ARB Rules Pronutro Packaging Not Misleading Over Reformulation Claims

Pronutro is not misleading consumers, rules ARB.

Product reformulation

In a decision issued on 8 June 2026, the ARB found that the packaging clearly alerts consumers to the product's reformulation through prominent "New Generation Pronutro" and "New Taste & Texture" messaging, and that consumers are unlikely to believe they are purchasing the previous recipe.

The complaint centred on what the consumer argued was a contradiction between the prominent claims announcing a new taste and texture, and the continued use of the phrases "The Original Protein Cereal" and "Original Flavoured Protein Cereal" on the packaging. The complainant also pointed to widespread consumer dissatisfaction with the new formulation, referencing online criticism and reporting by consumer journalist Wendy Knowler.

In its response, PepsiCo argued that the packaging makes the formulation change unmistakably clear through bold, highly visible messaging at the top of the pack. It further explained that "Original Flavoured Protein Cereal" refers only to the flavour variant, distinguishing it from chocolate, banana and strawberry versions, while "The Original Protein Cereal™" is a long-standing trademark highlighting ProNutro's heritage as South Africa's first protein cereal of its kind.

Brand heritage

The ARB noted that its role was not to assess whether consumers preferred the new recipe, but only whether the packaging was likely to mislead consumers.

In considering the "Original Flavoured Protein Cereal" claim, the Directorate accepted PepsiCo's explanation that the wording identifies the flavour rather than the recipe. It found that consumers would reasonably understand "original" in this context as a flavour designation, particularly as the packaging also prominently announces that the product has a new taste and texture.

The Directorate also rejected the complaint against the trademarked phrase "The Original Protein Cereal™". Although it acknowledged that the wording could appear contradictory when viewed in isolation, it found that the claim has appeared consistently on ProNutro packaging for several years and serves as a reference to the brand's heritage rather than its recipe. Evidence from historical Facebook and Instagram posts supported this conclusion.

Ultimately, the ARB concluded that the packaging, when considered as a whole, does not mislead consumers into believing they are buying the original formulation. Instead, it found that the new packaging clearly communicates that this is a reformulated version of the cereal while retaining references to its historical significance and flavour variant. The complaint was therefore dismissed and the packaging was found not to breach the advertising code.