To be shocked at the price of formula milk?

[Souredstones]

It's been 9 years since I was last pregnant and this time round I'm not going to attempt breast feeding because for my previous pregnancies I produced no milk and wasn't able to feed them. So I'm not stressing out I'm going straight in for the formula. I have medical reasons for doing so.

I get that they've put the price up to deter formula feeding. I know why. I agree breast is best. But from what I saw today it's now a sneeze under £10 a tin.

I'm lucky we can afford it, but what if you're on the threshold of not receiving help and find yourself, as I did, unable to bf even with the full intentions of bfing and being unable to afford this price.

Is there a reason it's doubled in price in the last decade? Have production techniques changed that much?

In some countries the cost of formula for a month is half an average monthly wage. The pricing and profit levels and the fact that once you start using it you have no choice but to keep using it to feed your baby is why the rules exist.

I agree that the price in developing countries is a scandal, btw.

The posts about the cost of other foodstuffs are also entirely missing the point. Babies young enough to consume all or mainly formula are a captive market. If bread went up to a fiver a loaf, most of us would be able to seek alternative sources of food. Not so with formula.

What about the other formula companies? Are you suggesting that there's collusion going on?

I will admit to not having ever been a big formula user. That being said, the cans of formula I have bought were generic, in the US, and about 10 years ago.

Is there not a generic formula market in the UK? If not, this is indeed interesting to the point that it's lurking in the back of my head as a business opportunity.

I'm always surprised by the idea that Aptimel is 'premium' milk, I think they do seem to have a 'heritage' reputation from when formula milk was very different between the different brands but I believe EU legislation has pretty much standardised it now so there's little difference in what you are getting for your money - is that right or is there a big difference in quality?

I am currently bfing DD but with some formula top ups now, I've compared Aptimel and SMA prices, and while the price per tin seems very different, when you compare the price per 100grams the price difference was 1p, which isn't a lot over a large tin, do they just make up different tin sizes to give the impression of being 'cheap' formula? (when the actual formula milk is pretty much the same per bottle).

But yes, a tenner a week is expensive compared to cows milk, but a drop in the ocean when looking at the cost of raising a child.

Chunder - the bit about advertising is interesting, I remember reading previously about the banning of tobacco advertising, you'd think that the big brands were against it, and while they made a 'show' of being against the ban, in actual fact they found it beneficial to them, it didn't have a massive impact on customer demand, but it meant they saved a fortune in comparassion, plus it meant that it became far harder for new brands to enter the UK market. Previously, if someone else increased their advertising budget, they had to match it to keep market share. Now that had gone. In a similar way, they aren't all that upset by having to cover fags for sale, because you can't be tempted by seeing an alternative, or seeing htat it's cheaper - some people might ask for all the prices, most smokers will ask for whatever brand they normally smoke, whereas if they can see them all for sale and see the prices clearly, they might notice another brand is cheaper.

Formula companies were rather happy with the advertising ban, but then once one company did follow on milk, they all had to do the same to keep market share. If that was banned, they'd probably be happier than most people would expect.

OP - the cost of formula is disgusting.

Of course though, it has NOTHING to do with breastfeeding promotion. It has everything to do with the huge marketing costs of a company which has to sell a product, the main competitor to which is superior, and free. No wonder they have to saturate the media with advertising in order to persuade mothers that their product is worth using. As Gabriella Palmer points out - markets are not made by god.

I despise the formula companies, and not ever having to buy their products was a big factor in me fully breastfeeding my children for over a year.

Would ask OP - did you ever have any help with your previous babies from someone medically trained in lactation support? Like a lactation consultant? If the answer to that is 'no' and you were reliant on the advice of non-specialist midwives, GP's and health visitors, then I'd say it might be worth seeing one to confirm that you will definitely be unable to breastfeed. Only about 2% of women can't make milk at all, and probably a further 10% might need to supplement with formula. But the vast majority of women can make milk for their babies, if they're given the right help.

The cost of formula has nothing to do with campaigns to get mothers to breastfeed anymore than the cost of chocolate, beans, cars, diseal etc. Formula companies know that they have the mothers and babies literally over a barrel: if you don't buy baby formula then your baby dies! Baby milk is priced as high as the parents can pay.

The issue is the cartel and anti competition between formula companies. I feel the governant needs to open up competition by encouraging supermarkets to have own brand baby formula. Prehaps some of the big food companies need to be broken up just like the banks are being broken up.

To be honest, I don't think the governant should get involved with parenting decisions. (Provided that parents know where to seek support and have good ante natal classes.) Although breastmilk is the gold standard of feeding a baby there are many excellent reasons for using formula. Feeding a baby formula is not child abuse.

Reallytired - a baby wouldn't die without commercial formula. Over half of all Americans were raised on homemade formula in the 1950's, and I can't imagine that they died in droves or suffered from very obvious ill-health. The recipes are all out there online still!

As for the government getting involved in parenting decisions - I think children's nutrition is too important an issue to be left to the vagaries of the market and to trends in lifestyle choices, choices which are primarily about the needs of adults and not children.

You only get the Healthy start vouchers at £6,20 per week if you dont receive Working Tax Credit. We find it hard and out tin is £7.99, we changed from aptamil to C&G because of the price when we started receiving WTC.

What makes me mad is that the price is high due to trying to deter parents from formula feeding but yet the companies are not allowed to advertise forumlas 1 or 2 because of promoting breast feeding. Surely if they cannot advertise those ones then the price shouldnt be so high.
They do deals on formula 3 so why not on the other ones.

The price isn't high to deter formula feeding - why would formula companies want to deter formula feeding?

formula companies WANT to make money and don't want people to breastfeed. In fact formula companies have in the past diliberately sabbortaged breastfeeding by giving women in the third world just enough baby milk to dry up their natural supply so that they are forced to use formula. (See the politics of breastfeeding by Gabrielle Palmer)

"Over half of all Americans were raised on homemade formula in the 1950's, and I can't imagine that they died in droves or suffered from very obvious ill-health"

Infant mortality is higher than it is now. There is also evidence that people in 2013 are a lot brighter than the 1950s and maybe this is due to better formula. (Ie grade inflation, more people capable of university education.)

Yes - I read something about average IQ levelling off or going down when mothers switched to formula en-masse in the 1950's.

Not a life or death issue though is it?

... Because the formula manufacturers are milking it. Excuse the pun!

So glad I am able to bf & have never spent a penny on the stuff.

Vouchers should not be available to low income families. If you can't bf it should be available at cost price on prescription. Formula should not be marketed my multinational companies to increase profit. Breast pumps, breast pads & nursing bras should also be available at cost price.

It's not only bad for the socio-economics (of any country) but also harmful to the environment. The presidence of FF is also a major contributor to infant mortality in the developing world and childhood obesity in the west.

Rant over.

"Vouchers should not be available to low income families. If you can't bf it should be available at cost price on prescription. Formula should not be marketed my multinational companies to increase profit. Breast pumps, breast pads & nursing bras should also be available at cost price. "

Do you not think that comment is a bit extreme. Some women just don't fancy breastfeeding and that should be a perfectly acceptable reason to bottlefeed.

There are already anti competition laws that have been applied to other areas of life like banking or petrol to prevent price fixing. The inflated price of formula has nothing to do with breastfeeding.

I am quite happy for formula to be provided for free to low income families. A baby cannot choose whether it has breastmilk or formula. If a baby is going to be formula fed then it should be given the best possible formula.

Reducing the price of formula for all babies in the will not decrease breastfeeding rates. It might mean that some bottlefeeding mothers eat better and enjoy a couple of minor luxuries. (like chocolate!!)

^Some women just don't fancy breastfeeding and that should be a perfectly acceptable reason to bottlefeed.

Sure. But you can't then bitch and moan about the price if you're bottle-feeding because you want to. Well, you can - people can bitch and moan about whatever they want. Doesn't mean it's justified though.

Very interesting that I'm sure quite a few people on here would describe themselves as pro-choice and that a woman's body is her business - except when it comes to breastfeeding.

Then, short of having her boobs bitten off by a dingo a woman has no excuse for not breastfeeding, is to not be believed if she says she couldn't breastfeed and is to be despised and condemned if (gasp) she didn't want to breastfeed.

Skint - if breastfeeding is so marvellous, women shouldn't need to be coerced into doing it.

I hope you're not including me in that; women can do whatever they want - no skin off my nose. But comments about formula companies having mothers over a barrel because their babies would die otherwise are a bit extreme given that the vast vast majority of mothers and babies can breastfeed. They don't have to, but it's more than a possibility and opting for formula instead is a personal and in most cases unnecessary choice. In a similar way, I chose to use disposables for my ds, even though they cost a lot more overall than cloth nappies. I didn't have to but I weighed up the pros and cons and made my decision, largely because it was more convenient, so I paid for that convenience. It was just my choice and I had to own it.

Its a fact of life that some choices cost more than other options. If cost is an issue then its one of the things you need to consider when making a choice.