to think baby formula should come in plain packaging?

[Yoyoyozo]

Fancy packaging is used to inflate prices and extract more money from parents with phrases like 'premium' plastered on the tin. Parents shouldn't be made to feel guilty for not buying the most expensive, well-marketed brand.

Yes, parents can make their own informed decisions, but clever marketing is proven to undermine this.

A report published in The Lancet (2016) unveiled that aggressive marketing of breastmilk substitutes is undermining efforts to improve breastfeeding rates

https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lancet/PIIS0140-6736(15)01044-2.pdf

No, this is not equating infant formula to tobacco! The aim is to prevent exploitative marketing practices that undermine access to impartial information on infant feeding.

I don’t see how baby formula is an ‘medical’ product unless you count all food as a medical problem. Most babies aren’t drinking formula for medical reasons, it’s parental choice/ convenience. Medical formula is often available on prescription for babies for whom it is a medical need.

In terms of packaging, isn’t this the same for all foods marketed towards babies, toddlers and children? Organix melty puffs, Ella’s pouches, hipp baby food jars etc all are heavily marketed. In most cases these branded products aren’t much different to supermarket own brands.

If you have a genuine issue with medical marketing then maybe look at brands such as calpol, nurofen etc. All heavily marketed and several times more expensive than unbranded versions with the exact same active ingredients.

Op wanted mums who FF to feel bad. That's the only reason to point it out. So FF mums know they are apparently risking their babies life.

Saying that on a forum on a thread about formula is a slap in the face to mums who FF. It's the emotional equivalent to an actual slap in the face.

I was drawing a parallel.

The reason to point out the risks of formula is because formula marketing has succeeded in portraying formula as an exact equivalent to breastmilk, which is not true.

This information can be the difference between parents making the informed decision to combi feed or not. Even just one or two breastfeeds alongisde FF can half the risk of SIDS.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/tarahaelle/2017/10/31/any-breastfeeding-even-partial-cuts-sids-risk-in-half/?sh=322edf522519

Or should we patronise women and pretend breastmilk and formula are exact equals?

“That belief in equivalence, in artificial breast milk, is perhaps the single most powerful myth ever created, allowing humans to abandon a fundamental survival mechanism, lactation and breastfeeding. Companies have consistently marketed their current formulas as almost equivalent to breast milk, so close as to make no real difference, even as perfect foods for infants, ‘richer’ in nutrients than breast milk.” Maureen Minchin, medical historian and consultant to the WHO and UNICEF

https://www.savethechildren.org.uk/content/dam/gb/reports/health/dont-push-it.pdf

No she thinks low income people are on a low income, and would therefore benefit from savings made by making formula chepaer by cutting marketing and fancy packaging which presumes parents are stupid enough to be taken in by pretty tins.

Yes, marketing definitely does drive up the price of formula:

'The price of baby formula in Singapore has more than doubled over the past nine years, prompting competition authorities to carry out a wide-ranging investigation into the functioning of the market. The Competition Commission of Singapore (CCS) found that the rise in prices had taken place largely following a rapid rise in marketing and research and development costs, rather than because the manufacturing costs or the price of ingredients had risen. Total marketing expenditure by all major manufacturers increased by 42.4% between 2010 and 2014.10'

https://www.savethechildren.org.uk/content/dam/gb/reports/health/dont-push-it.pdf

Stop attacking eachother and start attacking the system.

In 2021:

£5 billion spent by the big six companies on formula marketing in the UK
£50 million spent by the UK government on breastfeeding support.

Go figure.

It’s wrong to describe using prepared formula as a risk. It doesn’t cause SIDs. That is scaremongering. Also the risk of SiDS is minuscule and a lot of other things actually cut the
risk far more, things such as dummies, not co sleeping, not smoking, not over heating etc.

Yes formula isn’t the same as breast milk but it’s a perfectly good and safe food source, is just one of a whole host of parenting choices and has benefits for many. Frankly when you get to the teenage years you realise how far too much frothing is given to it and how many other parenting choice areas are far more worthy of attention that just get ignored.

Frankly when you get to the teenage years you realise how far too much frothing is given to it and how many other parenting choice areas are far more worthy of attention that just get ignored.

It's not about individual families, it's about holding to account a pernicious industry whose business model is based upon making billions by undermining breastfeeding and increasing the healthcare burden for things like pneumonia and ear infections. This is systemic, thus impacts everyone throughout their lives.

a lot of other things actually cut the risk far more, things such .... not co sleeping,

Safe bedsharing, when combined with breastfeeding, decreases the risk of SIDS, because of the presence of touch, breastmilk olfactory cues, feeling mother’s breath, breathing in small puffs of mom’s exhaled CO2 that can stimulate breathing. That's why SIDS does not tend to exist in countries where the breastfeeding and bedsharing are the norms.

https://cosleeping.nd.edu/controversies/

But that's a whole other thread

@WagonWh33l5 Yes formula isn’t the same as breast milk

Exactly. So why let formula companies market it as such? Or even as superior in some cases? Why let them market it at all?

Because it’s a good safe food. Last I heard parenting choices differing didn’t mean advertising should be banned.

Well you brought it up. You were scaremongering

50% of SIDs cases are caused by co sleeping. Using formula is not even listed on the Lullaby list of risks or ways to reduce risk Co sleeping is as is advice on how to cut those deaths from co sleeping.

Interesting in your apparent concern re SIDS you forgot to mention that.

The Lullaby Trust condones safe co-sleeping. Crucially, it has similar guidance on cot and crib sleeping, which can also be dangerous if guidelines are not followed. As far as I’m aware, SIDS is believed to be down to a gene currently, but there’s no test and we need to wait for further research before anything like that would be possible.

Sorry to step in when not a part of this specific debate, but co-sleeping when done safely is not considered dangerous in general. Unfortunately, unsafe co-sleeping including accidentally falling asleep on a sofa or chair among many other things is included under the term, so many headlines give the impression of danger. The Constance Marten case currently being heard in court has been a frustrating one for this misrepresentation where ‘cosleeping’ is referred to, but none of it is under the safer sleeping guidance.

I coslept with my FF baby and my EBF baby and am a light sleeper who wakes easily. On a number of occasions I caught my child (literally waking at that moment) as they rolled over, despite there being bedsides so no real risk of falling. It’s an amazing experience when you follow the guidance. It did mean sacrifices for us as my DH has a sleep disorder, so didn’t share the bed (but tbh he’s a nightmare bed partner as he kicks the best every few seconds in part of the sleep cycle, so neither of us felt it was that horrific and found other time for each other, it also gave us another space to be together that wasn’t where our child was sleeping).

It can be really helpful when waking several times a night and exhausted. I think mums shouldn’t be put off by a misrepresentation of The Lullaby Trust’s perception - especially as we’ve finally moved forward with that in recent years.

The posters point on FF will have been that EBF is seen as protective in cosleeping as mothers tend to sleep more lightly. This is factual evidence, but does not mean a FF mum cannot cosleep (as stated above I did).

I think it’s a shame this thread became FF v EBF when either/or a mix are a valid choice - just as cosleeping or sleeping in a crib/cot is.

I thick condone might be an exaggeration . This is what they say:-

“To reduce the risk of sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) the safest place for a baby to sleep is in their own clear, flat, separate sleep space, such as a cot or Moses basket. However, we know that many parents find themselves co-sleeping whether they mean to or not. Wherever you’re planning for your baby to sleep we recommend making your bed a safer place for baby. Our advice on co-sleeping with your baby will tell you how.”

They don’t and they can’t, at least in the UK. They can only advertise “follow on” milk.

That’s mainly because they can’t force parents to follow all guidance all the time and there are plenty of situations where cosleeping is not recommended (as discussed in the guidance). It’s not a straightforward black and white arrangement to give guidance on, it’s complex and includes genetics, cultural differences in types of bed, situational differences, micro environments etc. Condone is a pretty accurate word imo. I didn’t use the word ‘celebrate’ or ‘encourage’.

However, I’ve had my say and will duck out here as hopefully any mums considering will seek their own advice and make their own decisions based on guidance and situation.

This information can be the difference between parents making the informed decision to combi feed or not. Even just one or two breastfeeds alongisde FF can half the risk of SIDS.

Combi feeding is not allowed to be suggested or promoted by the NHS. I wish it was.

@WagonWh33l5

50% of SIDs cases are caused by co sleeping

There is no source for this? But all stats tend not to disaggregate safe and unsafe co-sleeping, or formula and breastfeeding, and often even conflate suffocation with SIDS

SAFE BEDSHARING (not the same as co sleeping) with a breastfeeding mum is the safest way for baby to sleep. Plenty of research has been done on this.

But with all the caveats about a safe surface etc. it is too nuanced for organisations like Lullaby Trust - so they have to give generic simple guidance.

Unfortunately this has created an illusion that you must endure sleep torture and get up and down a hundred times a night. We are carrying mammals being made to live in a nesting society. Fighting against millions of years of biological norms have created a postpartum mental health crisis.

In the uk at least, they can't. They have to put a little disclaimer on every ad saying breastmilk is best. The rules are quite strict. I'll try and find one to post

My twins were born early and went into the NICU. I couldn't breastfeed following this long stay. All this I orchestrated because I saw such wonderful packaging on SMA formula. How I longed to have that formula package in the kitchen. All my dreams of breastfeeding went out of the window upon spying 'premium' on the pretty tin.

I would leave the formula tins on the side for visitors to admire. I know some were envious - I could afford PREMIUM. Visitors would comment all the time on the luxuriousness of the font. I admit I did show off - I would often take out the scoop and show people what it looked like.

In the end visitors were coming JUST to see the tin. I swapped out all milk and food in the house for pure formula. I'm still giving it to my children now and they are 7.

I now keep the formula tins next to Lucky Charms cereal out on the side. Lucky Charms are imported and visitors will think I'm very wealthy. They are £5 a box.

I'm sure everyone is jealous. Good. They should be. It's premium after all.

You're right though OP, if they stopped making the tubs so fancy I wouldn't buy them. I don't want anything plain on the side for people to see. Disgusting.

This did make me chuckle 🤣

I am an up the revolution, ardent anti royalist. My in laws are flag waving, kate and William adorers who actually cried when the Queen died.

The only formula my baby would tolerate was kendamil. A paediatrician recommended the switch and it was like night and day.

To my dismay, my in laws loved the fact she was on it, “because the royals use it!” I even heard mil tell her friend once as I was preparing a bottle that dd had the same milk as royal babies.

God, can you imagine. That kendamil on the go in my shitty little house near Wolverhampton, with a park full of weed dealers behind it, gave them some sort of clout. So some people are this fucking dumb 🤣

If your baby is weaned you don't need to give them milk separately. Not a single one of my children, nor myself, ever drank milk once weaned. Just didn't like it. Make sure they're getting calcium through food.

Also just to be clear I was talking about the "toddler" or "follow on" formulas which can be advertised but are not nutritionally different from the regular stuff.

I used SMA as that’s what they gave to me to use in hospital Packaging made zero difference

OP i suggest you step off your so called moral high ground about breastfeeding and leave people to decide for themselves

But how is this relevant to the OPs posts?

She thinks formula should be cheaper and parents shouldn’t be paying more for pretty packaging.

You imply you wouldn’t care if packaging was plain. So you and OP agree, that package design is pointless?

I don’t believe she did. I believe she was trying to state a fact (although maybe slightly misinterpreted) BF and FF are not the same. That is a fact. That doesn’t mean that OP thinks that all FF moms should feel inferior about their decision to breastfeed.
You are trying to state that all BF moms see themselves as being superior but we don’t… that we somehow think that all FF moms should feel ashamed. We don’t think that either.

Many of the posts on here aren’t relevant to the OPs point. So many have taken this as a personal attack on them when it isn’t. I’m sick of all of this ‘FF are all shamed and being made to feel
guilty’ when the vast, vast majority of babies are FF… so FF has literally become the norm. I’m not saying that’s a bad thing… but I’ve seen a lot of vitriol aimed at BF moms on this thread (and other threads on the same topic)
It is as though many think we should somehow feel awful about ourselves because the very fact that we could/wanted to BF our babies is a personal attack on moms who couldn’t/didn’t.

BF moms get let down too. We get told when we should stop, or we try to get forced in to giving a baby a bottle so they can discharge you from hospital faster rather than providing the support we need. We get snide comments from people saying our babies will be small because we aren’t feeding them enough. Or that we shouldn’t feed in public and on top of that, we get accused of being smug and wanting to slap FF moms in the face.

I am sick of it - I don’t care how you choose to feed your baby so you shouldn’t care how I chose to feed mine. Being a mom is hard enough as it is.

Just how much does the OP think it costs to print a colour label in 2024?

I doubt it would even save one pence to switch to plain black and white packaging.

I would argue that if you are BF you don't really need to throw your hat in the ring regarding FF. Same way people shouldn't chime in on threads where someone is struggling to establish BF with "have you tried formula".

OP muddied the waters by including BF in the opening post as it was totally unnecessary and not of any actual value to her initial point. Also, her point was wrong- people dont chose formula based on packaging. The chose formula based on research of ingredients/ what works for their child.

The OP literally said that FF Increases the risk of SIDS and then tried to insinuate she was concerned about "poor people", it was rude and condescending.