Did anyone catch David Miliband on the News at 10 advertising Aptamil?

[foxytoxin]

I guess he like the current PM doesn't understand about the WHO Code and UK Law restricting the promotion of formula but Jeez, I expect the news editors at the Beeb to have some awareness.

In case you want to view it and complain about it, here is the link. Fast forward to 9.30 mins.

As unreasonable as it may sound to some the point of this thread is not to encourage anyone to breast feed.
It is to point out that UK law and the Beeb's code of practice have been broken and the been and the labour party ought to know that this is not on. This is about other issues not about turning people on, or off, breastfeeding.

Link coming up later to complain to the labour party that their leader is not supposed to be endorsing any product so that he can be seen as a warm and fuzzy dad. The cynical me is wondering if this is a stroke of competitive parenting between party leaders.

Tongue in cheek btw

here is how to tell Labour how you feel about Aptamiliband.

Aptamilibrand ??

Dundrumlin , your hat is perfectly safe :)

It is not 'about' some mother or other deciding to stop bf in order to emulate EM.

It really isn't.

But think about it. If you were the CEO of the manufacturers who made Aptamil, would you be delighted to have seen the clip? Yes....surely. Because it's free publicity and publicity of the sort money could never buy.

Aptamil is the middle class brand. Its marketing is pitched at the people who would usually breastfeed. I am serious about this - formula brands are virtually identical to one another (though different types of formula are not the same), so differentiation has be in branding/marketing/packaging.

Ed Miliband's family is the sort of family who breastfeeds and the fact his partner has chosen Aptamil to supplement/use wholly is not a surprise at all.

That little clip on the news is right in line with Aptamil's marketing strategy so they will be more than pleased with it.

Does this matter? Yes, because we have laws in the UK to protect breastfed and formula fed babies from unethical marketing. Formula is not a consumer product like floor cleaner or spuds. It is the sole diet of a small human being - if he's not breastfed, or not wholly breastfed, he has to have infant formula. Decisions on which brand to use, or to use it at all, should be made with information that's unbiased, evidence-based and not swayed by marketing.

The UK law is not strong, and formula is marketed unethically every day - EM and the BBC have added to this.

There is massive ignorance about formula in the UK - the information about the difference between whey/casein dominant, whether additional LCPUFAs matter, why small babies should not have follow-on, safe preparation, is totally drowned out in the 'noise' of marketing, direct to mothers and direct to HCPs who deal with mothers.

The news clip is one tiny drop in this bucket - by itself it will have zero effect on any one individual baby or mother. But it still should not have happened.

He was hardly advertising. He was merely pointing out what he uses for his baby. No fan of his either.

does ayone believe product placement doesn't work as advertising?

if so, many companies are wassting their money on it

No, ItalianLady - this was not overt advertising.

It was, however, de facto marketing of a very powerful sort - the sort manufacturers really like to have, and all the better 'cos it came free.

I think it was advertising as the definition of such is, 'to bring attention to a product' (oxford English dictionary).

Was he intentionally trying to be a spokesman for Apatmil? Probably not, but intention isn't really relevant. Fact of the matter is that he did advertise a product that is not allowed to be advertised. And broadcast on a channel that is not supposed to advertise.

The thing that concerns me her is not how the Milibands chose to feed their baby,that is their choice.
However he is obviously unaware of the WHO code regarding marketing of formula milk, and oblivious to the efforts his own party made while in power to promote breastfeeding in an attempt to improve the health of our nation.
I actually think it's quite scary.These are the people who want to be in charge of our country??

If anything the makers of Aptamil should be doing a picard right now having that idiot say he uses your product is going to put people off buying it.

I'm curious about this milk brand class thing?
I use Hipp organic and I'm working/underclass class, if I can't find it I get SMA, I've got the little cartons of Aptamil before as well when needs be.

I base my buying of milk on this
Hipp Organic = really nice and organic.
Aptamil = pretty nice.
SMA good but not as sweet as the others.
Cow and Gate = bloody awful.

I was not aware there was some stupid class crap to do with baby milk?.

Same thing goes for baby food, buy stuff based on taste.

Ryoko, the packaging of products says different things to different people and any one selling anything will package for its target audience. They all do it. Think about the Value and Premium packaging of the supermarket stuff. Then they charge different prices for the store brands. It has nothing to do with taste, nutritional content etc.

Aptamil and Cow and Gate is produced by the same company, probably produced in the same facility. There is nothing nutritionally different (or superior) in either product or any of the other formulas for that matter. The 'choice' between the two is largely based on target market appeal so the packaging is different, the promotional materials different, the price is different.

Crudely put, Aptamil is for the leafy suburbs and Cow and Gate for the council estates.

It is stupid class crap, you're right!

But, hey, I don't make the rules!

Vast majority of people don't do a taste test on milks, I can tell you. In any case, the water will affect the taste too and that's different everywhere. Cartons taste different from powdered ('cos they're UHT).

Aptamil is more expensive - this contributes to its differentiation.

Look at the packaging. Which looks more 'designer', Aptamil or Cow&Gate?

the supermarket analogy btw is not the best one as the content of formula is more tightly regulated than what can go into ready meals or sausages, for example. but it works the same way.

foxy - you're right, it's not the same as 'Value' sausages compared with 'Mrs Miggin's homecured pork and apple organic herby delicious sausages' as the ingredients in 'Value' and 'Mrs Miggins's' are usually very different.

But the packaging has to signify to the customer, very quickly, that Brand A is for them, and Brand B is for someone else. People don't always know they're being 'worked on' in this way, and obviously the branding doesn't get a 100 per cent hit rate!

But it works - and it's part of a whole marketing strategy. If I'd had to guess which formula Baby Miliband was on, I'd have guessed Aptamil, no hesitation.

"Formula is not a consumer product like floor cleaner or spuds. It is the sole diet of a small human being - if he's not breastfed, or not wholly breastfed, he has to have infant formula. Decisions on which brand to use, or to use it at all, should be made with information that's unbiased, evidence-based and not swayed by marketing."

Since formula brands are "virtually identical to each other", and if I understand correctly, all meet minimum legal nutritional standards, does it particularly matter which one a parent chooses?

In an earlier post, you say that there aren't any independent evidence-based comparisons of brand A with brand B, so I'm not sure how parental decisions could be made using such information?

It's strange I know very few Aptamil users here in NI, we are all SMA Gold or Cow and Gate and I think we have the highest use of formula feeding in UK. I had heard of Aptamil but only vaguely until I started using MN. Obviously the hospital I had dds in gave either SMA gold or Cow & Gate so that's why I went with SMA.

Aptamil and Cow and Gate are very different I can assure you, Cow and Gate is the worst it's got a strange iron/slightly fishy like taste none of the other milks have both in dry and carton/bottle where as Aptamil is up there with Hipp but not as good it's more creamy and less sweet.

You telling me you don't try everything you give your baby? I try everything, and sometimes apologise and go and add something to improve something or just chuck it and get something else, if he is refusing to eat it there is normally a good reason that can be rectified one way or another, if I think it's horrible why should I expect him to put up with it.

Hipp organic is all so really good in coffee.

" I'm not sure how parental decisions could be made using such information?"

Well, exactly. It's mainly by marketing/advertising.

Emma - read my post again. I said "though different types of formula are not the same". People do not know this, on the whole. They don't know there is a difference between whey and casein dominant (all brands have a whey dominant formulation and a casein dominant formulation); they don't know why follow on is only suitable for babies over 6 mths; other stuff people simply do not know...the info on the packaging does not really tell them much either.

Yes, brands are very similar. Types of formula are not. Parental decisions should be made with this knowledge.

Read the packaging on Aptamil and Cow&Gate, Ryoko - the nutritional panel. Spot the difference. There is very little.

I don't know why one would have a different taste from the other - maybe the packaging flavours it? Or maybe the source of LCPUFAs is fish in one and not in the other?

Funny really - you all get your knickers in a twist if someone doesn't want to see a bf'ing woman in public - yet someone mentions the word Aptamil and you're up in arms. Ironic, non?

Personally as someone who doesn't wish to be associated with the Labour party this news snippet has me convinced never to buy Aptamil!

AlpinePony - are you saying that it is somehow inconsistent to

• want to support a bf mother and baby and assert she has a right not to be harrassed and criticised for bf outside her home

• also want to ensure ethical marketing of formula milk

Why is it 'ironic' to have both those views?

sorry, I wasn't very clear. what I mean is, if formula brands are essentially identical,
why does it matter which you choose? Apart from the cost, of course. Surely it only matters if there are important differences between them.

And if no-one's actually done any independent comparisons, how can you say they're identical in the first place?

I don't have an agenda here, it's just the only element of people's issue with formula companies that I've never really understood.

ah, cross post tiktok - sorry, I am slow. No, I understood the distinction between brands and types, but I thought people on this thread were mostly concerned about formula brands marketing themselves as better than other formula brands, rather than the differences between formula types.

No, I didn't see Ed Miliband with formula and if I had, I wouldn't give a toss.

Emma - it's correct to say the formulations are virtually identical, because they have to abide by internationally-agreed and (in the UK's case) statutory parameters for each ingredient. The contents on each brand have to be listed on the package, and it is clear for standard formulas that there is very little difference (not the case with 'speciality' formulas).