The Advertising Code Committee (ACC) has ruled on the packaging of “Beautiful Immunity Kéfir Mild.” According to the complaint, the term “kéfir mild” creates the impression that it refers to traditional kefir containing yeasts and alcohol, while that is not the case. The ACC considers (in Dutch) commercial kefir without yeast to be common nowadays. Consumers primarily perceive “kéfir mild” as a milder flavor variant. Therefore, the term “kéfir mild” is not misleading.

However, the ACC regards the claim “supports gut flora” as a misleading health claim. This general health claim is not directly linked to a specific authorized health claim. As a result, consumers interpret it as an independent claim about kefir. Since no authorized health claim exists for kefir, the claim “supports gut flora” is therefore prohibited.

A general health claim is in principle permitted, but only if it is immediately and clearly supported by a specific authorized health claim. That connection must be visible. In the case of Dr. Willmar Schwabe/Queisser, the Court of Justice ruled that an explicit reference is required. If the specific health claim, due to length or number, does not fit on the same side of the packaging as the general claim, an asterisk (*) as an explicit reference can suffice. The condition is that it remains fully clear to the consumer that the general claim and the specific claim correspond in substance.

Back to Kéfir Mild. The advertiser has adjusted the labels and replaced the claim with “For gut health.” But does that solve the problem? That also seems to be a general health claim. It must therefore be clearly linked to a specific authorized claim in order to be understandable to the consumer. The final word on this matter may not have been spoken.