Is it still illegal for retailers to reduce the price of formula?

[JennyWreny]

If so, does it include follow on milk -

www.ocado.com/products/aptamil-2-follow-on-baby-milk-formula-tabs-6-12-months-578936011

Why would it be illegal?

Yes it is - formula can't be on price promotions, advertising, special offers, vouchers etc

It doesn't include follow on milk though - same as the advertising ban. That's why all the adverts are for follow on milks!

www.babymilkaction.org/ukrules-pt2c

I don’t think you are meant to discount follow on, but whether it’s illegal or not I’m not sure. It’s certainly not good practice. I can’t believe people still buy it tbh as it’s very much against NHS advice. But I suppose it’s cheaper. Should be banned altogether.

I it's only been illegal for 0-6 months, when it is a replacement for breast milk.

@Ciri it's illegal to stop the very dodgy practices of formula manufacturers (usually Nestle!) from encouraging parents to formula feed over breastfeeding and then, once it's too late, much like drug pushers, they have a 'captive' market. And, if you think that's farfetched, you'd better read The Politics of Breastfeeding because profits definitely matters more than babies' health to these companies.

Stage 1 milk isn't meant to be 'promoted' in any way - so no 3 for 2 offers, reductions on regular price, club card points etc.
All other milks are not covered by this rule.

To promote breastfeeding is my understanding of why the regulations are in place.

The laws only cover first stage, suitable from birth, formula. Not follow on, or growing up milks.

Thanks all. I did google but couldn't find anything much up to date.

Only stage 1 formula I believe

This

And probably should have added, the introduction of the laws around not promoting first stage formula, giving freebies or discounting it, coincide with the introduction of "follow-on" milk onto the market.

Hmm.

Shops aren’t allowed to advertise or discount formula to try and protect infant health from unethical corporations. I think it happened after the whole 80s formula scandal of them pushing formula in developing countries and millions of babies dying. Unfortunately the ban here doesn’t extend to advertising to healthcare trusts and depends on each Individual country. I believe there is a WHO best practice code that many countries chose to adopt

Follow on can be promoted, it is one of the reasons for its existence to promote the brand.

www.babymilkaction.org

www.firststepsnutrition.org

These are 2 really good websites for info.

This is why they invented "follow on milk" - restrictions on advertising, discounts and perks on formula for the first 6m are so heavily regulated that suddenly we need to switch to a follow on milk at 6 months.

The WHO guidelines over formula advertising do actually include follow on milks etc but the UK hasn't adopted that part of the guidance into our laws.

Formula is a lifesaving product. Formula companies are just morally bankrupt.

This is so blatant as well

The law isn't really there to prevent 3 for 2s, reward card points etc - it's to stop the really shady marketing such as sending salespeople into hospitals dressed in official looking clothing and calling themselves feeding nurses or some such, like giving out free samples targeted towards demographics who are more borderline for BF rates, like running ads that claim a certain brand is "closest to breastmilk" (that was over a decade ago but boy has it stuck), like giving out free samples targeted towards the most vulnerable time for establishing BM supply so that women become dependent on the formula, then the freebies dry up.

In order to ban all these and more creative methods the laws also cover discounting close to date stock and reward card points.

It's not to do with promoting breastfeeding as much as protecting it.

BertieBotts has made all the points I was going to- but also: have a look at the babies in the 'follow on' ads next time you see them: they're deliberately chosen to be as young as possible (so really little 6 monthers). The tactics are nefarious and sneaky.

Formula is important and lifesaving (we needed it initially). There should be a 'national milk' and it be taken out of the hands of private companies altogether. Especially given the regulations are so tight on the content they are basically identical.

They also have the older (but as young as possible to stay within the law) being fed in the same hold as you would use for a newborn. They don't want you to see an 8 month old baby being fed sitting up - the aim is to make the link with newborn feeding. I can't remember the stats but there was a survey done saying that a high percentage of people believed that they had seen infant formula ads when in fact they were for follow on.

And all of the formula brands are active on social media, run "advice lines", try to sponsor "education events" or conferences for health professionals.. it's insiduous.

They can’t discount it but some shops may be able to give it away if you’re in need (either directly or via a heathcare provider). Talk to your local foodbank for advice. But if your DC is over 6 mths old putting them on cows milk / fortified plant based milk is completely fine.

If infant milk and follow on milk are the same (hence why apparently you don't need to change from 1 to 2), then surely this means that this formula on offer is in reality suitable for all ages?

In these difficult times, with everything so expensive, if people can get some (equally safe) cheaper formula, which relieves the pressure on finances, then I'm all for that.

No they are not the same and people should not be buying follow-on to feed to their newborns. The follow-ons have more iron for a start.

What is true is that if you have a formula fed baby, then you don't need to start using follow-on at 6 months. You can just keep using infant formula, and then transition to cows milk later on.

Follow on was invented as a marketing gimmick to get round the advertising/promotion ban and is something that parents can do without.

It's not the same unfortunately. The birth - 6 month ones are very tightly regulated, the 6-12 month ones aren't. They're suitable for children who are getting some of their nutrients from solid foods - so really the 6 month thing is not quite right these days. That dates from when it was advised to begin weaning at 3 months so solids formed the majority of the diet by 6 months. (In 1980 for example it was considered sufficient to change to cow's milk at 6 months).

These days we are advised to wean more slowly and solids should be supplementary to the main nutrition which is breastmilk or formula until solids begin to take over at approx 9-12 months.

NHS advice and first steps nutrition (which is an independent source of info for parents and health professionals about formula and baby foods) both recommend using first infant formula until 12 months. I used to think this as well - why stick with a non-discountable version if a cheaper one is available and suitable? But now I would stick with first stage unless the baby is pretty established on solids (at which point TBH cow's milk ought to be fine anyway). It makes sense to say for instance don't bother with the growing up milks for 12m+ because cow's milk (much cheaper, less sugar and you probably have it at home anyway) is fine, but it's harder to see the sense behind don't bother to switch from infant to follow on formula - when the switch is no bother for parents and may save money.

(But yes - better not to switch unless baby is having a good amount of solids)

There was an article in the Guardian a couple of days ago about restrictions on formula. Not just no discounts - some food banks won’t take it. I get that breastfeeding is recommended but this seems completely ridiculous.

Food banks and formula