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

They're not being asked to believe anything as 'reliable facts' they're being asked to compare various bits of theoretical (that means 'made-up') information for purely academic purposes...

Where on that paper does it say that the information they are expected to assess is theoretical or made up?

The exam paper states "This label has been taken from a packet of My Baby Food."

can't believe anyone is astanding up for this - how naive would you have to be not to see the insidiousness of this 'information' ?

possibly if you were 15 years old....

although i do note that formula manufacturers are known to offer money to prominent bloggers/ net pundits for promoting their product in ways they could not directly do with without contravening the law themselves.

Oh come off it. This is information on a school exam paper ? children should be able to trust that the actual facts are true and analyse all the arguments. Instead they are given lies and propaganda and told to disprove what the charity boss says, with no analysis at all of the claims about the formula company.

It posits the breastfeeding charity as sanctimonious ignoramuses (Mrs IM Right, FFS) and the manufacturers as entirely ethical (giving away their product to save lives in developing countries). It's a horribly biased and entirely misleading case study. A fair case study would not involve lying to children.

The exam question said

"Responsible Mothers Are Us (RMAU) is a United Kingdom pressure group. They want to ban chemicals in baby foods. 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. When interviewed, she said: ?Calcium carbonate is a chemical and so it is a pollutant. My Baby Food must be banned to prevent the mass medication of babies. I don?t feed my baby the stuff of gravestones.?

This is clearly talikng the Michael out of opponents to FF. The exam board thought this was OK.

Can you imagine what the exam board would have thought of the following alternative question

"Climate Risks Augur an end to the Planet (CRAP) is a United Kingdom pressure group. They want action on climate change to save the planet. The group was founded by Mr Al Bore who has made a career in ?goodness? and 'caring for the planet' and has influenced governments to distribute his DVDs to school children. When interviewed, he said: ?Carbon dioxide is causing climate change. When we breathe, we exhale carbon dioxide. Breathing must be banned to prevent the destruction of the planet. I don?t see why other people should breathe and harm the planet.?

I think the officials at the exam board would have had kittens about this question. They could envisage their careers being terminated if they approved this question, and being personally called in by Alan Johnson to explain what they thought they were doing.

It's more than just theoretical made up stuff.

Excellent example claig. I can't believe that there are posters on here who cannot see how insidious this kind of thing is. It is dangerous precisely because it is presented in an exam format so the examinees will not be thinking about whether they are being 'advertised' to or not and at this age unlikely to have formed opinions about bf/ff and are thus open to influence.

Unfortunately, the mythical speech attributed to the mythical I M Right is roughly how a lot of the more militant campaigners for BF actually come across. i.e BF is unassailable and everything else is poison. Some of the lobby groups, rather than simply throwing their hands up in horror at this exam question and shouting 'foul', should look more closely at their PR and the image they are presenting. If they're worried about what's influencing 15 and 16 year-olds, that is...

Can you give any examples, Chil? I've never seen or heard anything of the sort so would be interested if you can show me different.

yep, i'd love to see that stuff if you can find it, chil.

Sent this to a friend who is Head of Science.

She thinks it's nothing to worry about as '15/16 year olds are just worried about getting the question right, not about the rights & wrongs of bf'ing'.

I think I'm more bothered by this than by the exam board. I've known my friend/colleague for several years, & she always seemed reasonably un-thick...

"Can you give any examples, Chil? I've never seen or heard anything of the sort so would be interested if you can show me different."

You may not have seen or heard anything but I've certainly experienced some very unhelpful & judgemental comments personally as someone who formula fed their baby. Midwives, HV, acquaintances. At one kid's birthday party I had to endure a whole twenty minutes of haranguing on why Nestle should be boycotted. I also know one poor mother who couldn't BF but who was so pressurised by her NCT group to 'not give in' that she let her baby become malnourished and unwell.

The 'bad PR' is not the stuff on the website but how the black/white message is being translated to the grass roots

In defence of Science teachers, may I say that I am one, and I think the question is shit.

oh lord what a bore. i ff and boycott nestle, it's not an anti-formula stance, it's an anti-knowingly-killing-babies-while-bankrupting-their-parents stance.

and was it people from her social nct coffee group, or the nct bfing counsellor who encouraged the person you know whose child became ill? do you actually know the person to have checked these distinctions?

Totally, Aitch....the Nestle and the formula marketing thing has nothing to do with 'breast v formula'. If someone at a birthday party bores people with their views on this, then you might feel irritated, but this is a separate issue from whether mothers are 'pressured' to breastfeed.

I find it odd that someone would allow friends from a social group to persuade her to do anything against her better judgement, to the extent her baby became ill.

This would not be an NCT stance, by the way. Thousands of women take part in social groups connected with NCT. They have a diverse range of opinions, behaviours and outlooks. Please don't blame NCT for mothers allowing their babies to become ill

that is so not on.

I'd love to see the list of people this paper passed through enroute to being published.