The ASA upheld a complaint about a poster seen in a London Underground station on July 21, 2025 that promoted the UK-based supplement brand’s ‘Food-Grown’ supplements. The UK’s independent regulatory body for advertising ruled that the claim was misleading, because it understood that the products were created using synthetic materials.
The ad also included the phrase “Wild by nature,” which the ASA said consumers would interpret to mean that the nutrients came directly from food or natural sources.
As Wild Nutrition explained in response to the ruling, the term ‘Food-Grown’ is their registered trademark recognizing their formulation approach, not a literal claim that the supplements were grown like crops or that they were entirely natural.
The brand’s production process starts with isolated nutrients, some of which are typically produced through chemical synthesis, and as the ad did not explain this and the evidence did not show all starting nutrients were food-derived, the ASA concluded the claim could mislead consumers.
What rules did Wild Nutrition break?
The Committee of Advertising Practice (CAP) Code sets the rules that advertisers in the UK must follow. As the ASA enforces these rules, it found that the ad breached three specific provisions in Section 3.
The first rule requires that marketing communications must not materially mislead or be likely to mislead consumers, and in this case, the ASA found that the term “Food-Grown” could lead consumers to believe the nutrients came directly from food or natural sources, which the ASA concluded was misleading.
Secondly, the ASA decided the ad did not explain what “Food-Grown” meant or how the supplements were actually produced, breaking the rule that advertisers must not mislead consumers by leaving out important information or presenting it unclearly, ambiguously, or too late.
Finally, the ASA concluded the company had not demonstrated that all nutrients were derived from food or natural sources, which is how consumers were likely to interpret “Food-Grown”. This broke the rule that advertisers must hold adequate evidence to support objective claims before publishing them.
Registered trademark doesn’t excuse misleading ads, ASA tells Wild Nutrition
The Food-Grown process, as the company’s website explains, involves combining an approved nutrient with a glycoprotein mix and introducing it into yeast, probiotic cultures, or citrus pulp, where it integrates into a food complex over about 72 hours before being dried and encapsulated. Wild Nutrition refers to data from several scientific studies showing that nutrients integrated into a whole-food matrix have increased absorption levels in the body.
“Vitamins, minerals, herbs, oils and botanicals are formulated – with all their essential compounds – so our bodies instinctively recognise these formulations as food, welcoming, absorbing and retaining the nutrients,” said Henrietta Norton, founder of Wild Nutrition.
However, even a registered trademark can break advertising rules.
The ASA therefore ruled that the ad must not appear again in the form complained of, and Wild Nutrition was told to ensure that its future advertising did not claim their ingredients were entirely derived from food or natural sources if that was not the case.
Wild Nutrition did not respond to a request for comment at the time of publication.
