a start up from the UK that has spent millions of pounds on rigorous clinical studies, scientific rigor and extensive public education. They have contributed more towards promoting health awareness in the UK than any company I know. Their mission is crucial and deserving of celebration. I really think we should support companies like Zoe and entrepreneurs everywhere who are doing their best to build exciting companies, if we do this, the UK will be a much friendlier environment for entrepreneurs and that will benefit us all.”
