Nestlé's 'No.1 pediatrician-recommended' formula ad fell — it never produced the study

Nestlé promoted NAN Supreme Pro 2, its follow-on formula, on billboards across Portugal with two claims: 'the No.1 brand recommended by pediatricians in Portugal' and 'thinking of healthy growth', citing a study — 'HCP Tracker, November 2024, APLUSA'. Danone Nutricia, maker of the rival Aptamil line, complained to ARP, Portugal's advertising self-regulation body: pairing medical authority with a promise of healthy growth gave the ads the feel of medical validation.

The Ethics Jury agreed, in a decision deliberated on 22 June 2026 (Consulta 2J/2026). Under the ARP Code, an advertiser must substantiate factual claims when asked; Nestlé did not produce the cited study, so neither the sample nor the methodology could be assessed. Worse, the jury found, placing a 'No.1 recommended' claim next to 'healthy growth' slid the message into a health claim — which under EU rules on nutrition and health claims requires generally accepted scientific support. The campaign was found misleading.

The jury ordered the campaign suspended immediately and not re-run, in whole or in part, for as long as the illicit elements remained. Nestlé had argued the recommendation claim rested on an independent market study and that 'pediatricians' in the plural was not the kind of individual medical endorsement EU law bars; it was cleared of unlawful comparative advertising. It appealed. The ruling still drew the line: 'No.1 recommended' is a fact, and a fact needs its evidence on file.