formula

[Emma2506]

Ok so I don't want to turn this into a whole ff vs bf war but I find it highly offensive to ff mums who can't collect advantage points/clubcard points, shops aren't allowed to have any offers on etc for formula. I understand it's the LAW but why is it acceptable to have deals on alcohol yet ff mums are penalised for choosing to ff or not being able physically able to bf? I know the excuse is shops promote breast feeding but I'm struggling to get my head around why a bf mum would buy formula just because it's on offer if she is doing well bf and it's FREE!

WashedIris - That isn't an 'easy remedy' . One offer per sale - so that one offer is 3for2, the poor still lose out if they can't afford to buy two. They are still subsiding the more affluent.

And the reward points is because we draw a line. We say no promotion. Because promotion affects bfing rates and because price promotion hurts poor families who ff.

It really, really isn't worth a cat and mouse game of regulation with the formula companies of "ooh ok, just one promotion" and "ooh, ok, just reward points". They have entire departments of very professional people working out how to best promote whilst staying within the law. Give an inch, and they will shaft everyone.

These debates always frustrate me. They become about why people can't have advantage points when the real question is WHY ARE THE PROFIT MARGINS SO HIGH IN THE FIRST PLACE. But by having everyone in fighting about whether 'breast is best' no one organises themselves to hold the companies accountable for that little wheeze.

cones no I don't think they should be allowed to market! I just don't think loyalty points are an issue.

Cats - I think the thing about loyalty points is it is incredibly difficult to regulate. You wouldn't want 'indirect' discounts like "200 clubcard points if you buy Cow and Gate". So you'd have to have complex legislation about the points being accrued at the same rate as for other products. And then what would happen if the loyalty scheme accrued points at different rates (like some give you more on children's items for X period of time). So the law would get more and more complex. Soon enough, they would find ways to exploit it. It's their job to.

Priority I can see that, it could be horrible to regulate and like you said I suppose it could be exploited if they really tried.

Which is a shame

It doesn't actually matter whether you can get points or not. It's just that points are a form of promotion hence they are banned under a blanket ban on promotions.

You can see that points don't make any difference because the formula companies aren't doing promotions with points on the 6m+ milk, which you can claim points on. If it made a difference, they'd be doing it with that. It doesn't make a difference to sales hence it's NOT ABOUT POINTS.

Making an exception for reward points is complicated and also there isn't a pressing need for it. So points, while perfectly benign, remain banned.

TheCatsMeow - for example - giant beaker of milk advert claiming that cow's milk has no iron so this special 1 year + formula is better. No, it didn't explicitly say that breastmilk is rubbishly low in iron, but it played into that idea that breastmilk has fewer nutritional benefits.

There was the Cow and Gate advert which said "Do I look ill? Do I look less intelligent?" etc (paraphrasing, it didn't say exactly that) - playing on the idea that formula is "just as good" as breastmilk - yes it's a perfectly fine alternative, but when you look at the hard data, breastfeeding does have benefits. Again, it didn't say "Formula has all of the same benefits as breastfeeding" outright. It didn't need to. That's not how advertising works.

SMA ad showing a Dad doing the night feeds of a very young baby - something you can't do when BF. Later changed to an older baby after they got fined.

Just some examples. I'm not in the UK any more so they'll be a few years out of date, I haven't seen any recent ones.

PCH fantastic points and well made.

Bertie thanks, I can see why those things could cause problems

My experience is that there is equal negative views of FF and BF and both parties can make comments that can be read as hurtful.

I work in a profession role with new borns and infants up to the age of 2 and some of the derogatory comments made by colleagues about mothers who breast feed (especially when it's a toddler being breastfeed) is quite shocking actually. It makes me feel uncomfortable.

But, on the other hand I have attended a breast feeding training session and the woman hosting it said something that was very derivative towards formula feeding and the fact that she said it to a room full of people was even more shocking. I felt really uncomfortable then as any FF mothers (current and past) must have felt like shit.

Nutella oh do fuck off dear.

OvariesBeforeBrovaries

I am so sorry. We've failed you. There's no excuse. We need more support workers, support workers that will do it for free.

Until people get paid we are all going to suffer.

I was with a poor mum yesterday. She had been ringing the bell for 45 mins to help to feed. She had a c-section so was very uncomfortable. She told me a midwife had helped position the baby whilst mum was upright then literally walked off.

I had a quiet ward so I was able to spend a good half an hour with this mum whilst she cried onto my shoulders and got very emotional. In the end I had managed to show her how to feed lying down, comfortably. But that's only because I had the time, that day. The midwives can only do so much but they aren't helping here. They are usually first point of call and for some reason the right communication isn't being made.

We need money and until there's money behind it I won't be able to help a mum like that again soon.

Oh writer I've actually heard social worker state that they think women shouldn't breastfeed once the baby has teeth.

Most parents are doing their best.

Talking of Social Workers, I was once working with a young mum whose infant had been on the CP register since she was about 6 weeks old and when the baby was 9/10 months old it was becoming clear that ultimately the child was going to be taken from its mother. The mum approached me one day and asked if it was possible to start breast feeding the baby (she'd been FF since birth) as she thought Social Services might let her keep the baby then because they'd think she really loved it if she BF

Also, it's not just that breastfeeding is "best", it's that formula introduces risks and mothers aren't informed of those risks at all when they are attending their antenatal visits. There's a complete lack of education around breastmilk - it is perfectly made for that baby at that particular moment based on their immediate needs. Formula can never replicate that, despite Aptamil claiming that they are the closest to breastmilk (load of utter shite).

Formula advertising should be banned completely - this being allowed to advertise for those crappy follow-on milks is just ridiculous (which are jam packed full of sugar, by the way).

Are follow on milks meant for babies past 6 months or past 12 months?

Follow on milk is from 6 months, toddler milk is from 1 year

But follow on milks or toddler milks aren't actually needed! You should just use the stage 1 stuff instead of that follow-on stuff, as far as I know.

I used follow on milk from about 9 months as it was cheaper and you could get offers on it

I switched to cows milk at 1 year so never used toddler milk

coconut we're all aware of the benefits of breastfeeding thanks. It's about weighing it up and in my case it wasn't worth a screaming unhappy baby and pain. I sometimes feel guilty but I know I did what was best.

I think it was more of a risk for my baby to have a depressed mother who couldn't look after him and to not latch than formula, thanks

When I was in hospital having DS, on the 3rd day of his life I asked the midwife if I could have a small amount of formula for him (I was trying to breast feed but had been having some problems) and she said no. She told me that she knew I wanted to breast feed and that giving him some formula wasn't going to help matters. I was a bit taken aback and don't know if she was genuinely trying to be helpful or not?

I still don't know how I feel about it 22 months later.

Are they allowed to refuse formula if a new mother asks for it?

I find it sad when these threads become about bfing or ffing being better.

At a population level, bfing has health benefits and it is therefore good for public policy to encourage it. At an individual level, personal choice or personal circumstances may well outweigh that and make ff the optimum choice for that family (and, for a group of women, bf was the choice and the preference and they were let down by funding for support, but that's a slightly different issue).

Formula is a good product, for choice or for necessity.

But, especially in the absence of 'basics' model brands, price promotion is bad for babies - especially for the population level effect on bfing and the direct negative impact on the poorest families.

That's why we ban it. It's not because it's a bad product. We ban some advertising because the product is bad itself (e.g. cigarettes). We ban others because, even though the product itself is life saving, the negative effects of advertising are too great (e.g. we don't allow marketing of prescription medicines in this country). Price promotion on formula is the same - we are banning a negative behaviour around a product which can be life saving.

Priority I do agree with your point that the marketing could and likely will be exploited, I don't think either method should be encouraged though I think people should be made aware of the facts.

Writer - yes, I think that's quite normal, especially if the hospital has or is working towards Unicef Baby Friendly status (I had DD at Kings in London where this was the case). I think it's a fairly normal policy not to provide formula routinely, except in SCBU where necessary. Certainly mothers who planned to FF were told to bring their own formula as the hospital wouldn't provide it.

We switched to follow-on at 6 months because it was cheaper.