Baby milk firms to drop nutrition claims

[Nip]

here

I guess those who bf this is a good thing, but i didnt bf and this now makes me feel like cack!

I meant it in the sense of "it was the best phrase I could think of on four hours sleep"

In that case it was an accurate and succinct way of putting your point across Hunker.

I agree with this bit "Claims such as 'Closer than ever to breast milk' and 'helps growth and the immune system' have been banned. " because it's misleading. Whilst they might be closer they're not close by a long shot and that's misleading.

But infant formula is a valid alternative to breastfeeding. It's not an equivalent replacement, it's not better but it is an adequate alternative. Just like having a kitkat is a valid alternative snack to having a banana and Mumsnetting is a valid alternative activity to singing Row Row the Boat with your 13 month old baby. It's not as good but it's still an alternative.

First of all sorry, when i started this thread i wasnt feeling to great - hence why there is a delay in me replying after a short visit to the dr's! (but thats a totally different thread! )

I totally agree with you about the ridiculous types of formulas you can buy - the follow on etc etc - my DS is 11 mo's and i was discussing with my DH that at 12mo's we could give him cows milk to which DH said "Oh no, its says on the formula tin he can have this until he's 2!" - I took me a while to explain!

Thanks Everyone!

thikn your DH has proved the point really !!

glad you are ok ! x

Message withdrawn

Can I ask what the downer is on Follow On Milk? I bf my dd3 for a year, when she more or lkess self-weaned I replkced the BM with this as I believed it be of gretaer nutritional benefit than plain cows milk...is this proven not to be the case?

If she's eating a healthy balanced diet, milk is of much less nutritional importance after 12mo, which is why it's ok to switch to cows'.

If you all feel really strongly about making changes to the system so that mothers are more supported to start bf and continue bf, then please log onto the Breastfeeding Manifesto Site and you can make a real difference.

(shameless plug!)

trained bfc's are part of the solution to crappy bf rates, but to make a real difference there needs to be a huge change in the prevailing culture, and getting rid of this kind of misleading marketing is a good step imo.

Great - one more reason to continue beating myself up about failing to breastfeed.

that growing up milk and follow on milk makes me cross, actually. what a shocking bloody outrageous rip off.

Message withdrawn

Thanks for the reply - bt can anyone tell me if the follow on milk is better for them than cows milk or if the added vits etc are a lie?

It does have added vits etc, the ingredients listings are true.
Point is she should be getting all necessary vits from fruit, veg etc in her diet.

Thank you, she does eat a good diet, but I personally don't mind paying more for milk that has added vits, as cows milk is low in Vit D apparently. She still loves her milk so I'll probably keep her on it until she's 2 at least.

Our main source of vitamin D is through our skin on exposure to the sun though...

It's your call, but out of interest I'd compare the cost of a year of powdered milk to the cost of cows' milk + whatever vitamin supplements you think she needs.

So the milk isn't crap..it's just expensive is that it?

absolutely - expensive and unneccesary, not harmful.
Hence the "shocking bloody outrageous rip off" etc comments below.

Couldn't you just give your dd vitamin drops, if that is your concern?

Many people here (me included) are against follow-on milks and the like because their primary purpose is to allow formula companies a way in which to circumvent the law regarding infant formula. Basically, it is illegal to advertise or promote infant formula for babies younger than 6 months. So SMA, Farleys and the like dreamed up new products for older babies to improve brand awareness and advertise their "base" products by association.

Of course, advertising their products for babies up to 2 years (when most medical professionals advise that ordinary cows milk may be used from 12 months) is also a good way of increasing their sales.

Okay, I kind of get your point. BUT...if it's a choice of having to give cows milk and vit drops ( which the HV advised) or follow on milk I don't see the problem witht he follow on milk...

Perhaps I am missing something...I'm not being deliberately thick, but what's the problem with the cost of it?
Use it if you want to, don't use it if you think it's expensive and a rip off. It's a choice thing.

Whether or not these (follow-on etc) milks are crap...

Well, would you rather give your child organic, pasteurised milk? Or would you prefer it to be dried, highly processed, given lots of additives (including vitamins, but also preservatives etc) and then reconstituted?

organic cows milk is naturally higher in omega three and vitamins generally than non organic isn't it..i think..that is why we have it anyway..it also tastes much better formula is horrible

Why does she need the vitamin drops? What does the HV think she's short of that she can't get from her diet? (eg is she non-dairy, vegan, gluten intolerant etc?)

I do agree it's the parents' choice between cows' or powdered milk, but it should be a properly informed one.