Smoothie specialist Innocent has been lambasted for its claims that its “superfood” drink removed bodily toxins and could supply more antioxidants than eating the recommended five daily portions of fruit and veg.
The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) said that Innocent, whose sales more than doubled in the last year to £96 million, was unable to prove its claims with medical evidence, and has asked the firm not to repeat them.
Innocent marketed the Superfoods Smoothie - comprising crushed pomegranates, blueberries and acai berries, and packed with vitamins and minerals - as a “natural detox”. In press adverts, it claimed the drink offered “even more antioxidants than the average five a day”, adding: “We think it’s the world’s superest smoothies recipe.”
Innocent told the ASA that the high level of antioxidants neutralised free radicals, thus removing toxins from the body. The company also said the product had an oxygen radical absorption capacity value of 1,640 umol per 125g serving, compared with between 1,470 and 1,870 umol for an average five-a-day diet. But the watchdog’s response was that neutralising free radicals was not the same as removing toxins, which water intake and reduction of alcohol consumption could do in itself.
Official dietary advice suggests that fruit juices and smoothies should make up no more than one portion of the government’s recommended five a day.
It added that even if Innocent’s evidence had been correct, the Superfood Smoothie was in the middle of the antioxidant levels cited, so suggesting the drink could provide “even more” was unjustifiable.
The ASA commented: “We welcomed Innocent’s assurance that they had no plans to use the ad again or to use similar claims in the future. We told Innocent to delete the claims, and to ensure they could provide suitable evidence to back up any claims.”
Today’s row comes amid an ongoing battle between Innocent and authorities over the nutritional value of its drinks. Innocent insists that one of its smoothies provides “at least” the equivalent of two portions of fruit and veg, but the Food Standards Agency and the department of health disagree, saying that crushed, squeezed or pulped fruit drinks only provide one portion because the structure and fibre of the natural product is altered or lost.
Catherine Collins, spokeswoman for the British Dietetic Association, said raw fruit and vegetables were superior to commercial fruit drinks because fibre, phytochemicals and vitamins remained in their original forms. Even a home-made drink was superior to a shop-bought smoothie, she suggested, as it is not pasteurised.
But Innocent spokeswoman Ailana Kamelmache suggested the government had wrongly included smoothies with juice in its calculations. Smoothies provided one portion of vitamins and minerals and one portion of fibre, she said.
Kamelmache apologised if people found claims for the Superfoods Smoothie confusing, but she said the company had tried to make its packaging clear.
No comments yet