Could somebody please explain to me why the promotion of FF would be such a bad thing?

[conniedescending]

because as long as they don't say or imply its better than BF then I can't really see the problem? Or why we have to get hysterical about how other people feed their babies?

maybe if FF was made out to be not such a bad thing then there would be more mothers actually bf'ing for longer and with subsequent children as they could be supported by mixed feeding their children.

george cooney mmmm...... which car do i need to get?

Bloody hell, Nancy, you're right....you'd better get on to Nutricia, Wyeth, Pampers, Johnson&Johnson, Mothercare and anyone else trying to sell stuff to mothers.

Tell them straight! If mothers don't want to buy formula milk, or nappies, or bum cream, or cots and sheets, they will not be swayed by your ads! Don't waste your money! Mothers are not stupid! Alone among consumers, they are completely impervious to advertising!

If they are breastfeeding, nothing anyone can say or do will persuade them to use formula - nothing at all! No, not even your costly TV ad you have spent months researching and devloping! It's all a waste of time!

Because all mothers who decide to breastfeed continue breastfeeding and never, ever use formula, so what is the point of advertising to them? They won't be in the least bit influenced by your suggestions, because 100 per cent of mothers who start breastfeeding continue, secure and confident in it.

Except.....er.....

And yet most mothers assume that they will go over to formula at 6 months. I thought that myself, and I'm neither incredibly stupid nor unable to think for myself. I just thought that this was what happened - you 'stuck it out' for 6 months and then went onto formula. Now I really don't know where I got that from - probably from the maternity leave provisions, the normalisation of bottles, the myths that surround breastfeeding and the power of misty-eye making advertising of follow-on formula.

x-posted with Tiktok. Except she said it quite a bit better than I did.

I'm not saying advertising doesn't work - I'm just saying that you can't sway people that don't want to be swayed.

Judging by the amount of people I have heard saying that Aptamil is the closest to breastmilk, I have no doubt that formula advertising, even now, is extreme compelling.

Why do ff companies advertise? Of course the would love us to all use ff, part of the reason I feel strongly that the should be strictly regulated is because the have in the past engaged in some very under hand tactics to undermine bfing. I personally think the current SMA ad, showing dad making up a night feed is awful. My local trust is very pro bfing, and i'm lucky I had loads of info and support, but if that was absent i could certainly see myself sat at home, knackered with bleeding tits, seeing the sma add and thinking that looks so much easier

The people that can't be swayed aren't the people we're worried about here. They're going to BF even if it becomes illegal

It's the people who don't have access to any information about BF and therefore think FF is the only option, because the might of Big Pharma has made FF the 'normalised' option, while BF is seen as oddly hippy.

which is what could happen if they were allowed to promote FF as much as they'd like to.

x-posted with tiktok as well, and I totally agree.

Wtf is immunofortis?? I suspect in same league as boswelox?

Nancy - I am sure you are right. People who don't want to be swayed are harder nuts to crack - they might need a lot more undermining, a different approach, repeat 'performances' of an ad, or free offers, or 'carelines', or samples, or product placement in a magazine. The very hardest nuts might still resist - and good for them They'll seek out help, proper support, if they hit problems, and their confidence will not waver for a second.

But why should you have to be a hard nut to breastfeed successfully? Why can't you be an ordinary, wobbly, tired, under-confident mum? Why should Big Money be permitted to exploit you with spurious health claims about formula, and get into the massive gaps left by the poor support for bf in this country?

And formula feeding mothers - they and their babies will benefit from information, not fluffy bunnies logos versus cutesy teddy ones.

speaking of which, have you seen the latest ad which starts off looking like an ad for BF, with the baby sort of radiating a blue glow? it then goes on about some follow on milk or other, can't remember which one, but the same blue glow is emanating from the child.

i.e. our follow on milk has the same effect as BM....

tiktok, you have summed me up completely:

"ordinary, wobbly, tired, under-confident mum"

think that might be my new screen name....

bit off the point, but earlier this week I followed a bus for some time with a NHS promotion of bf on its back.
it read 'breastfeeding - it's your choice'.
initially i thought fab, a bf promotion on a bus... then i thought, mmm, bit wishywashy actually, how about 'bf - it's better for you and your baby'???
I think part of the problem with promoting bf is that everyone's so afraid of upsetting the ff-ers.

Potatoes - could be because they had identified a local thing whereby mothers were not choosing to bf because partners or grandmothers were undermining it....has been known

So 'it's your choice' means you can decide, not them.

I agree that breast feeding should be promoted - I'm all for it.

My sister in law is breast feeding at the moment and I'll happily go out with her and act as her minder - giving the death glare to anybody that dares to raise an eyebrow.

But I'm also for equality. So if you promote breast feeding you can't deny formula feeding a presence. Otherwise the picture painted is that it should be swept under the carpet. Breastfeeding is the right option, formula is the dirty little secret.

where are all these formula adds? i don't think i've ever seen one - and i watch lots of television.i do tend to go into a bit of a fuzz when i see babies though. i didn't know they were allowed to advertise. i would have thought that most people who need / want to use formula know it exists so maybe the advertising is more of a brand thing.

Equality, yes, but the advertising budgets of the big pharma companies against the NHS? No.

Utter bollox, Nancy....no one is denying ff a 'presence'. It is there, on the shelves, freely available as it should be.

It's about as dirty a secret as clothes pegs, see my other post, which are also not advertised. We don't say that clothes pegs are swept under the carpet simply because we don't see glossy ads for them all over the place. Same goes for prescription meds - not advertised, a necessary product, used without shame!

Ff mothers and bf mothers are equal, but their methods of feeding are not the same, or equal in benefit to their children. This is, as I explained, a public health issue - to make it into an equality issue is painfully ilogical. To pretend that it really doesn't matter how you feed, or that outcomes are invariably the same, or that both methods should be promoted equally to spare the feelings of ff mothers, is to perpetuate a situation where those mothers who found they ended up ff not by choice feel unable even to say they feel sad about it - after all, if it doesn't matter how you feed, if it's all a fuss about nothing, then what is there to feel sad about?

Why trivialise their feelings in that way?

Message withdrawn

Message withdrawn

Also the isn't equity, there aren't any ads for bfing on telly, or in mags!! There are two adverts on telly aimed at underminig bfing, and lots of ff ads in baby mags suggesting ff is almost as good as bf

Formula feeding carries risks, breastfeeding doesn't. There have now been over thousands studies world wide to support this fact. Yet the average mum is unaware of the risks of formula feeding. The additional costs to the NHS in terms of hospital admissions and care for chronic illnesses are huge. Advertising formula for children under 6 months is banned. Formula companies get around this promoting follow on milk. They pay for courses for health professionals.It would be wrong to ban formula because it is necessary but thanks to advertising the choice to breastfeed isn't made on a level playing field. The rules need to be tightened so that mothers do not see formula as normal but as a subsitute when breastfeeding can't be done. We don't see cigarette advertising for the same reason. Think about your own pocket, you are the ones paying for results of formula feeding through paying your taxes. If you have supported the formula companies by formula feeding then you pay twice. Lobby the government to ban formula companies inappropriately promoting their products.

After all, would you rather receive impartial advice from a midwife or health visitor or one than had been given "treats" by a formula company???

But banning the promotion of formula isn't a comment on formula, it's about formula companies.

Even if it had no impact on undecided mothers, the companies exist solely to make profit. Aptamil has been quoted as being 'closer to breastmilk' by individual MW and HV if you search threads on parenting websites.

Do you really think that companies would spend millions on advertising if it had no impact?

Why do people pay more for supermarket 'finest/taste the difference' ranges when there's often very little difference in product content from the ordinary (cheaper) range?

Why do people pay out extra for branded goods (like washing powders), when the same product can be bought cheaper unbranded (often manufactured by the same company)?

Advertising persuades people that they are getting a superior product. A license to advertise would allow the companies to milk (no pun intended) more money out of families.

My mum, in her one-woman campaign to stop me bfing in the early days said to me "I nearly bought you a tin of formula today"
Me: "Er, why? I'm bfing"
Mum: "Well, it said 'closest to breastmilk'"
Me: