What do we think of Kirstie Allsopp's link with SMA?

[hunkermunker]

I am slightly less than utterly unimpressed You?

And yes, of course, it's her decision, yada-yada, but what a shit decision it was.

Kirstie, I knock walls down in your general direction.

Back to the SMA thing - it's all part of the "brand". The notion, the feeling that this company cares about your baby and is just offering impartial advice. It doesn't have to advertise directly, it just has to build up a perception, a feeling that SMA is a nice, baby friendly produce that just wants what is best for your precious child.

And that is why Kirstie should not have done this.

Well, yes, everyone loves a clown.

Sorry tiktok - I have read many of your posts on bfing and generally respect your opinion/experience, etc. But where do you get the information that it is bfers who move on to follow on milk? I am aware that I can only provide a small snapshot of experience, but I never ever felt the need for follow on. Stopped bf dd1 and dd2 at 12 months and they moved to cows milk. Your comments on this are verging on paranoia in my opinion.

MrsP3 - you're aware that Tiktok has vast experience on this subject, you admit yourself that you are but one single voice and yet you call Tiktok verging on paranoid?

Why not just ask her for clarification in the first instance?

MrsPhas3: If I was sensitive - which I am not - I might take offence at 'verging on paranoia'. As if You talk as if I have made this up in some sort of dream about persecution. I would also like to recommend you read my posts - I was clearly talking about people who start bf and then stop when their babies are quite young and need to stay on a milk-only diet, and who therefore have to switch to formula. I was not talking about you.

My statement that people who start breastfeeding are more likely to keep their babies on formula for longer is not an invention. They come from a marketing presentation I attended a little while ago - I cannot direct you to a written or web-based reference and the inner machinations of formula marketing have to be inferred from what we see of the way they do it.

It's perfectly true though - mothers who start breastfeeding and who then switch to formula stay using formula for longer than mothers who ff from the start. So it makes perfect sense for manufacturers to reach these mothers ie the breastfeeding mothers.

Following up my own post: do you not see this in your own observations (if you mix with other mothers with a variety of feeding experience and choices)? Who are the ones buying the follow on, the toddler milks, the junior milks...the ones who ff from the start, or the ones who have some experience of bf?

If Formula was £38 a pot do you think more people would breastfeed?

That's how much I had to pay for my daughter's formula until my doctor got involved

I am amazed that you are surprised and disappointed at KA whoring herself for quite a few grand.

V disappointing Ms Allsopp, IMO

Not sure of your point, minky....

I don't think anyone wants formula to be expensive!

I think it's a very valid point

Do you think more people would try to feed themselves if formula was really pricey?

Tiktok - I was not intended to offend you. I apologise. And I freely admit that my experience is limited, and I do recognise your experience, but I am very surprised that bfers (including short term ones) are more likely to fall for the follow-on milk and so on. Not what I have seen, and my eldest is 8, youngest 16 weeks, so I've been in groups of parents for some time. But I'm happy to accept that you've had this information presented to you.

I agree with your sentiments - marketing of something so crucial, that is, the way we feed our children, should not come down to slebs, glossy packaging, etc.

Minky: no, I don't think they would, not auomatically.

If formula suddenly shot up in price to that extent, people would begin making their own formula, preparing ordinary milk, as they did before formula was widely used.

A few people would stick with bf for a while longer, I suppose.

MrsPhas, apols accepted

It's not that they 'fall for' follow on milk. They stop breastfeeding and have to switch to formula, not follow on but regular formula, because their babies are not yet old enough for follow on.

It's not 'falling for' the marketing of it all - it's using a product (formula, in general) that has been marketed to them as trustworthy and healthy.

It's also a socio-economic thing. FF-from-the-start families have less disposable income than bf-from-the-start families. (Moreover, Healthy Start vouchers are only usable with infant formula (not follow on) or regular milk.)

Clarification: vouchers usable for infant formula or regular milk ie not follow on or any other fancy-schmancy milk

BTW I am very pro BF

brief property hijack

no vvv, it was another proposal muttered by the govt at one point, that 5k should be given to first timers so as to even the playing field a bit. but of course, it would just put the prices up by 5k. [market forces icon]

Seen as there are so many experienced breast feeders here perhaps some of you could help out on this thread.www.mumsnet.com/Talk/2330/565689

I breast fed my older 3 until 6 months, then went onto follow-on instead of cows milk as I believed (from reliable sources I believed at the time) that the natural iron levels in babies depleted after this time, and, as formula is fortified, it made sense to me.

If this is what we are led to believe, then its no wonder bfing mums move onto follow-on. I would have done my research and made an informed choice, so its not a switch I would have done on a whim (but it was 6 years ago so can't be specific as to where the information came from). And I suspect I'm not alone in believing this at the time.

Disclaimer: this was in the days before I knew about MN and subsequently am still bf my 1yo DC4

This is not what I said, though, foxy. You - breastfeeding to 6 mths - is not the market they are targetting with their DVDs about the early days. It's mums who start off breastfeeding and then stop in the early days, weeks and months and who then have to use regular formula. They are then 'hooked' into formula buying.

The marketing of follow on is a different thing.

sorry

Lol at KA being the SMA Jordan for the middle classes

Read an interesting statistic in The New Scientist (the one about trying to mimic breast milk, which is my opinion is fascinating from a scientific stance, but bad in so many other ways - just because something is scientifically possible doesn't mean it's a good idea etc)

Essentially what they are trying to do, from what I understand is to replicate mother's milk - in other words, create a super formula.

Anyway only 3% of women in the UK are breastfeeding exclusively at 6 months. Is this true?

I think the correct figure is 2 per cent, or it might even be 1 per cent...but it's not entirely trustworthy as a figure as women who started solids at six months (rather than after) go down as not bf excl at that time (though it will still be a low figure).

The stats are from Infant Feeding 2005 (big UK survey).