SMA symposium for dieticians and paediatricians - on Failure to thirve and obesity????

[vlc]

I was searching for thrive lines and this popped up.

Now WHY would SMA want to host a symposium for paediatricians on failure to thrive / obesity? What's their angle? Their guest speaker is Tam Fry of the Child growth foundaton, and having googled him he is a huge advocate of the WHO BF baby growth charts.
Are SMA attempting a pre-emptive strike before the charts come into then general HCP domain and HCPs are confronted with 'ideal' growth standards, challenging their bottle fed norm experience?

I'm a bit puzzled by this. Wish I could be a fly on the wall.

Any HCPs amongst us going to this?

failure to thrive

I've no idea what 'thirving' is. doh.

vlc, the formula manufacturers try very hard to maintain links with hcps and have done for decades. I don't think it is a pre-emptive strike - it's not as precise as that. It's just part of their marketing to stay close to hcps and to be a part of their training - keep the brand well known and make them seem scientific and supportive.

I think it is a disgrace, and the CGF should know better. But there again, they have long-term links with SMA going back a long time. A few years back they produced a tape measure for measuring babies' heads, with the CGF and the SMA logos on it.

The same thing with drug companies and GPs... Close association

Just that Tam Fry has been known to say stuff like this

"Mr Fry said: ?We have been overfeeding our children in the first year of life for the last 30 years in this country by using the wrong charts. It has been turning off a whole host of mothers who want to breast feed but have been told their baby is not growing fast enough. It has stigmatised them and made them feel incredibly guilty when in fact we should have been encouraging it.?

...so I wonder how SMA plan to spin that? That can't be helpful to them at all!

and surely that's wrong anyway??

which bit, smb? (loving the new name)

vlc, paying lip service to breastfeeding is part of the marketing strategy.

He is right, that the use of old-style charts after the age of about 5-6 months* may well contribute to babies being labelled as under-weight, when in fact they are growing physiologically .

It is in formula manufacturers' interests to appear up to date, scientific, and supportive of best nutrition. They want to be the good guys, as this helps distract from their more obviously reprehensible marketing tricks.

"but have been told their baby is not growing fast enough"
Surely that tends to happen in the first few weeks/months though. Lots of mothers are back at work after 6 months, and so the obsession with the weekly weigh in stops I was obsessed and off for 12 months, and yet I still went for months between weighings after he was 6mo.

Thanks vlc, I wish I could take the credit, but someone else came up with it for me llast year. It's particularly appropriate at the moment as DS has 1.5 molars and is suffering

Ah but when this comes in, you can bet they'll find a million different ways to reassure you that their formula (and theirs alone) will ensure your baby is not ...er fat