Note: This advice is given by the CAP Executive about non-broadcast advertising. It does not constitute legal advice. It does not bind CAP, CAP advisory panels or the Advertising Standards Authority.
The increased consumption of sugar-rich soft drinks alongside a worrying rise in obesity in the UK has prompted concerns about the contribution of those drinks to the diet. Although many have a sugar content comparable to that of fruit juice, some drinks do not provide any nutrients except energy and are easily consumed in large volumes. Sugar-rich foods can contribute to dental erosion and dental caries. Marketers should be cautious when making health claims about drinks that have the potential to make a significant contribution to calorific intake and should consider the portion size of the product being promoted. See ‘Food: “Healthy” Claims’ and information on portion size and guidelines for recommended daily nutritional needs available from the Food Standards Agency (www.food.gov.uk).
The fortification of drinks with micronutrients (vitamins and minerals) is a growing trend. CAP understands that the health benefits of soft drinks that contain added micronutrients such as vitamins A or C or B vitamins depend on the drink’s contribution to the diet and relate to the level of fortification, amount consumed and other dietary habits. Manufacturers should ensure that products with micronutrient fortification are not promoted at the expense of foods containing natural sources of those nutrients.
In August 2009 complaints made against a poster ad for Oasis stating “presents Rubber Duckzilla for people who don’t like water” would encourage children to drink the product rather than which would be detrimental to their health were not upheld as their humorous and surreal approach did not depict a real life situation where water was eschewed in favour of the product. (Coca-Cola Great Britain 26 August 2009).
Presenting a soft drink as “healthy” merely because it contains less sugar than competitor brands or naturally occurring sugars in fruit juice is likely to breach the Code. The ASA upheld complaints about a Popzone drinks leaflet that featured a table comparing the advertiser’s product with fruit juice and the claim “Many parents choose fruit juice as a ‘healthier’ option for their kids, when it actually contains the same level of acid and twice the amount of sugar as a bottle of Panda Pops”. The ASA concluded that the leaflet misleadingly implied Panda Pops drinks were healthier than orange juice, which contains vitamins important for maintaining health (Hall & Woodhouse Ltd, 16 March 2005). See ‘Food: Health and Reduced Fat, Sugar or Salt Claims’.
Rule 15.3 reflects the Regulation requirement that when making comparative nutrition claims marketers may only compare their product to other foods in the same category and those other foods should not themselves be able to make nutrition claims.
Rule 15.2 of the Code reflects the requirement under the Regulation that health claims referring to general non-specific health benefits of the nutrient/food for overall good health e.g. “good for you”, “healthy” must be accompanied by an authorised health claim. However, as the European Union Register of authorised health claims is not yet complete the ASA is likely to investigate under Section 3 (Misleading advertising) for the time being.
In upholding complaints that ads for the Vitaminwater range were misleading as they implied a product with high levels of sugar was healthy, the ASA noted factors such as the appearance of the products which made it clear that the product was not ‘pure’ water without calories or sugar, but because the ads made claims that were likely to be understood as referring to the nutritional and health benefits of the drinks, it was likely that, in conjunction with these claims, readers would infer that the range of drinks were "healthy". The drinks contained a significant proportion of a consumers RDA for sugar, so the ASA concluded that the ads were likely to mislead (Coca-Cola Great Britain t/a Beverage Services Ltd 7 October 2009).
Under (EC) Regulation No 1924/2006 on Nutrition and Health Claims Made on Foods marketers may now make a nutrition claim only if it appears in the Annex to the Regulation and if their product meets the criteria set out in the Annex. For the Annex and conditions applying to such claims please click on the following link:
http://ec.europa.eu/food/food/labellingnutrition/claims/community_register/nutrition_claims_en.htm
Nutrition claims might differ in wording to the claims listed in the Annex, but if they are likely to have the same meaning for the consumer they will be subject to those same requirements. Marketers should also be aware that any claims deemed to provide a nutritional benefit to the consumer are likely to be considered “nutritional claims” and should comply with the Annex. (The FSA's Guidance on the Regulation can be accessed here: http://www.food.gov.uk/multimedia/pdfs/ec19242006complianceguide.pdf)
See ‘Tea: Health Claims’.
Last modified : 23 September 2011