A recent ASA ruling gives an example of what not to do when using these types of claims. In a series of videos featured on Instagram, the advertiser compared the sugar content of a branded chocolate-based snack to various fruits by claiming that their product contained less sugar.
The Skinny Food Co made the following non-compliant nutrition claim:
“Chocolate that contains less sugar than fruit?! The Skinny Food Co allows you to continue to satisfy your sweet tooth by indulging in one of our delicious chocaholic snack pots. Meaning you don’t have to remove chocolate from your daily diet! [star eye emoji] #SkinnyFoodCo #NotGuilty”
Although this product is not a food supplement, the same rule applies to the advertising of food supplements.
The Nutrition and Health Claims Register states that comparative nutrition claims:
The Skinny Food Co did not compare products in the same category (snack vs fruits) and additionally breached the Code due to these factors: