As already addressed, the fibre content has been decreased significantly on this new version.
With fibre being very important in providing satiety, I’m just wondering what effect this reduced fibre has on the new Huel bar? I could eat a 250kcal “old” Huel bar and feel full for a good few hours, probably comparable to 400-500kcals of Huel powder.
It’s not fair to look at percentage changes - rookie mistake if you are an analyst. The difference in absolute mass of sugar per bar between the versions is like 3g which if the new bars are really that much better is more than a fair trade off. Ultimately I see the bar as a bit of a snack so if you’re keeping sugars down throughout rest of your day 11g is nothing. That’s probably about as much as a banana!
I personally can’t wait to get my new batch as loved the old bars but the crumbling made them virtually inedible. When I grabbed a bar I normally needed something even easier, handier and quicker than the shake so having the bar disintegrate into chunks as I ate it carefully just wasn’t good.
Thank you for the considered response. Ultimately, I was looking for a healthy snack bar that had the least required sugar content to ensure it held up as a bar.
I agree with Flamme. 90g of sugar a day seems very high as an official recommendation. Please see the following link for a 25g/50g daily max recommendation:
Flamme’s calculations also stand-up. The BNF 2017 that you refer to recommends no more than 5% of total kcal to be consumed as sugar. That is approximately 25g of sugar assuming a 2000kcal intake. The 90g max you mention is referring to the Reference Intake which to my understanding is set by European Law for food labels.
I’ve found other bars out there that have achieved a sugar percentage level similar to the previous version that maintained a much better consistency. So I’d challenge that the sugar levels needed to be increased for consistency purposes.
Ulitmately, I would have preferred the previous bar or the newer version bar just with less sugar but respect that other priorities take precedent.
Please avoid phrases such as “rookie mistake”. You are assuming we all have similar preferences and requirements. Four points to help explain my preference:
It is fair to look at percentage changes if that is important to you. The bar size has indeed been reduced, in part as there is less fibre present. Less fibre for me is a negative as I see that as beneficial health-wise. This also increases the concentration of sugar in the snack and thus in your mouth and digestive system which I also see as a negative health-wise.
The increased sugar concentration and reduced fibre content makes them less filling and thus more prone to over eating.
The absolute sugar content is still much larger. Approximately 3g may seem small, but compared to an original value of around 6g, that is a lot. Remember the total calories for the two bars are the same.
You are comparing the bars to a banana as that is likely the kind of thing you eat. Many people avoid eating much fruit, as again, it is high in sugar. Many health advocates recommend against considerable fruit intake, especially bananas as they have a very high starch/sugar content.
Using percentage changes on a small absolute change is often misleading at best (our sales are up 100% from 1 to 2!).
If that’s important to you that’s fine but mentioning it without also mentioning the absolute change is straight out of the tabloids misrepresentation of statistics books.
You also say original value of around 6g which is not right either - the v1.2 I have in front of me says 8.2g/bar.
Either way those are personal preferences - it’s your right to voice your opinion and maybe if there’s enough of you they might offer 2 versions of the bar…
Love the bars! Tasty and very convenient for lunch at work. I have a 2 scoops smoothie in the morning and a bar at lunch and feel full until dinner when I feel the need to eat something green and leafy.
v2.0 have a really good ‘bite’ and have not caused any digestive problems, extremely satisfied with them.
Are there any plans to offer other flavours in future, or to allow a vote / opinion poll on consumer prefs ?
Good questions. The best option will be to cancel your subscription on the UK site and recreate it on the EU site, this way you will avoid any shipping costs to Spain, so long as the order is over 54EUROS. However if your account remained solely on the UK site then your order would still be fulfilled for the time being, no problem, but you would be charged the £8 delivery cost.
If you have any problems whatsoever then don’t hesitate to contact us directly on firstname.lastname@example.org as we would love to make sure it’s all sorted for you I hope this helps.
I will receive tomorrow 48 bars, but I just found that the sugar in each bar is almost the 20%. I knew that there was an increase of sugar but not that much. I tried to find the nutritional profile and wasnt available on the web, only in this thread.
Why did you add sugar and why do you think 17,3% of sugar is good for the bars? @JamesCollier
I believe I answered your point previously in this thread:
Yes the sugar is higher, but they were pretty low sugar before and v2.0 is still pretty reasonable.
The previous bar was too dry any many complained. plus the soluble fibre syrups were well too high and people were getting a laxative effect on 2 bars. So there’s a trade off. Indeed, we managed to get rid of glucose syrup which was in v1 bars which isn’t a good ingredient, and used better syrups from brown rice and date instead.