WTF? The pro-formula science GCSE

[Longtalljosie]

The above is not me being sad. That's me turning the air blue...

www.nct.org.uk/press-office/press-releases/view/224

That's disgraceful.

Good grief! WTF was the exam board thinking? (Assuming they were thinking at all, that is...)

TBE that quote was by the fictional charity leader

That is absolutely unbelievable !

Leaving the pro formula issue aside commercial companies should have no influence on education!

I am horrified

oh i see what you mean, sorry

I can see why people think this is a delicate subject and I suppose it depends on the intent. If someone got paid to add a bit about formula being good for babies that is an outrage. I want them taken out and shot.

On the other hand I see nothing wrong with what it says if it didn't have an agenda, but was just a made up example.

I have heard people say things like “so and so is a chemical and so it is a pollutant. Maybe not the head of a charity, but just post "I love giving my DCs fruitshoots" and watch what happens

The bit about saving babies from malnutrition is true if the mothers couldn't breastfeed.

Fucking hell.

Are 15/16 year-old GCSE chemistry students the target market for formula then?

Chil there is research that shows that girls are already decided on how they will feed their babies at a very young age, so this sort of thing is actually far more important than you might think.

Anyone who has a baby, might have a relative who has a baby, might get a job working with babies, lives next door to someone with a baby err, pretty much anyone really is a target for pro-formula material. Teenagers are a good audience for this sort of shite propaganda, they are doing PSHE, they are forming opinions, they are

I am part and part . I wonder how much other stealth marketing goes on in exam papers. I don't believe private companies whose bottom line is commercial gain should have anything to do with the education of our children

The illustration that claims to be taken from a pCket of babyfood is completely irrelevant to the question. All it does is fix an unhelpful and untrue idea in an impressionable teenager's mind. As for the information in the subsequent box -

Onagar, the claim the f protects against malnutrition in the developing world is a blatant lie.

Formula is responsible for more infant illness, malnutrition and death than any other form of feeding. Why else do you suppose the WHO Code regarding formula exists?

whoops. So cross I failed to finish a sentence. Teenagers are working out where they fit in the scheme of things particularly in regard to family issues and sexuality. .... is what I meant to say.

It's a GCSE exam question everyone.... they never bore any relation to the real world and were always just a bunch of numbers dressed up in what the examiners think is a 'fun' way. They could have picked any manufactured product. Don't get all soap-box about it just because it's baby food rather than Pot Noodle that was selected.

Bt it was baby food and not pot noodle, I wonder why?

maybe it's part of this "let's be soft and not risk upsetting the girls who have already decided they will FF" thing.

like if a PG woman is asked if she'll BF and she says no, even MWs/HVs nowadays feel they don't have the right to question it or even suggest giving BF a try.

FWIW I agree to some extent that it is only a GCSE question and they are always made-up mumbo jumbo... but then they could've done it about ANYTHING, so it seems really silly to do it about something so emotive especially if they're going to get the info wrong!

Examiners have various abstract topics to weave into a paper around which they have to build a reasonably 'real-life' sounding question without repeating themselves too often. Chances are that - rather than cynical corporate sponsorship - one of the people setting the exam has just had a baby - and at 2am when they were scooping out the SMA thought 'this would be a good way to illustrate subject X'

"My Baby Food is recommended as being the closest to a mother?s own breast milk. It is given free to mothers in the developing world ? without it their babies might die of malnutrition."

This is a blatant plug for formula, presented to a very impressionable audience. An audience to whom it is illegal and unethical to advertise formula.

Similarly the 'label' stating that the baby milk was "Pure and natural" and "Closest to mothers' breastmilk" is an illegal plug for formula.

"The group was founded by Mrs I. M. Right who has made a career in ?goodness? and is paid from donations given to RMAU by members of the public"

This is a dig at the charities that promote breastfeeding as a natural and good form of nutrition.

None of these sections are at all necessary or relevant to the exam question.

It would have been mildly contentious without them. With them it is dishonest, unethical, and, frankly, disgusting.

och I'm sure if you go through the last 10 years exam papers you will find all sorts of rubbish about all sorts of products

The kids are too busy thinking of the answer to worry about ff versus bf..

It's the science yeachers who should be responding to this.
I'm not a science teacher but AFAIK science curriculum is supposed to cover social and ethical aspects of science