Antibreastfeeding?

[Redebs]

Having just browsed some of the 'Help articles' on here, I'm shocked at how Mumsnet is discouraging breastfeeding.

There's one on how normal it is to wean off the breast at two months because of all the 'problems you will have'.

There's one on 'combi feeding', which is about giving formula feeds to breastfed babies - the surest way to reduce your milk supply in reality.

There's another one about packing dummies and bottles in your hospital labour bag. This is definitely going to interfere with newborns getting colostrum and learning to latch. If a baby needs anything, the hospital will provide it in reality.

I know some women choose to formula feed, but these are insidious, supposedly helpful, undermining tactics aimed at new mothers trying to breastfeed. Most of these are sponsored by the baby bottle manufacturer MAM.

If formula companies were promoting this, they would be, rightly, in contravention of advertising rules.

All medical and scientific advice is to give exclusively breastmilk for the first six months and to continue to at least twelve months or longer.

The alternatives are not less good for every baby.

The majority of babies in the UK are bottle fed so in that sense it's entirely normalised.

What we've also managed to do is normalise women to feel bad about it.

But yeah these campaigns don't help and it's pretty poor to see them pushed on a parenting site.

Actually a mothers health is just as important. If she's not right how she going to be able to take care of her baby

Ok, so for some babies there is something better than breast milk and formula? I suppose if you don't have either then you would feed your baby whatever you do have. Is that what you meant?

So now a mother’s health is just as important? Yet this entire thread has been about how it isn’t , and only a selfish woman would formula feed because of her mental or even physical health? Deary me, this thread is all over the place.

When have I ever sold otherwise. Oh wait I haven't

Said*

To be fair you also said you wouldn’t respond to me again so I’m quite disappointed you have.

I don’t care who advertises what - I can’t imagine anyone being influenced as to whether to ff v bf from an advert.
New parents research whether they will bf v ff and make their own decisions. We don’t rely on a internet parenting site!

Breastmilk is best for baby and there are benefits for mum too, but breastfeeding itself isn't always the best thing for mum- and her health and wellbeing is important too. Formula is great nowadays- safe and provides what baby needs to thrive. The reasons women either choose to formula feed or cannot breastfeed are numerous and I agree with others that a lot of the judgement is based on the assumption that aw silly women don't know what they're on about rather than actually any attempt to address the factors that influence how babies are fed. Personally I think combi feeding is brilliant and little known about.

@Parker231 the restrictions on advertising have been in place since the 80s I think and the formula companies brought it on themselves.

Advertising comes in many forms and whether we believe it or not we are all influenced by it.

If you read an article that tells you to feed your baby a certain way and it will do x,y,z positive thing it influences your thinking. Not many of us would dig into who wrote that article or who paid for it.

Literally since formula was invented the formula companies have engaged in unethical practices. They are still doing it. I'm a CMPA mum, my son was combi fed with specialist formula. He was fine with my milk but would projectile vomit normal formula. It made him really sick (sometimes formula isn't good for babies).

I was lucky and I had good support and evidenced back information from our paediatric dietician.

There has always been an exception in the WHO code for specialist infant milks for premature or sick babies. The companies are allowed to promote their products to health care professionals for these milks. They've decided CMPA is a good loop hole and it's often diagnosed from symptoms not testing.

They've started to target HCP with misleading information on CMPA to get them to prescribe it more. Given it cost £35 a tin, it's a nice money maker for them.

I've met many CMPA mums over the years. A significant number of them were told by their GP (so well before seeing a specialist) that you can't breastfeed a CMPA child and we're told they had to give their babies these formulas.

I have zero issues with how anyone feeds their baby.

I have huge issues with formula companies who put profits above babies and who continue to lie and engage in unethical practices.

I didn't think they were allowed to advertise baby formula? I've only seen follow on milks advertised! Not sure why people are mentioning advertising.

But actually by being restricted on advertising means that cheaper brands can't get the message out that as formula is so stringently regulated they're more or less the same (save for specialist milks).

Essentially advertising has been restricted for many years, we still have extremely low BFing levels- I don't think it's ridiculous to suggest there's far more to it than women watching adverts and thinking ah cool I will do that. Not only is it offensive to suggest women are so easily swayed and can't think for themselves, but it also dismisses the many women who suffer on without support.

I asked the midwife for recommendations as to which formula to buy - she recommended the one our local supermarket stocked plenty off so easy to buy each week. Good advice.

Ever noticed how follow on milk is packaged just the same as first infant milk?

In the adverts the babies are usually pretty close to 6 months old.

The mum holds her baby the same was as when she was breastfeeding the baby.

Moving on from breastfeeding to follow on milk (which you don't need to use at all)

It's subtle, but it's advertising first milk by giving the brand recognition.

If the NHS invested in paid breastfeeding support workers then I'm sure these would be a far better source of up to date info than GPs who are not specialist. Expecting women to give up their time for free to support other women, to expect a few minutes with midwife or MSW because they don't have the time to solve peoples issues is not sufficient. Personally I think all babies should be checked for tongue tie and birth and the corrective snip offered, there should be paid roles specifically to support, and groups who volunteer should recieve funding if the government is serious about upping the rates. If a baby has been diagnosed with CMPA having the option to see someone to help support them and go through the required diet or to prescribe something so women have the choice would make the world of difference.

@Bunniesue the WHO code was brought in as a response to what the formula companies were doing.

They were sending sales women dressed as nurses into maternity clinics. Spreading false information and giving free formula out. They were giving it to women who they knew would not be able to continue to formula feed safely. This led to the deaths of babies.

Where the WHO code is not fully adopted the formula companies just go nuts with who they advertise formula.

In the UK we are protected from the worst outcomes by high literacy rates, clean water, free healthcare, welfare state and relative wealth.

The code has nothing to do with women not being trusted to make choices for themselves. It's to do with formula companies not being trusted to put women and children above profits.

@Bunniesue I heartily agree and I'm one of those unpaid women who work to support others.

Better investment in maternity services of all kinds would be amazing.

Like I said. I was a lucky one who got to see a paediatric dietician at 16 weeks old. Most women don't get past the GP and if the issue is 'solved' with the formula it gets them off their books.

We took a stab at estimating the cost of this further up thread. If the NHS employed 1 ‘breastfeeding support worker’ per 100 pregnant women at £30,000, that would be £200 million a year. That’s without factoring in the tongue tie operations and the clinics needed to run the whole show. It simply isn’t worth it financially.

I'm not saying I agree with low wages but they'd be a band 3 or 4 at most i suspect similar to newborn screening roles. Wouldn't need 24 hour coverage so could have less and of course not everyone would need or want to utilise them. Could run an effective service for less, this also lessens the burden on other staff so has a decent effect across the board. The repeat appointments people largely seem to need to fight for the tongue tie to be sorted probably isn't far off what it would cost.

Advertising for formula (through the proxy of follow-on milk that was invented for this exact purpose) is like any other kind of advertising — it’s completely naïve to think that you are different from everyone else and that it has no impact on you. Companies advertise because it works, and they understand better than the consumer how it works. People should make the decision they wish but if you think you made that decision in a vacuum, you are kidding yourself.

Because before the thread turned into a bunfight it was actually about whether mumsnet should be creating adverts for mam bottles/pumps etc disguised as a post about combi-feeding. So it’s not a formula advert, but maybe adverts for bottles should be subject to similar conditions as formula? (Question up for debate, not necessarily my opinion.)
Suggesting advertising has an influence on new mums and new mums to be, as well as society at large is really not any kind of insult. Advertising works, or companies would not pay for it. There is enormous quantities of data around on this, companies employ people to track the effect their advertising campaigns have on consumer behavior. Advertising itself is an entire enormous industry. One that wouldn’t exist if it didn’t have an effect.
The outcome we want as a society is a greater proportion of women wanting to breastfeed and succeeding at it. Because yes, there are some benefits to it on a population level. What we don’t want are individual mothers feeling judged. And at the moment basically everyone feels judged however they feed their baby. Which is horrible for everyone.
A lot of the solutions are not really about mums and their decisions at all. It’s about collective knowledge, societal attitudes and expectations, workplace rights, childcare availability and affordability. There is nothing to be gained by making women who want to formula feed feel guilty. And there is nothing to be gained by making women who wanted to breastfeed but could not or could not continue as long as they wanted to, feel like things would have been different if they’d have worked harder at it, or sacrificed more for it. No! Mums are basically all doing their best, and we should be changing things on a societal level to improve breastfeeding rates. Restricting advertising is one of many ways to try to do that. So should adverts like the mumsnet mam sponsored post exist? The real point of this thread was supposed to be about that.

This is my view on it.

I was very lucky getting the tongue tie sorted. They noticed it straight away when he was born. Some don't get noticed and not always able to get seen for it to be sorted. I manged to feed him still but was so painful.