Hi @Tom_S and others
Thanks for the post and a very valid point made. Just so others reading this are aware, at Huel we aim to be transparent about what we do and we recently posted this article so people can understand the ingredients we use, so I’m guessing this is where the info for this post came from. (But please correct me, Tom, if I’m incorrect with this assumption).
It isn’t, however, as straightforward as some would think. Far from it, as it happens. And, no, it’s definitely not profit @Jaijai, despite what you think; and there’s no ‘easily guess’ reasons @Tom_S, because, bluntly, you’re wrong!
Firstly, here’s the reason why we have the current suppliers
Although we’re growing rapidly as a business, we’re still recruiting and one area we’re looking at is procurement and these people will look at all aspects when suggesting new suppliers including nutrition and sustainability issues. Ingredient choices so far have been driven by quality and nutrition rather than other factors. Also, with smaller companies, options are limited so we had fewer options; but I’d like to think now we’re at a size where suppliers would be keen to work with us more; meaning we can continue to address these points. So, you’ll be pleased to here we have been already working on this.
Now the reasons why it’s not just as simple as 'buy local; it’s better’
Product quality varies hugely. Our company is ‘nutrition first’ and rightly so. Sustainability and carbon footprint are very important to us, but not to the detriment of quality.
For example, with flaxseed, the omega-3 content does vary; it’s the primary reason it’s in Huel. Then there’s the heavy metal content of the soil - we have certain limits to adhere to in end product. What about the milling? It needs to suit our product. Flaxseed can also be a risky product in terms of microbial contamination and we have quite a big inclusion so this is a factor for Huel compared with other flax-containing products. These are just a few top-of-head reasons.
In respect of the Chinese-sourced ingredients, our ingredients have very high quality standards so any contamination from the pollution concerns raised, don’t apply.
Two of you have incorrectly made the assumption that the reason for these choices are profit. Of course, we aim to make a profit, but I’d rather look at longer term profit and I’d like to think we’re doing well because we are transparent and having the best quality formula; also that we’d make more sales by addressing issues of concern and ‘doing the right thing’. I’d like to think we’ve demonstrated this by posting the article and providing replies like this.
Now the bit where I agree with you
We absolutely should be trying to source our ingredients from the best suppliers and the more local the better. But not at the expense of nutrition and quality (ironically, what you suggest this is what we’re not doing!). We are doing this and plan to do it harder. However, supply regions may not change for reasons that it’s not in the best interest of the product. And also, you’re just looking at carbon footprint in respect of food miles - there are other sustainability issues, where a supplier in another part of the world may actually be better than a European one.
Huel is actually far, far better than other food sources in terms of sustainability and there has been a project running on this and we plan on sharing information soon. You’ll like it, especially as it identifies areas where, although we’re miles ahead of other foods, we can still improve our sourcing.
You’re dead right to raise this issues of carbon footprint, but you’re wrong with your assumptions around price and quality: sorry to be blunt! We are absolutely committed to improving which will involve looking seriously at ‘buying local’, but I hope now I’ve demonstrated that there’s a lot more to this.