Legislation on formula promotion

[Again]

Don't want to start a war here, but I'm wondering if someone can point me to the legislation that bans promotions such as temporary reductions in price of formula. I was in an Irish supermarket and saw some and wanted to look into the law in the area. I don't know if it exists in Ireland, but it would be good to get an understanding of the law in Uk or EU.

"Allow meat to be advertised but in a responsible way, so that untrue claims are not made and that health risks are not glossed over."

This is fine, but you can't allow the company in question to decide what is responsible, because there is a conflict of interest.

The formula companies don't care about babies, they don't. If they could get away with slipping inferior/cheaper products into the milk and babies didn't actually die then they would because it would improve the bottom line.

They must not be allowed to self regulate - the ones who will pay for that self regulation have no voice.

I wouldn't trust the meat industry to self regulate either.

I didn't know that vegetarians live longer

Ok just lost my post, if you want advertises compaies to have free rain we would have the same situation in the UK as a lot of thired world countries (well at lest most people in the UK could affort formula). They adverties there products as being better the BM and promote heavily in hospitals and bribe health works with incetives to promot there products.

In thired wourld countries this leads to babies dying, becasue parents can't afford enough formula so dilute it to much cousing malnutriation. They then offten don't have the facilites to sterilies properly so infants die from infections.

Now luckly in the west west don't have these problems. But we end up with shockinly poor brestfeeding rates, when really wearth you like it or not brest is best.

Again - I can't provide scientific data to back that up. It's something I've heard wouldn't want to claim it's def true, was for example only. I think that external regulation of all advertising is definitely the best bet. Anyways, I will go now ladies. I hope you all don't think I'm not pro BF - I very much am, I just try to play devils advocate. When you feel strongly about something it's perfectly natural that you want to change things ASAP - of course you do, it's babies health we're talking about. But when changing long ingrained opinions it's vital not to jump on the banning, all companies are evil etc bandwagon. This comes across to those who don't agree with you as scaremongering and negative and will not help one jot IMO. Attitudes change over time, be good BF role models to those around you and you'll do more to promote BF than any multi million campaign ever could

I do have strong views on breastfeeding, but I have even stronger views on our senses being assaulted by marketing, everywhere we look and on everything. It hardly even matters whether the claims or correct or not - just give us all some peace and quiet!!

This thread is not really even about having strong feelings on BF, it is about whether industry can be trusted to self regulate when they will lose money if they act responsibly.

Personally, I think the answer to that is No.

It is the job of Nestle and Unilever etc to make money for their shareholders, that is why they exist, they don't exist to ensure the optimum well being of babies - so there is a conflict between what the baby needs and what the big corporation needs and the baby has no power.

"good BF role models to those around you and you'll do more to promote BF than any multi million campaign ever could"

Not when you are surrounded by images that equate normal baby feeding with bottles etc. Have a look at the Mumsnet logo.

I don't think corporations are evil, I think they have a purpose which is at odds with that of parents.

Yes the MN logo is a good example! Am pretty surprised it hasn't been changed tbh

i'd imagine vegetarians live longer as on average they have less body fat
I am a fat vegi so i'd imagine i'll die with the meat eaters

StealthPolarBear, yes you could be right on that one as they have proven that you can live longer if you eat a restricted diet.

No nesacerly the best thing for you though as you have to eat a starvation diet not much fun either.

(Just checking we're clear:There is no suggestion that formula should be banned - it's unethical marketing that needs to be banned.)

Bubbles, I accept you are sincere,but sorry, I think you are misinformed about the issues involved. I say this, because you replied with confidence to the OP's question with a totally wrong answer - the WHO code is not law, the UK law does not do anything to back it up still less 'enforce' it...I guess you now realise your error, but you may need to think a bit more about this, and explain why babies in the West should be less protected from unethical marketing than babies elsewhere.

Not having unethical marketing does not restrict people's choice in any way. Formula would still be on sale and freely available. People would make the decision to use it and to select a brand on health or personal choice grounds, not because of packaging, low price, spurious health claims etc.

I fail to see why this is anything but a good thing! It's nothing to do with persuading women to bf - your analogy with vegetarianism just doesn't stand up and this is one of the reasons.

There are many things that are not advertised, without it being an assault on freedom of choice: coat hangers, safety pins, dusters We don't miss it!

Sorry, have only just popped back to check Mumsnet! I think it's best to agree to disagree on this one! Having just returned from my mum and baby group, sat under the huge breast is best poster display board and been told that the BF support group are all getting free hand massages, sat by the HV with the BF is best covered filofax and had the BF mums in the groups having their pics taken whilst they BF whilst the FF mums only had their pics taken when they had stopped FFing I honestly really don't think a regulated formula ad will do any harm, that's all. I really think the NHS might just be hinting that BF is the best....

Bubbles, you are confusing the arguments!

Making sure formula is marketed in an ethical way is a different issue to all the other stuff you describe.

Please answer the question - why should babies not be protected from unethical marketing?

They should. That's why I said throughout that the marketing should be regulated. The above was largely aimed at the suggestion that BF doesn't receive enough promotion - all I see everywhere I go is BF promotion!
To answer your Q's - I said the west because people in the west have the money and ability to prepare formula in a hygienic and safer way. People in other parts of the world are often denied access to clean water etc so can't do this - making formula an inappropriate product to be advertised in other parts of the world as it would be very hard to use it appropriately.
My analogue with vegetarianism was to do with trying to show how aggressive promotion of any issue is not the way to change peoples' behaviour, banning advertising is only a small part of this. Re advertising you are right nothing needs to be advertised. However when you ban advertising something a multi national company will still want to find a way to get their message out. This has led to very worrying developments in the formula world. Mainly we've had follow on milk - a completely pointless product even for FF'ers that has given the impression that you only need to Bf for 6 months and that if you don't give it then babies will become low in iron - rubbish we all agree.

Look, unregulated advertising is a bad thing. Regulated advertising is not a problem in my opinion. I appreciate others might disagree. I would also be quite happy to see BM advertised too. And before people say but the NHS has no money.... They do have money for health campaigns - see the recent stroke awareness ads and the change for life but I agree that they have limited resources. What the NHS has though is midwives, Doctors, infant feeding consultants etc all on salary to promote BF all of which do a very good job of doing so. If people still aren't BF'ing despite an advertising ban and extreme NHS promotion then there's more going on than just a lack of knowledge and I really don't know what the answer is to try to change things. The only way I can think is to start again and work slowly away at gradually changing people's minds...

Actually you're very wrong about breastfeeding promotion spend, Bubbles ... the formula companies outspend the NHS/govt to an extent which is actually quite embarrassing.

"In the UK, formula companies spend at least £12 million per year on booklets, leaflets and other promotions, often in the guise of ?educational materials?. This works out at approximately £20 per baby born. In contrast, the UK government spends about 14 pence per newborn each year to promote breastfeeding." From here

I don't know where this notion of a level playing field between breastfeeding and formula comes from. Breastfeeding is still a minority sport, and the pittance spent on promoting it tells us all we need to know about the government's so-called devotion to the cause.