Salt in Huel is now reduced to 3.3g per 2000 kcal. 0.7g per 100g

Quick summary:
In v2.0 we made a mistake and put the salt level too high, sorry. We have now lowered the salt to 3.3g per 2000kcal (56% of GDA).

We will keep you updated on the dates and the batch numbers, but current info is as follows:

(Please note: the first batch numbers below had no added sea salt, however the labels still say 6.4g per 2000 kcal, we didn’t have time to change the labels in time)

  • Large Vanilla - first without sea salt 2491 - currently shipping 2497
  • Large Unflavoured – first without sea salt 2495 (DOM 05.09.16) - currently shipping 2476
  • Large GF Vanilla – first without sea salt 2502 (DOM 12.09.16) - currently shipping 2455
  • Large GF Unflavoured – first without sea salt 2503 (DOM 12.09.16) - currently shipping 2456

In summary large Vanilla are shipping with reduced sea salt. The large U&U, GF Vanilla, and GF U&U are not but will in coming weeks.

More details:
After raising the salt level in v2.0 we have listened to the feedback and now have a clear plan. We do accept that the level we chose to include in Huel v2.0 per 2,000 calories wasn’t the optimal level. Sorry, this was a mistake by the Huel team. The delay in us responding is because we needed to look at this issue thoroughly to ensure that any change we make is the right move, plus we were waiting for certain data.

As v2.1 is still weeks away, we’ve decided to make an interim change to v2.0 which will be active soon for all, see dates above.

What action we took:
On the 6th Sept we stopped adding the sea salt to all future batches of Huel. This took the salt down from 6.4g to 4.9g. As well as the removal of sea salt as an ingredient from Huel, we have also re-examined the sodium in some of the main Huel ingredients and found the level to be lower than previously thought.

In the early days of Huel we used supplier specifications sheets and published nutritional profiles. Then we moved to a combination of these and bespoke lab test results, conducted by Intertek, to provide increased accuracy. However, these labs tests were one-off and could include anomalies. So we have since cross checked this with other sources including NutriCalc who are the industry standard for nutritional information and have based their results on numerous readings. Using NutriCalc reduced the salt down to the current 3.3g.

The interim labels for 2.0 represent the salt per 100g and per 2000 kcal correct, however they state that the GDA is 82%. This is not correct, as stated above it is actually 56% and was a proofing error which is corrected on the website.


Great news! Thank you for listening!

I look forward to putting in an order soon. :slight_smile:


That’s great. Thank you for making the changes.

Now, what about the Sodium Flouride?


So after all that, the salt wasn’t actually over 6g per day anyway, even with the additional sea salt…

Either way I prefer it like this, if anyone wants extra salt it’s very easy for them to add their own.


Great news! Looking forward to v2.1, and will continue to happily consume v2.0 in the meantime.

Huel has greatly improved the quality of my life, I’m so happy this product exists.


I second this. I second this so much. Huel’s been a lifesaver, and one of the best things that has ever happened to me.


This is great news. Thank you for being open about it all, Julian.


Oh no thats too low! :grin: (joking)

But seriously, really happy to hear that and thanks for being up front about the mistake.

I’m putting an order in and will posting a lot less on the forum!

Thanks again




So it sounds like the original v2.0 actually only had 4.8g of salt per 2000 calories.

3.3g + (6.4g - 4.9g) = 4.8g

Which means you could have left things exactly as they were, changing just the label to show the more accurate number of 4.8g, and most people would have been perfectly happy.


does this mean the salt levels of v1.2 and below were also incorrect?


This is very important. Please revise the old nutritional profiles with any new relevant information. We want to know what we were eating!

It sounds to me like having inaccurate data has not helped anyone, particularly the team when formulating Huel. It would would set a great precedent if you could release some or all of this new data (periodically and/or as it becomes available).

Still waiting for V2.1 here.

Edit: Is NutriCalc not just a software package for calculating (i.e. arithmetic) the nutritional profile of a food product? Using a different calculator should not yield different results. Perhaps they also provide a database of nutritional information but you can’t just pick the “best” numbers they have to suit your needs. I have no idea how much Sodium is in Huel now, or historically. And the same can be said of every other bit of Huel nutritional information.

In all the foods that you eat, data is based analysis or from calculation from data available on NutriCalc and other similar databases. Ingredients vary and ALL foods - without exception - will vary.


I understand all of that. Thanks. And thanks for removing all the “added salt”.

I would just like a bit of clarification about how you went from the 4.9g per 2000 kcal Huel to 3.3g per 2000 kcal of Huel. You simply changed your source of information, you didn’t change any ingredients. Where is the discrepancy? Is it something like - supplier of oats claims X grammes of Sodium per 100g oats, NutriCalc claims Y grammes of Sodium per 100g oats. Y is smaller than X, so let’s go with NutriCalc’s value?

This all leads to a greater question about nutritional information accuracy and precision. This is obviously applicable to all foods and food products. Is Huel any more or less susceptible to variation across it’s nutritional profile? How far can Huel drift from its stated calories, macros, micros etc.?


Do you seriously think that every single bag of crisps Walkers made has exactly the same nutritional profile as what is printed on the packet? Every supermarket salad, every box of cornflakes, every sandwich? Of course all products deviate from the ingredients lists on the packet from time to time. They’re just typical values.

Surely you’ve noticed that sometimes you’ll get one dehydrated pea in a Pot Noodle, sometimes none and sometimes four or five and once I had ten dehydrated peas in a single beef & tomato flavour pot noodle. But the ingredients list and nutritional info printed on the side of the beautiful brown pot of gorgeous beauty remains static.


Similar comparison of diets consisting of random grocery items and of Huel has already been attempted on this forum, however the sensibility of such a comparison can be easily contested: In a diet consisting of random grocery items the deviation of a single item can only have a limited effect on the overall nutrition. If however you are drinking Huel or if you keep eating the same thing exclusively, any deviation in the composition of Huel or that thing is going to play a significant role in your overall nutrition.


Thanks for your usual contribution. You can re-read what I already wrote to answer your questions.

Different foods and food products have different nutritional information standard deviations or precisions - i.e. how much they generally can drift from the label values. I’d just like to get some idea of the natural variation in some of the primary ingredients in Huel.

And separately I’d like to know why Huel can decide to change the reference material for their nutritional info and arbitrarily choose their preferred source. Why can they change the nutritional label without a corresponding formula change. You could be eating two identical shakers of Huel wrt. ingredients/formula and they can have two different labels making different claims.

I’d just like to know what is in Huel, what was in Huel and what will be in Huel. Isn’t that the whole point of Huel?


Are you referring to nutritional information or an ingredients list as they’re quite unrelated.

I’ve had a check and if the v2.0 label that’s on the main website is also on the packet then it’s breaching EU regulations relating to food labelling.

Huel lists protein in the wrong order.

“Nutrients will be required to be listed in a certain order – energy (both in kilojoules and kilocalories) and the amounts (in grams) of fat, saturates, carbohydrates, sugars, protein and salt (in place of ‘sodium’ which is no longer permitted)”

1 Like

I think its a question of degrees and the numbers are important. No I wouldn’t expect it to be exactly the same across packets of crips, but I wouldn’t expect it to be out by more than 30%. The change from 6.4g to 4.8g is more than 30%.

1 Like

The change from 6 4 to 4.9 was the removal of the sea salt.