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.

ILMD, I saw a quote from Aptamil about them not wanting to mimic breastmilk - will try and find it.

What a lovely bunch of women you are - somebody gives the home address of a pregnant woman (thankfully deleted) so you can all send her abuse because you don't agree with her choices and they way she earns money.

Nancy - who is this 'bunch'? One (count 'em...one) poster, swiftly jumped on by others, instant deletion.

And your point is.....?

We know you are in favour of unethical marketing from your previous posts. Presumably you think the SMA dvd is an excellent idea.

Don't have a problem with it in the least. Just as I don't have a problem with the Cow and Gate advert.

Perfectly consistent with your previous position in favour of unethical marketing. Congratulations.

that's your take on it Tiktok, I'm just not in favour of a ban on formula advertising or treating FF mothers like lepers.

oh for Gods sake

They didnt seem to have all these breastfeeding problems 100s of years ago, and in half the devoloping countries (who havent yet been brainwashed by the SMA Force Feeders.)

I am very skinny, had 2 enormous babies, and managed to breastfeed both of them for 2 yrs each. I wouldnt have had it any other way. On days where my milk seemed to slow down, i knew my body would adapt and produce enough milk.
Its only something like 5% of mothers who physically cannot breast feed.

Boobs are for feeding. Why does the whole world make such a freakin fuss?

Nancy66 if you go to the very loooong thread about the cow and gate ads, you will see that hflotsofnumbers has been a shitstirrer on that thread. Whether she genuinely believes what she posted on there wrt her beliefs about formula and the advertising of it or if she was just doing it as a trolling exercise is by the by.

It is very intresting that the person who has been 'defending' formula on previous threads was the person on this thread who posted Kirstie Allsop's address.

She is behaving as a previous poster known as cowmad did.

Disclaimer, I have read on here that she has been taking similar shitstirring attitudes on other topics in Talk but frankly, I can't be arsed to go confirm this for myself.

just a quick question, you dont actually have to swap to follow on milk or the toddler, hungry baby milks etc do you, if your baby is happy on the infant formula, which most would be? there is no need to swop, i mean they go on about the extra iron, which will prob just constipate the baby and also these ones with more cereal to help them sleep? or something, but nutritionally there is no need to swop milks once the baby reaches six months (or in the case of one of the hipp milks ten months)

and with regards to kirstie, i cant believe she need the money and she obviously has no moral standards if she thinks that this is an ok thing to do

Could it be that problems with breastfeeding in the past just weren't discussed?

I'm sure women still had problems, but the solutions were different.

Wet nurses, for instance?

Nancy, do you know what a 'non sequitur' is?

Here's an example:

"I'm just not in favour of a ban on formula advertising or treating FF mothers like lepers."|

Here's another one

"I'm just not in favour of global warming or mugging old ladies for their pension books."

Geddit?

Please explain how an ethical approach to marketing of formula is the same as 'treating ff mothers like lepers'.

Why aren't you in support of ff mothers being able to access non-commercial information about formula, in order to help them make a health-based choice? Why do you prefer to restrict them to a choice between fluffy bunny logos and giggling adverts?

[sigh] FF mothers can see past the fluffy bunny logos etc you know, and then make an informed choice. Or are we so stupid that the only thing that influences our choice of formula is the colour of the box and the celeb that promotes it?

If the formula companies want to spend money on advertising let them. Most parents tend to look at ingredients etc to make an informed choice.

Or did I instantly lose half my brain power when I stopped bf at 3 months?

But for most formulas the only real way of distiguishing between them is the colour of the box, the celeb who promotes it, or just anecdotes from mums, midwives, HV.
Research into any meaningful differences in effect between the different formula milks is pitifully bad. In the absence of evidence who is actually in a position to make an informed choice?

well we tried sma but ds didn't like it so were recommended aptimil by hv (shock!) and he's doing really well on it. A lot better for his tummy. Its also trial and error but I personally wouldn't be swayed by packaging or celeb endorsement when it comes to my baby's food.

dunno, if the way it was packaged and who it was endorsed by did not make a difference, do you think that formula companies would bother
, nope , it would be in a plain tin with no sleb endorsement.

jordan / sma/ hello magazine spread anyone? that was very bad IMHO. >>or was it ok! magazne..?>>

i did not make an informed choice to formula feed, by god, i do regret it now, more power to anyone who did though!

true lulumama. I just get a bit annoyed when it is assumed that parents who choose to ff will therefore fall for advertising and give their baby the formula in the pretty box even if it doesn't agree with the baby's digestive system.

Just a bit sick of some posters who exclusively bf, have never used formula or intend to but feel they have the right to comment on something that they have no experience of. I, on the other hand, have bf and used formula and so can see both sides. Although as I only bf for 3 months I'm no expert and so would not post on a bf thread. Usually

well, i have never breastfed, DD did try to latch on , but ...... and does not stop me wading in ! luckily, tiktok puts me straight if i get it wrong

Right I can 'shitstir' if I want. But I wasn't. I was just getting fed up with people getting their knickers in such a twist - and not being able to express themselves.

I have never changed my name on mumsnet ever. So no trolling thank you.

sure you can shitstir all you want. the beauty of mn is that it keeps deletions to a minimum.

as for trolling, it is not just about namechanging to be a nuisance. It is also about being deliberately rude, insulting and provocative to get a 'bite'.

the definition of trolling as it was originally meant on early listservs was the fishing definition, not the little guy under a bridge one.

Yeah, yeah WHATEVER.

Still looking for the kill

'express themselves?'

did you mean to use these words in a debate about breatfeeding?

lavie... i used aptamil with my dd on the advice of HPs (there being nothing else to go on apart from the friendly polar bear on the pack). they are heavily marketed to, that's why they recommend particular products.

anyway, glad that your boy is doing well on it, but i wanted to know what you saw when you saw past the fluffy bunnies. cos there isn't anything else, is there?

(and i won't use aptamil if i have another, no way. i personally think it gave dd the shits for a year. fine to begin with, i was pleased that she had poo like bm etc, but i didn't change to follow-on cos i wanted the fish oils and she still had it at a year. all her bf pals were pooing fairly normally by then. i read up a bit about it, those fish oils give babies the shits, basically. )

No! Express as in explain.

The whole thing just gets me going - some people come on for a fight or an argument.

And think they are so right. I just love the capital letters - wow! I am so shaken - I just can't sleep.

As I have already said KA's address is already internet available.

So Kiskidee where are you?

Yeah Kiskidee where are you?

"FF mothers can see past the fluffy bunny logos etc you know, and then make an informed choice"

It'd be good to think that mums could do this , but in order to make a properly informed choice they need access to the research on which the formula companies base their claims as to the efficacy and safety of their product, and the education to assess the quality of this research. They also need access to evidence based, independent comparisons of the different formulas - showing which ones are best tolerated by the largest number of babies. Unfortunately this information doesn't exist, so mums are left to rely on anecdotal evidence and marketing claims.....

TBH, most people I know who buy formula seem to accept the claims about the product made by manufacturers on the sound basis that 'they wouldn't be allowed to say it if it wasn't true'. They also accept what health visitors tell them about the different brands (such as 'aptamil is the closest to breastmilk) without ever questioning them as to the evidence on which they base their assertions.

I personally am utterly staggered by how little proper research even quite educated parents do before deciding a) how to feed their babies or b) what formula to use. I am convinced that 90% of people spend more time researching which buggy they're going to buy their baby than what they're going to put in their child's body as their sole food for the first 6months of their life.

LaVieEnRose - you say you did do some research into this issue? What were your sources of information? How did you choose which brand of formula to use for your baby?