challenging illegal formula packaging - sorry if this has already been posted but this is from the CEO of the NCT

[harpsichordcuddler]

"The NCT has been given a clear view from LACORS (the Local Authorities Coordinators of Regulatory Services that some infant formula packaging currently on store shelves is illegal under current regulations.

In order for it to be removed from sale there needs to be a prosecution or threatened prosecution. Local Trading Standards Officers are the people who would bring a prosecution, but to do this they need to receive large numbers of complaints from across the UK.

Would you help? This is your chance to make a real difference.

Next time you are in a supermarket or chemist, check out the infant formula packs (this formula is labelled as ?suitable from birth?) and read the wording.

The wording we are informed is illegal is

? Formulated to be nutritionally close to breastmilk
? With omega 3 LCP,s
? Closer Than Ever to Breastmilk
? Inspired by breastmilk

You may find other wording which is similar.

Send photos or a description to your trading standards office (you can locate your nearest using this link)

Scotland www.scotss.org.uk/scotss2.htm

England www.tradingstandards.gov.uk/consumers/clegis.cfm

Wales www.wrexham.gov.uk/english/env_services/tradingstandards/

N Ireland www.detini.gov.uk/cgi-bin/get_builder_page?page=61&site=9&parent=110

Channel islands www.gov.je/EconomicDevelopment/TradingStandards/

With a note to say

?These packs were on display in my local xxxxxxx on date xxxxx and I believe them to be illegal under current legislation because of the wording on the packs.
Please note the words

[INSERT WORDING ON PACK]

My information is that this wording is likely to be illegal. Please would you follow this up for me and let me know the outcome. ?

They will do the rest. You don?t need to explain why you think it is illegal or comment any further ? just report it. The body from whom local TSOs take their lead has already advised us that this packaging is illegal. Your letter will push them to act."

Oh yes, absolutely. Thats what you/we are Harpsi.

Because the formula companies, they have your baby's best interests at heart. Of course they do.

We just want to commit acts of genocide and atrocity.

If you are that worried about women being undermined, why don't you start a thread about misleading claims made by beauty products?? There are enough out there!

I quite fancy wiping out an entirerace, actually.
I need a hobby.

What do people think those who want to support bf get out of doing it?

Perhaps we are paid in big gold ingots by a large-breasted milk goddess?

Or maybe, just maybe, we're interested in empowering women?

So does that mean people who disagree with us are interested in oppressing and disempowering women?

Hmmmm...

Posted by Hunker

Does anyone know what the 6 claims are which are on the permitted list?

I'm amazed that something as bland as "with prebiotic care" isn't allowed. I myself thought it was a pretty lame back of the envelope job by C&G which means nothing at all.

Does the law relating to advertising "puffs" apply to this at all?

because, crookshanks, that doesn't matter so much imo.
women don't feel as much pain and anger and misery about it.
ime.
what we feed babies is more important than face cream
or mascara.
imo

Beauty products don't kill thousands of babies in developing countries though.

Although, interestingly, Garnier/L'Oreal/Body Shop are all owned by a company who do...so there is a kind of link.

Posted by Hunker

Oh, you mean like the brands of cosmetics owned by Nestle by any chance?

Funnily enough......alot of us already do....

Coincidence?

I do feel quite a lot of pain and anger and misery that no anti-cellulite cream works though, Harpsi

Posted by Hunker

Beatcha, VVV

Posted by Hunker

"Does the law relating to advertising "puffs" apply to this at all?"
Christ, no! the stuff about being close to breastmilk is repeated so so so often. it is extremely infleuntial for many women ime.
this is pretty solid legal advice as far as I can tell.

It looks kinda weird, reading my own posts...sort of.....

luckily I don't have any cellulite.
if you bf for four years it all disappears.

Oh I know the "close to breastmilk" thing wouldn't come into it at all Harpsi. I'm convinced on that. It's some of the weirder things that are springing up. I just can't believe (but obviously I'm wrong from what you're saying) that anyone would actually believe them/take any heed.

You'll know which ones are mine though, VVV.

They're the good ones.

No, no, no, don't change your password!

Posted by Hunker

obviously Twinkle it isn't the whole story, the advertising claims are part of the bigger picture.

TM, using the word 'prebiotics' is useful to advertisers because the consumer easily confuses it with 'probiotics' and many probably don't know that the two of them exist, never mind what the differences are.

the companies are pandering to the public having just enough information about one of them to draw the wrong conclusion... but in their favour.

Well, twinkle....this is the thing.

Most folk think that if it wasnt true, they wouldnt be allowed to say it....oh hang on.....it isnt true, and oh yes - they are saying it....

Damn, I've only bfed for 35 months, so a way to go yet!

(Is it really that long?! Crikey!)

Posted by Hunker

Kiskidee, on the C&G website, they make confusing and misleading claims about pre and probiotics. The bastards.

TM, how many times have you seen on here people defending weaning at 4m because "if babies weren't meant to have food that young, they wouldn't have jars suitable from 4m"? Same thing with formula claims. We expect advertising in this country to be pretty truthful.

Same as television phone-in competitions, I guess...

Posted by Hunker

Thats the thing - as a parent, I made sure I had all the information to hand about formula - and I don't mean just reading the back of the packaging...so I knew what I was buying and feeding my child.

I knew it wouldn't be as good as my breastmilk, but I didn't have any choice. If people out there just go by what the packaging says and takes it all as gospel, than that's a pretty sorry state of affairs and if women have to have it 100% spelt out to them about it, how are they being empowered???!!

Kiskidee - that would be me then . I know better now and I feel really stupid (not that the prebiotic crap was in any way instrumental in me ending up formula feeding).

hello you lot...

all present and correct, i see.

Crookshanks, well your situation is your situation. obviously, every woman's situation is different.
just because you were able (educationally and emotionally) to access that sort of information) then that doesn't mean everyone is in the same position.

I know, I know, I know. But "inspired by breastmilk" - isn't that truthful? OK it may be more inspired by profit, but still. Like I said, if the law is intended to remove any reference to breastmilk (which would be fine by me) it should just say so. And make them cut the price by half while they're at it (with all that money saved on fancy advertising slogans and all that).