Asa says Zoe’s daily 30+ supplement contains ultra-processed ingredients despite ad claims

Zoe, the high-profile health and nutrition brand backed by entrepreneur Steven Bartlett, has had one of its adverts banned by the UK’s advertising watchdog for making “misleading” claims about ultra-processed content in its supplements.

The Facebook advertisement promoted the company’s Daily 30+ product, a food-based supplement containing chicory root inulin and nutritional yeast flakes. In the ad, Bartlett declared: “This is a supplement revolution. No ultra-processed pills, no shakes, just real food.”

However, the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) ruled that the supplement did contain ultra-processed ingredients and concluded that the advert breached advertising rules. The complaint was raised by an unnamed professor of nutrition and food science who challenged the credibility of Zoe’s claims.

Zoe, which offers personalised health testing, nutrition guidance, and supplements, shot to prominence after Bartlett invested in the brand in 2023. Its Daily 30+ product aims to help consumers reach their dietary fibre goals through a mix of plant-based ingredients.

But according to the ASA, two of the supplement’s key ingredients — chicory root inulin and nutritional yeast flakes — are not wholefoods and have undergone significant industrial processing.

The ruling detailed how chicory root inulin is produced: involving slicing and steeping the root, purifying the extract with carbonated water, evaporating the liquid, then performing partial enzymatic hydrolysis and filtration. While Zoe argued these steps could be replicated at home, the ASA disagreed, saying the cumulative process went well beyond what a consumer would consider “minimal”.

The ASA noted: “Nutritional yeast was manufactured, and chicory root inulin was extracted using an industrial process… we considered the number of stages used in processing went beyond what consumers would interpret as minimal.”

Zoe defended the advert, insisting the supplement was made from “real food” ingredients without artificial additives. The company claimed the term “ultra-processed” was being used inconsistently, and reiterated that Daily 30+ was not a typical pill or shake but a food-based powder designed to be added to meals.

Co-founder Professor Tim Spector lashed out at the ASA’s verdict, calling it “disgraceful”.

“We categorically reject the idea that this advert is misleading, or that Daily 30+ — or any of its ingredients — could be classed as ultra-processed,” said Spector. “The ad clearly states that Daily 30+ doesn’t contain ultra-processed pills or shakes. That’s because it doesn’t.”

He criticised the ASA for targeting a product intended to improve public health while “doing very little” to combat the advertising of junk food to vulnerable groups.

The ASA, however, remained firm in its decision. It emphasised that while no formal, universally accepted definition of “ultra-processed food” exists, the typical consumer would expect a “wholefood supplement” to be free from ingredients processed through multiple industrial steps.

Steven Bartlett, who fronted the advert but was not the subject of the ruling, has distanced himself from the regulatory clash. A spokesperson said: “For the avoidance of any doubt, this ruling is not against Steven Bartlett whatsoever. It is for Zoe to debate the merits of the ASA’s ruling.”

The ad must not appear again in its current form, and the ASA instructed Zoe to ensure future marketing does not make misleading claims about processing levels.

The ruling adds to the growing scrutiny surrounding health product marketing, especially in an era where consumers are increasingly wary of hidden processing in supposedly “clean” products.