to think that the new SMA advert is very close to breaching the WHO code.

[sickoftheholidays]

Just seen that nauseating advert from SMA "Theres nothing more important than what you do for your baby at the start" cue mum handing lap top with big SMA logo on the screen over to dad, and then picking up newborn baby.......

I thought the UK we werent allowed to advertise breastmilk substitutes for babies under 6 months of age? yet here we are with a newborn and a clear implication that SMA is a great thing to do for your baby at the start.

I honestly dont want to get into the whole bf/af debate, I dont give a sh*t what mums choose to feed their infants as long as its nutritionally adequate, correctly made and in sufficient quantity, but I do support mums having accurate unbiased information regarding feeding choices for their infant, and also about manufacturers of artificial milks sticking to the rules regarding their adverts! The cow and gate one was misleading enough, but at least the baby was over 6 months!

Cat98 certainly the makers of vitamin pills would like us to think so.

MrsTittleMouse glad to know I'm not the only highly educated poster on here stupid enough to be influenced by advertising .

How can anyone be so stupid as to think that their decisions/lifestyles are not influenced by advertising? Advertising invents needs where there are none. Do you have an ipod, or -pad? Somebody pointed out these "gut yogurts" or whatever they are. There are loads and loads of products that people don't need but are convinced are an essential part of their lifestyle. Why? Because advertising says so, that's why!

What I find astonishing is that in this day and age people question EVERYTHING, with one exception: advertising. People buy wholesale what advertisers want to sell us (oh yes they do!). People are so critical of any authority, and angrily reject any kind of restraint on their freedom to choose to do what they want, however they buy more and more pointless and crap stuff only because they are convinced by clever advertising that said products are necessary.

And people here even think they can get unbiased information about formula from adverts ! Some posters question the World Health Organisation and yet say that formula advertising needs to be there because we need information about formula

whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/9241562110.pdf

Page 23 onwards gives some discussion about vitamin content of bm and I read it that diet would and does affect vitamin content. Am I reading it wrong??

www.healthystart.nhs.uk/en/fe/vitamin_supplement_recommendations.html

Oh and I totally agree with tiktok et al -Of course advertising influences people. Why else do companies spend so much money on it?

Milk production can only take what's in your body, so if you are seriously vitamin deficient then there won't be enough in the milk. It's quite hard to be vitamin deficient even on quite a crap diet though - I think the big ones are vitamin D (not enough sun exposure rather than diet though) and vitamin B12 if you are veggie/vegan.

A couple of quotes from the publication:

Intestinal absorption is among the dietary factors that
influence vitamin A requirements. In turn, dietary fat,
infections, the food matrix and food processing all affect
intestinal absorption (6). However, none of these factors
is relevant for breastfed infants since the bioavailability
of preformed vitamin A from human milk is likely to
be greater than 90%, and breastfed infants are protected
against infection, particularly gastrointestinal
infections.

3.4.3 Estimates of vitamin D requirements
The United States Food and Nutrition Board (122)
recommends 5 g of vitamin D for infants 0 to 6 months
of age, although it also acknowledges that breastfed
infants ?with habitual small doses of sunshine? do not
require supplemental vitamin D.

Cat - the overall quality of breastmilk varies very little indeed with diet.

This does not mean breastmilk is always identical.

There is no evidence that mothers on normal diets need to supplement with vitamins to enable effective breastfeeding. Yes, vitamin content varies somewhat with the mother's own stores/intake - but the effect is fairly marginal unless the mother is very badly nourished herself. It's the same with prebiotics/LCUFAs - a mother v. low in these may produce milk that's lower, but again, a marginal effect unless the mother is very badly nourished.

There are some good studies of mothers who have fasted for religious reasons (eg Ramadan) while bf, and their milk is a little bit different in micronutrients, with no ill effect on growth or health of their babies. It would not be a good idea to fast long term - but we are not talking about mothers at a dietary extreme in this discussion.

Very undernourished women, in this state for a long time, may have difficulty in producing sufficient breastmilk and the quality of it may be lacking in some ways - their babies are also likely to have suffered nutritionally in utero, so they are already in a compromised state, especially with regard to iron.

Does this help?

Thanks, yes it does help. I am still a little confused about the whole healthy start thing though - our local bfc says she supports the need for vitamins given routinely to bf infants. She acknowledges that many may not need them, but says it is better to be sure, given the increase in conditions such as rickets, and that the drops won't do any harm.. do you agree with her?

I think rickets is caused by vitamin D deficiency isn't it? That's more of an issue if you have dark skin/cover your skin/stay inside a lot etc so probably easier to have a blanket approach than target particular groups who are more at risk.

AFAIK, blanket vit d supplementation has not been evaluated as a public health strategy in the UK. But everyone (from infants to centenarians) gets vit d supplements in Scandinavia, and I don't think it's undermining to bf - it's just a reaction to the fact they live in a northern climate with little sunshine and spend far less time out of doors than their ancestors and don't eat as much whale/seal blubber (or whatever) as their ancestors did :)

Ethnic groups with dark skins living in the UK probably don't get the amount of Vit D their bodies 'expect' to get. We just don't get sufficient sunshine.

I don't think there is any evidence vit d supplements can harm babies.

I havent read all of this but I do have a few comments

1 sadly DOH doesnt follow WHO code completely and hence what the WHO code says is not completely what the British law says. I do not belive that the advert (as it is and yes I have seen it) technically breaks this (and I agree it is borderline)

and 2 I live a very comfy life that has enabled me to not work and stay at home to look after our 4 children because of advertisment and branding (my husbands field) To say it doesnt work is really the same as saying I and my children do not exist.

No one will look at an add for formula and say " oh You will formula feed my baby because of that add" but if you do get into the situation of wishing/needing/choosing to formula feed your baby you will pick the formula milk you feel most comfortable with. chances are something lik 98 - 2 that this will be the formula brand you have seen the most adds for. (be that tv or in friends houses)

Warning: this is a bit long!

I desperately wanted to bf my baby. I tried and tried and cried and cried, and pumped and swallowed herbs and even domperidone a drug I wouldn't give my ds for his reflux due to being worried about the blood/brain barrier (so he got it thru my milk anyway) and I did all this because it IS frowned upon to use formula. I know women who have seen their babies practically starve (on the advice of bf councillors) rather than supplement or switch. Women go to these desperate lengths to avoid formula because of a great deal of pressure, exerted consciously or subliminally.

For example the comparison between formula and tobacco. My bf councillor made a similar comparison in our Nct breast feeding sessions. You may say its just an example but why would you use it unless you felt they did a similar amount of harm? It wouldn't be relevant. So there's a subliminal message right there. And saying adverts for formula should be banned suggests that it is a product like drink or fags, that should be shut away, that one should be ashamed to use.

I felt a stinging shame when in cafes I produced my powder keg and bottle and made my formula. I'm sure it was my imagination but I also noticed mothers seemed to be divided into pockets of breast feeders and formula users.

I still feel a failure today for not being able to perform the most essential of functions as a mother: that of nourishing my child. And the extent of opinion on bf-ing: that anything else will not give your child a good enough start in life adds to that exponentially. I agree it's important to encourage women to try as hard as they can, but taking them past the point of their endurance into a psychologically fragile place should be avoided. It's hard enough, isn't it?

The early baby in the advert will have been a specification required in the advertising standards brief. They will have insisted on the company inserting it to ensure the company encourages bf-ing. The product is not for younger babies and they have a minute amount of time to advertise the product. It will have been an inconvenience to them that they were reluctant to include (hence it being superfast) You'll agree it was irrelevant to include it. It's not there so they can mine-sweep any happily bf-ing mums of younger kids into the evil domain of formula consumption.

I suspect encouraging women in developing countries to formula feed is as much to do with the fact that they are developing: women were easily convinced that formula was preferable by advertising when it first emerged, which was when most of the damage was done. They were uneducated on the subject. We now know better, but they don't in developing countries. It's a question of educating, informing. Then the formula companies can advertise all they like and it won't have the same impact.

There is too much pressure on women to bf. FF is such a taboo in middle class society, but many women try and fail to fully bf, making ff necessary. In my experience, parents start ff because bf doesn't work out. It's not a calculated choice and has nothing to do with advertising.

yawn, surely you have something, anything in your life to think about that is actually an issue?

And some of us didn't because we didn't bloody well want to. Didn't try and fail. Took medication as soon as i was able and never intended to. Not because of naughty Nestle but because it didn't appeal to me and because i wanted to go back to work.

Anyone who thinks FF is the 'accepted norm' is living in a dreamworld. It's definitely looked down upon (you only have to look on here to see that). Midwives and HV and ante natal classes can't even give you basic information about doing it safely and it is treated like smoking or gambling by the guidelines set down by the government. On tv NOBODY formula feeds either. And there's loads of sneering and people feeling like they need to explain themselves for not being able to.

I went on the Aptamil website to get some product information and had to go through pages about breastfeeding before getting what I needed - seriously, who would go on the Aptamil website for breastfeeding advice - it's all designed to heap guilt on a parent (lets be honest, mother).

There shouldn't be a pro or anti either lobby. Women should be allowed to make their decisions (or have them made for them, as is often the case) without anybody's beak stuck in.

I just wanted to weigh in my opinion as a young pregnant woman. I understand on mn it is the absolute opinion that bf is best, but not to judge those who ff. However I have actually found the opposite in rl.

As a young mum to be, it seems to be most of my peers have chosen to ff, and bfing is seen as a bit icky. I personally want to give bfing my absolute best try, but will admit that I'm quite nervous about doing it infront of friends and out in public. Whereas I wouldn't have a second thought about feeding a baby a bottle in public.

For this reason I actually would appreciate bfing having the same advertising as ff on tv etc, not just through hcp's. I think it would help to normalise it for the younger mums out there and stop the 'weirdness' factor.

I don't care about the advert. Not a bit of it. I do care about the BF-brigade seemingly wanting to remove all reference to formula. It doesn't happen on the other side so why doesn't everybody just shut up and let mothers feed their children as they see fit?

Some excrutiatingly patronising posts on this thread about 'how stupid are women for not realising they're being sold to... blah blah'. How absolutely belittling.

A mother who decides to breastfeed isnt going to suddenly pitch down the road of formula feeding just because of an advert. However, if she can't breastfeed, for WHATEVER reason, there's a viable backstop and thank goodness for that.

I hardly ever comment on these threads now because they get right up my nose but feel sufficiently irked by this one to post to say LEAVE WOMEN ALONE to decide what method they will use, they have brains in their head and don't need a righteous indignation from some quarters, stipulating what they should and shouldn't see advertised.

Someone's bored and resurrecting old threads !