Glycemic Index of Huel

I’m very interested in Huel. It appears to be the first soylent product that doesn’t have maltodextrin in the formula and that is great. Soylent has just publicised their GI which is quite high at 64, too high to be healthy if one is consuming soylent for 100% of their meals. Someone drew the comparison that the official soylent has a GI higher than coca cola which is just wrong for a healthy meal replacement product.

Do you know the GI of Huel?

I can’t tell you how excited I am to try Huel. As a diabetic I am concerned about high GI so I can’t wait to try Huel.

Hi - thanks for your message.

We’ve just launched Huel and obtaining a GI value of it is something we want to have. In theory, though, the GI should be reasonably low as it’s based on oats and is high fat.

What type of diabetic are you and what medication are you on?

Hi James

I am type 2 diabetic and take metformin daily. I also check my blood daily which is useful for tracking any sugar spikes. I’ve tried several soylent brands but all but one gave me a marked sugar spike and these also had maltodextrin in the formula. It is really good that your product has no maltodextrin and you demonstrate that there is no need for it. Well done on being the first.

Hi David

OK, great - if you do choose to use Huel, it would be great to hear how you feel with it and what your BMs are like.

Thanks and all the best :slight_smile:

1 Like

In defense of Soylent (and possibly Huel?), the comparison to Coca Cola is disingenuous. The GL of 100 calories of Coca Cola is 16, while the GL of 500 calories of Soylent is 35. If comparing equal calories of Coca Cola and Soylent, Soylent has 44% the GL of Coca Cola. Comparing other 500 calorie servings of various foods, watermelon is 33, whole-wheat bread is 38, 2% milk is 40, oatmeal is 55, black beans are 30, and peas are 33.

It would still be good if Rosa Labs is working towards reducing the GL of Soylent. And it is good if Huel is lower than Soylent and others soylent brands. But, Soylent values aren’t insanely high, and the comparison to Coca Cola is disingenuous at the least, flat out wrong at the most. More accurate to say Soylent has the same GL of peas.

1 Like

@davidmccarlie, have you explored keto versions?

We’ve just launched the primary Huel formula. We have a lot of plans: one being a low carb version of Huel

“Oats come in a wide variety of forms, including Irish, steel cut, rolled, and instant. Depending on which one you select, the GI could vary from 42 to 66.”

Oatmeal and Diabetes: The Do’s and Don’ts

Sure. Plus there’s so much more that influences the GI. We don’t eat foods on their own: we eat them as meals. Huel is a perfect example of this.

@JamesCollier or @Julian, it’s been three months since you’ve indicated you want to obtain a value; do you guys have a GI value for Huel?

1 Like

No sorry the test costs £3500. So it’s not something we can justify at the moment.

1 Like

Hello Julian, i do appreciate huel, and i am 2 meals a day hueler.

I Hope that You have palnned At last to invest to let know all huelers the gi.

When WILL we know. Please tray to fix a date? Thankyou

My blood sugars are lower (but still within healthy ranges)!on 100% Huel than they were when I was eating regular, supposedly low-GI foods. That tells me all I really need to know about the glycemic load of Huel. Like James said, combination of foods plays a huge part in the impact on the body.

1 Like

I was in a meeting the other day and was told that it’s against EU legislation to display / publish GI scores for a food product, which surprised me to say the least. We are currently looking for the relevant legislation.


I just Googled it and this indicates that may be incorrect…just making representation about a low GI is against legislation. Dunno how old the link is, nor how accurate. I just selected the first one I Googled.

1 Like

That is useful, thank you. We are currently awaiting clarification on the issue.

1 Like

OMG!!! One more convincing argument for the Brexit!:joy:


You can definitely publish GI scores. You can’t make misleading GI claims.

NCBI link


Just my thoughts on this, but it would be great to hear from Julian what the current legal situation is.

From what I know, Glycemic Index is not free of critic - see Wikipedia article [1] or the Health Canada’s paper [2] (see Ric’s link to NCBI).
EFSA’s strategy to only allow proven health claims is great - would be a mess otherwise. Problem here seems to be that a panel back in 2010 didn’t see evidence for such a claim (see EFSA journal [3]). A decision that is criticised in return (see this article [4]).

As far as I understand it correctly, it is ok to_display_ the GI. You’re just not allowed to conclude anything because of a “low” or “high” GI (because this would be than a health claim). Pretty much what Ric said.

Anyhow, would be interested to hear what the official situation is (and why, what, …). Just out of curiosity.

And because I’m a new user and can only post two links per post, here are the links:


1 Like

We’re looking into this issue.

Thanks for the link - however, it makes no reference to GI and as there isn’t a legally recognised method for obtaining a GI measurement, we have to be cautious.

GI may be taken as an indication that there’s implication of a connection between the food and the person’s health. A health claim, under EU regs, has to state, suggest or imply a relationship.

This is where GI falls into a grey area and is why we’re looking into it.