Background
Three complainants, including a medical doctor and a consultant for the pharmaceutical and life sciences industries, who understood that Orlistat acted to reduce the absorption of fats and did not suppress the appetite or help with food cravings, challenged whether the presentation of the medicine in the ad conformed with the Summary of Product Characteristics (SPC) in the marketing authorisation.Ad description
A TV ad for Numan, seen in June and July 2025, featured a woman in an office being approached by a surreal-looking character. His outfit was made of an array of food including eclairs and waffles. He said, “Wow! Who’s feeling decadent?” The woman replied, “Not today, Buffet Boy” and walked away. The character repeated her words mockingly and displayed his outfit of meat, prawns and pastries while saying, “Treats from Sweden, courtesy of Steven”, indicating a colleague who was eating a pastry. The woman looked away and ate an orange. The Buffet Boy character crept away, shouting, “Meeting Leftovers?… Lisa!”, and ended up slumped in a concrete stairwell.
The woman held up a phone screen which displayed the Numan Weight Loss programme app. Bold text on the app screen stated, “Numan WEIGHT LOSS PROGRAMME”. Three sections of the app were shown: Coaching (with a photograph of a person), Medication (with an illustration of a white object with the Numan logo) and Clinical Care (with a photograph of a person). The woman left the office, laughing with her colleagues. The voiceover stated, “In your battle against Buffet Boy, weight loss medication from Numan can help.” On-screen text stated, “Alli 60mg ‘Hard Capsules’ contains Orlistat. For overweight adults with a BMI of 28+. Combine with exercise and a reduced calorie, lower fat diet. Always read the label. 18+ only”.
Issue
Three complainants, including a medical doctor and a consultant for the pharmaceutical and life sciences industries, who understood that Orlistat acted to reduce the absorption of fats and did not suppress the appetite or help with food cravings, challenged whether the presentation of the medicine in the ad conformed with the Summary of Product Characteristics (SPC) in the marketing authorisation.Response
Vir Health Ltd t/a Numan said the ad promoted its weight loss programme, which combined clinical care and coaching with the non-prescription medicine Alli (Orlistat), and which was supported by a mobile app. They confirmed that Alli held a UK marketing authorisation from the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
The ad featured a fictional character, “Buffet Boy”, who personified the constant presence of food in everyday surroundings such as the workplace. Lisa, the main character, was shown eating on two occasions, first from a spoon, and later when she chose an orange instead of the pastry offered by Buffet Boy. Numan believed this demonstrated that Lisa continued to experience hunger and was making conscious dietary choices. She was intentionally partaking in a lower-calorie diet, in line with the requirements of the SPC, which stated that Orlistat should be taken with a reduced-calorie, lower-fat diet. The ad did not suggest that Alli curbed appetite or reduced cravings, but rather, reflected the effort required by users to make healthier decisions to comply with its requirements.
A shot of the Numan app showed the three elements of the programme: coaching, medication and clinical care. Numan said that made clear that the ad related to a broader weight loss support service, and that it did not suggest that the medication worked in isolation.
Clearcast said the ad showed the woman making healthier choices and so illustrated the role of informed decision-making in weight loss. They said Buffet Boy represented the everyday temptation of unhealthy food, and that the woman resisted, not because her appetite had been suppressed, but because she had chosen to follow a healthier lifestyle. They endorsed Numan’s view that the shot of the app made clear that Alli was one component within a wider, supportive framework. They believed the depiction of the product in the ad and the on-screen text accurately communicated its intended use.
Assessment
Upheld
The BCAP Code stated that ads for medicines must conform to the use indicated in the licence issued by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA). The ad stated “weight loss medication” and the on-screen text referred to Alli 60 mg capsules. The ASA noted from the SPC for Alli (Orlistat) that it acted by reducing the absorption of dietary fat. It was indicated for weight loss in overweight adults with a BMI (Body Mass Index) of 28 or more. The SPC also specified that while taking the medication, the patient should follow a nutritionally balanced, mildly hypocaloric (low in calories) diet that derived approximately 30% of its calories from fat.
The ad depicted a woman declining offers of foods such as eclairs, waffles and pastries. We considered that viewers would see the Buffet Boy character as a personification of the repeated temptation that people might encounter in their daily life from foods high in sugar or fat.
We acknowledged that after refusing Buffet Boy’s offerings the woman was seen eating from a spoon and later eating an orange rather than a pastry. We understood that was intended to reflect that the woman was not experiencing a reduced appetite but had, rather, chosen to comply with a lower-calorie, lower-fat diet while taking Alli. We noted Numan’s weight loss programme offered coaching and clinical support alongside medication and that the woman’s behaviour was intended to demonstrate informed decision-making around food in that context.
We noted, however, when the woman was faced with Buffet Boy’s offers of food, she replied calmly and dismissively, she did not look at him and her expression remained impassive. We considered that the ad depicted resistance to food temptation as effortless rather than the result of deliberate choices. The selection of an orange, a food significantly lower in calories, reinforced that impression, as did the voiceover claim, “In your battle against Buffet Boy, weight loss medication from Numan can help”. We also considered the specific reference to weight loss medication, rather than to the weight loss programme, implied that the medication played a primary role in helping users resist temptation. The Numan app, that showed the other two components of the weight loss programme, appeared only fleetingly on screen, and we considered it was unlikely to counteract the impression given by the ad overall. Similarly, we considered that viewers would not necessarily make a direct connection between the on-screen text that referenced the dietary recommendations for Alli users and the woman’s behaviour in the ad.
For those reasons we considered that viewers were likely to interpret the ad overall as suggesting that Alli helped reduce cravings or suppress appetite. We understood from the SPC that Alli acted solely to inhibit fat absorption.
Because the ad implied that the medicine could help users resist food temptation in a way that was inconsistent with its authorised indication and mechanism of action, we concluded that it breached the Code.
The ad breached BCAP Code rule 11.19 (Medicines, medical devices, treatments, and health).
Action
The ad must not appear again in the form complained of. We told Vir Health Ltd t/a Numan to ensure that the presentation of medicines in future advertising conformed with the Summary of Product Characteristics (SPC) in the relevant marketing authorisation.
