AIBU - to think that adverts for follow on formula should acknowledge breastfeeding...

[GillianLovesMarmite]

Having just seen the advert on tv for heinz (now hideously overpriced) Nurture (follow on forumla) which delivered the message that it is the best thing you can give your baby for its development...
Do you think it would be unreasonable that these adverts should recognise breastfeeding - eg saying that if you are breastfeeding that this is great and providing what your child needs, however, if you have chosen not to breastfeed or have chosen to formula feed, that this is then the stuff for you... and that the 6 month time thing is not a deadline to stop at but a target to aim for.
I realise that by 6 months I am now in a minority of mothers who are still breastfeeding. I acknowledge that everyone has a right to choose how to feed their child, or that sometimes the choice is made for them, often by conditions or factors outside of their control and I would NEVER presume to judge how another woman feeds her child.
However, I just think it would be appropriate for these adverts to acknowledge that if you are breastfeeding you don't need this stuff - although in the real world I know that this will never happen as they have a product to sell - but do you (whether bfing or ffing) think that this would be an unreasonable thing for the companies to do?

(Sorry for the long post - just really really annoyed by the advert).

Sorry jacblue, I didn't mean to come across so preachily (if that's an actual word)

The whole advertising thing and the lack of good scientific information about formula to mums who are considering using it is one issue that really gets to me and gets me riled.

told you I should've just hid the thread

Six months is more about the time before introducing anything else than a target to aim for. I haven't ever heard it used officially (I know people read it like that) as a target.

Can't say anything LackaDAISYcal hasn't already said, cause I deleted it all as I read her posts

BTW, I was going to post what TikTok said too about targeting BFing mothers.

YANBU. I thought with ds1 that I "ought" to have fed him sma progress because it "complements a weaning diet with added vitamin and minerals" (their words). THis is despite the fact that ds1 couldn't stand the stuff and ended up being breastfed until he was nearly 16 months! Also why does the dad on sma progress advert promise to get up for night feeds? Correctly me if I'm wrong but do most ff babys not need night feed that much past 6 months? And doesn't the baby shown look younger than 6 months?

YAB totally unreasonable.

The company have a product to sell and are trying to do so. What they are selling is a product people want to buy or they wouldn't have the money to continue advertising.

In my ante/post natal period I had bugger all advice on Formula feeding but endless endless information and what at times felt like 'brainwashing' about BF. It was explained from a very very early stage that it was best to BF for 'as long as possible' with a year being an ideal length of time to aim for.

People, in the most part DO know breast is best etc etc and so can put the adverts into context for heavens sakes.

You talk a good talk about everyone having choice etc and not judging anyones choices but then in that case why ask this question at all, surely it is a non-topic!!

nuff said LackaDAISYcal.

I was genuinely interested in other peoples feelings towards the adverts as my experience is bfing - I have found it interesting and informing to read the posts people have replied with to the question. In my pregnancy and birth prep I received no formal information about bfing but wanted to as my friendship group with children were mainly bfers - there was a lack of information about both formula and breast feeding and if, post-birth when the health workers asked how I was feeding my ds I had said formula - no-one would have batted an eyelid... Which I think in some ways does at least recognise the right of the mother to choose.

Follow-on milks do acknowledge breastfeeding - at the bottom of the advert (usually in very small writing) something like, "Breastfeeding is the best nutrition for infants and follow-on milk is not intended to replace it" or words to that effect.

• will squint harder at the telly the next time the ads are on... rather than clsing eyes in despair...

for 'clsing' read 'closing'...

I think antenatal classes should discuss in more depth the difficulties you can have with bfing and products that can help you through a little, like nipple shields, creams, etc. They should also let you know that expressing doesn't work for all.

I think the worst people for taking sides and insisting on one being the best (be it bf or ff) is the health visitors!

I found the whole experience very lonely as, although I had friends who chose to bf and friends who chose to ff, I was the only person I knew who wanted to bf but couldn't.

'Tis the reason I'm a little over-tetchy, LackaDAISYcal.

"I think the worst people for taking sides and insisting on one being the best (be it bf or ff) is the health visitors!"

I couldn't agree more Jac.

Have enjoyed everyones contributions - genuinely interesting to here everyones pov - will look for the small print on the ads... off to pay dh some attention as he has spent all evening fixing new cot and installing fireguard to keep ds on the carpet! Will check back in tomorrow

well if is going to advertised it should be based on facts and it should state the risks of formula feeding.

better still don't advertise it, advertising is not information.
its mainly misleading causing people to think oh this is almost as good as bm.

why slogan gives the customer the most information.

1. closer to bm
2. closer than ever to bm

?

neither its doesn't mean anything.
its not information.
and i think the risks should be stated on the tins, not just fluffy line that breast is best.

I don't think the adverts should promote Bf because most women know breast milk is the best thing for your baby so:

A) Those who choose to FF couldn't really care less if an advert says BF is best because they have already made a choice to ff.

And

B) Saying in advert that BF is best for baby is just going to make those who desperatly wanted to BF but for what ever reason couldn't feel like shit, inadiquate, bad mothers because they didn't have a choice but to ff and would have loved to BF.

mss, although most woman do realise breast is best you do not realise to what extent annd what the risks of formula invole.

adverts for bf help normalise bf.

Really formula should not be advertised, so no, I don't think they should mention bfing at all.

It is not a good idea to speak about formula feeding ante-natally because pg women will not remember the details of ff as they generally can't see much past labour and birth. That is why they are there.

MW's and HV's can and should talk about ff to mothers on a 1 to 1 basis, in her own kitchen, if FF is what the mother needs information about. It gives her the opportunity to ask questions which are specific to her living conditions and have them answered for her when she actually needs to know. Not 2 or 3 months later after an antenatal class. This is the safest way for mothers to receive information about formula feeding, not advertising.

I find it very frustrating that in fact people do have the impression that bf is only for the first 6 months, and that this is "following Guidelines". Just in the last week, I have seen Charlotte Church quoted as saying she bf until her baby was 6 months as that was the "government guidelines" and then some woman on the radio talking about dividing maternity leave between both parents said several times that when the mother has bf until 6 months, as per guidelines, then she could go back to work and the father could take the rest of the leave... The advertising of follow on milk only increases this impression, imo.

I'm not in the UK so haven't seen the same ads but just wanted to say that here in France, I was swamped with pro breastfeeding leaflets etc. and absolutely nothing about ff. IME there should be equal info about both types of feeding, because FF can be the best option sometimes, as it was for me and DD1. I thought I HAD to BF, and struggled on for nearly five months. Swapping to FF was the right decision, and I only wish I'd done it sooner. That said I went on to BF DD2 for a lot longer with no problems. Just goes to show that one size doesn't fit all

sorry to be blonde, but will somebody tell me what's so horrendous and dangerous?!!

Agree with kiskidee and julejules.

Formula manufacturers are simply out to make money. IMO it is wrong to try and influence infant nutrition by advertising formula.

There is no advertising of formula in Sweden and I think Norway/Denmark and b-feeding rates are much higher and duration of b-feeding much longer. Advertising is not about providing information, its about selling a product.

And I agree about the 6 month guideline is exploited, when pregnant myself I thought that everyone gave up at 6 months, I had heard of govt guidelines and follow on milk.

KIskidee

"formula should not be advertised"

Why on earth not?

Why should mothers who either choose to FF or have to not see adverts for different types of formula?

What vociferous pro breastfeeders do not like to acknowledge is that most babies on formula can and do thrive. Formula does not have arsenic added in you know!

And yes it may be anecdotal but of myself and my four best friends, all now in our 30's, we were all FF, none of us is obese, diabetic, plagued by immune problems or less intelligent than many of our oh so lucky breastfed counterparts.

And why do the HV's and leaflets not tell you about the risks of breastfeeding?

yes I am on a bit of a rant but for heavens sakes Peoples choices in feeding ytheir children should not, IMO be a matter of public consumption as long as the feeding is meeting the childs nutritional needs.

But why should feeding choices be left to the formula companies out to sell their products?

They hardly have babies best interests to heart.

Not sure what you mean about the risks of breatfeeding.

Sorry but YABU. as has been said there is no information available about any formula brands due to a ban on advertising so mums who cannot or choose not to BF (and its individual choice) are left in the dark thanks to the constant mantra of "breast is best".

i couldnt feed DS due to being ill so the only brand we had heard of was SMA. DS didnt like this and it took us a couple of attempts to find a brand he liked and suited him.

rather than judging people who use formula, shouldnt we advocate informed choice?

ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
I could have written this thread

Pannacotta

But what is wrong with a company wanting to sell its product, especially if it has done lots of research and development and it has a licence to sell its product. personally I am completely in favour of the formula manufacturers being able to compete with each other as this will in all likelihood improve the products they are offering.

From my own personal experience there are risks/disadvantages to breastfeeding and to deny that denies many women the belief that they have the right to choose. My own pewrsonal experience is one friend who directly associates her PND to protracted (we are are talking 4 months) of extremely difficult attempts to breatfeed.

Another friend who developed severe mastitis and had to be hospitalised and endured an operation to remove the infected tissue.

Someone else I know (not a close friend) whose child had failure to thrive, was advised again and again to at least top up with formula as she was not producing enough milk but held out until the poor child was nearly 6 months old and bloody malnourished.

Please don't get me wrong, I am in favour of BF if thats what the mother wants/is able to do but unfortunately pople taking the stance that formula is so dreadful that it shouldn't even be advertised kind of makes that unlikely.