This series of adverts drive me crazy. The adverts state things such as "Cow and gate (insert product name) contains more iron than a toy rattle" While this voiceover plays there is an image of a baby chewing a toy rattle. Fair enough. This makes sense. However, they have another advert in which there is a baby chewing a bracelet and the voiceover states "Cow and gate (insert product name) contains less sugar than a bangle". I really didn't know that bangles were that sugary. Did their advertising team not notice this?
They're all pretty crap - the one with the porridge drives me mad "baby can't have mummy's porridge because it's too salty, and she can't have daddy's porridge because it's too sugary, so she has to have the one that costs 7 times more". It's OATS, ffs. Just don't put bloody salt and sugar in. Is that so hard to understand? Presumably in the world of sugared bangles it is...
Many stupid adverts recently have made supposed health claims - e.g. a bowl of all bran contains more fibre than 15 apples - which taken in isolation is pretty useless information when trying to work out a balanced diet.
They're subverting this by taking it new levels of useless information which certainly gets your attention.
However, is it approprite for them to do this when talking about something I'm going to feed to my baby? I think not.