What are you good people at MN doing getting involved in a tie in with *Aptamil*???????

still don't see why you had to say it though.... still up to you

Arragon - 8.53 - comment about ads showing healthy white babies

IMO mothers on low incomes should be given a choice, if they are b/feeding they should be given money for feeding bras or vouchers for healthy foods.

ML - she is "QOQ" after all.... she must put the quotes in for you!!!

times please, too lazy to scroll down

Marslady - perhaps you should read the post which my comments were based on and you'll see it's ver relevant.

Have to say I do see the sense (sort of) in not allowing advertising of formula milk, but don't really see the benefits of not advertising the special offers.

Surely if a mother has already made the decision (happy one or not) to bottle feed there's no harm in giving them speical offers.

I know of a few bottle feeding mum's who've put their babies onto Cows milk MUCH earlier than 12 months because they found the price of formula milk so difficult to keep up with.

qoq I don't think you need to worry quite so much. there are lots of ads around with fat gorgeous black and mixed race babies. I don't think it's an issue here.

you might want it to be one.... cowers in the corner waiting for the attack* .... but it's not.

Well all of the ones I saw in Zim had gorgeous little black babies beaming back at me - although admittedly I can't remember if they were the "big" international brands or whether they were local formula makers.

Not always though, QoQ - they quite like women to think that the western way is to formula-feed...

"fat, healthy and white babies on the ads"

They tend to show black babies on the ads in those countries................

cowers in the corner waiting for the attack*

OK I shopped my local supermarket to Trading Standards for reducing baby milk (it was possibly my thread that Lunavix remembers). I don't think its fair to say 'we are all intelligent people 50p off a tin of formula isn't going to stop us b/feeding if we want to', however we cannot assume that everyone is as intelligent or sensible. I remember when my DS1 was newborn and I was trying to b/feed him all I could think about was formula, it was difficult enough to keep going with family/friends telling me to give up and change to bottles and in addition my HV recommending a bottle of formula a day I would have given up far sooner if presented with adverts telling me how close to b/milk a certain brand of formula was or being presented with regular special offers on formula at the supermarket.

I try to avoid Nestle if possible as their practices in third world countries have sickened me.

However I am not critisising MN for taking the Aptimel ad as we are all very intelligent on MN and know the different between making up our own minds and an advertising ploy.

I'm not convinced that Milupa would part with its hard earned cash to Mumsnet, unless it thought that it reap a benefit - future customers.

Many of the women who use Mumsnet do not even come onto the "Talk" section, though obviously it is from this section that MN gets its subscribers. Some users do come on to look at content (the best buys etc). They get the emails and they do look at the home page (It took me 9 months to visit the talk section, though admittedly it wasn't as busy way back then!)

Milupa obviously feels that there will be enough interest to warrant its "ad" in order to pay up. So that bothers me. But personnally I'm beyond the stage of using their products. MN got some negative feedback when they brought this up, but ultimately they're a business, so money will be a driver. But I feel that it could weaken the Mumsnet brand. Boden, Mark Warner and Milupa....

Apologies in advance as I have not red the full thread but I don't find the ad that problematic. We are bombarded with far more info about breast being best that I really don't think a single ad about formula buried in a site about breastfeeding is going to have much impact. actually, I'm sure that this debate is actually bringing a good amount of readers to the Milupa site...

I think there's two seperate issues here.

1. That MN carries the ad which (as someone else said) I did not notice till it was pointed out. Personally I feel that if all the ads help keep this fabulous site up and running then I don't care what they are advertising. We don't have to be drawn in.

The second issue is the whole advertising by baby milk companies thing. That is a minefield which has been debated by better (and at present less tired) minds than mine. Go check out Baby Milk Action, look at the whole advertising thing if it interests you - there's a real war going on at times. Go join the fray if you've the time and energy. Personally I feel that these companies always do what they want. Their record as regards promoting formula milk (especially in third world countries) is utterly appalling and they have the deaths of many babies on their hands as a result. Babis who might have lived if only they had been breastfed and not subjected to formula made up with dirty water by mothers who were influenced by the fat, healthy and white babies on the ads.

That really is my last post here.

The Mumsnet ad doesn't say "ditch breastfeeding and feed your kid this stuff" - so, despite the fact that it links to information that pushes it, it doesn't break the code.

I hate the fact that MN has to carry ads from companies who can't legally advertise their products. It makes me very uncomfortable to think that MN can't afford to refuse advertising that so many MNers object to.

Of course advertising like this works - if it didn't, why would Milupa be prepared to pay that much for it?

I wouldn't want to see enforced subs, because it's unfair to deny access to MNers who can't afford to pay. But I'm feeling very guilty that I haven't contributed more myself.

Enforced subs a little unfair if people can't afford to pay though.

I wonder how many more clicks the Aptamil site has had simply due to this thread. I rarely even look at the home page and wouldn't have done today if I hadn't read this.

I'd rather enforced subs, to be honest, but that's how I feel regardless of who's advertising.

Or, to put it more bluntly, if you were given the choice of enforced subs but no aptamil ads or pay as you please/if you please and an aptamil ad which one would you select?

I don't think aloha is missing the point - it's about time the Mumsnet team made some money from this site because they certainly don't make enough from us. And who are all these Mumsnetters that are going to be manipulated into giving up breastfeeding? By the sound of this thread everyone here is smart enough to see through Aptamil's advice.

I just feel for Carrie and Justine because sometimes it seems that whatever they do to raise money to keep MN going (let alone letting them pay themselves a paltry wage) causes them grief (which they handle with huge grace IMO) and we are so possessive about the site (a good thing of course) but they do need funding and I'm sure not everyone pays anything like what they could towards it. I know not everyone can afford to, but some of us do use the site and get tremendous value from it - I certainly count myself in here - but don't contribute enough. I'm a pretty evangelistic breastfeeder myself but I still think that we have to look at ourselves before going on the attack. This isn't aimed at anyone and in general I agree with the antis, but it is something that strikes me.

Agree with all that's been said about formula advertising being Not A Good Plan, for all the reasons listed thus far.

Advertising works. That's why they do it. Milupa know full well that advertising a breast is best link to their site will get women who are feeling guilty about wanting to stop to click - and presto, when they do, they discover that, according to Milupa, their formulas are as good as breastmilk. Hurrah! Everybody's happy. Mum can stop breastfeeding without any guilt and Milupa have another customer.

Message withdrawn