Save the Children's new report on marketing practices of formula-milk companies: what do you think?

[RowanMumsnet]

As some of you may have seen from press coverage over the weekend and this morning, Save the Children is today launching a report into the marketing practices of formula milk manufacturers.

The report focuses specifically on marketing in developing countries - where a lack of good sanitation and public health awareness can make formula-feeding precarious - and on the importance of colostrum to a baby's long-term health. You can read more about the campaign and see the petition here.

We've been asked to get behind this campaign - and as ever, in these situations, we need to know what you think!

Is this something MNers would like us to support? As many of you will know, we have long refused advertising from Nestle and its majority-owned subsidiaries. Save the Children's report is also critical of Danone, the second-largest formula manufacturer.

We'd be really interested to hear your views.

I support this campaign

That has to be the most frustrating discussion I've ever seen on TV Clouds !

Absolutely made my blood boil.

Are we completely incapable of looking beyond our own narrow world in the UK, even for a moment, and even when the stakes are so tragically high ?

Shag half your list has been disputed,had research further down the line with different outcomes,had spurious research ie not that reliable,are very small numbers anyway etc,etc

The fact is using formula in this country is not even comparable to using formula in third world countries and needs a different approach.

Oh and re circumstances women differ from country to country,we're not exactly the same nor should we be,we don't need to be- we have a safe alternative to breast feeding.Mothers in third world countries don't.

This is not about bullying mums who formula fed. For goodness sakes. This is about protecting babies. The fact is breast milk is better for babies when it is an option. We are being convinced here in where we have access to the internet that it isn't - all you have to do is look at the breastfeeding rates for that. Breastfeeding support is dropping, breastfeeding is now the rarity, not the norm. If that is here, where we have endless supplies of information, access points to get opinions, and can be somewhat assured that Nestle aren't blackmailing our medical staff, and yet we still are undermined as capable at every single turn, how on earth can we expect people who do not have any of this to be able to breastfeed?

Formula is not sterile. The water is not clean. They cannot sterelise bottles. That has ''illness and death'' written all over it.

And yes, I do think the labeling in Europe needs to change as well. Not breastfeeding increases the risks of various illnesses both for mother and baby. This facts are skirted over for fear of offending those who chose to formula feed - and because these bloody companies have so much power, no one wants to believe that they are not nice. Well, they're not. They're really really not.

We've been well and truely screwed by these companies haven't we? Formula is not a good choice anywhere unless you cannot breastfeed, express or recieve donated human milk.

The 'its alright for us but not for them ' attitude is disturbing. Yes, lack of resources to buy the correct amount of formula, the fuel to heat it to the correct temperature does make formula more dangerous. But us treating formula like some desirable choice and status symbol of wealth does tremendous damage in the majority world, where articial milks become something to aspire to.

I don't know about you, but I reckon the gains to maternal and infant health of breastfeeding are worth trying to curtail the unethical activities of these companies. We're sold it as a liberating choice, but its just the patriarchy trying to make a profit out of our insecurities at the expense of our health and our babies health.

Why is formula based on cow's milk or soya? Not because its the ideal substitute for human milk, but because its cheap.

I support the campaign.

I support the campaign because preparing formula milk safely in developing countries is difficult compared to the West and the way formula milk is marketed is appalling. Also the qualities of breast milk and the benefits for the mother are very poorly understood - even in the UK - as many have already pointed out. I don't support vilifying mothers who choose to formula feed, especially when they are fortunate enough to live in cultures where ff can be achieved with appropriate hygiene and accuracy. I read WhatALark's comment and ff being seen as 'an improvement on nature' and have also experienced talking to people who believe this in SE Asia and other parts of the world. This is what we believed in the West for some time, and there are plenty who still believe it here.

I was told by a scornful young mum at my children's school that I am old fashioned because ff is 'more modern'. This attitude is shifting here but so often people are excited by anything that seems new and modern and then reassess the early enthusiasm for it as more information becomes common knowledge. Just watching the well-researched 'Call the Midwife' is fascinating because of changing attitudes. I think the cynicism of the Formula companies who are well aware of up to date research is shocking and should be strongly challenged - but also feel it's important not to patronise (or matronise?!) women in developing societies who refuse to believe that breastfeeding is better when formula is a new, modern, scientific advance. It's not just because of aggressive marketing - it's also because humans frequently think that new developments are good and make things better. Sometimes they are right and sometimes very wrong (e.g. thalidomide). So although the Formula companies play on this, it's not the whole story.

By the way I am a mother who mix fed my first 3 children and am still exclusively bf my 14 month old 4th child - sometimes it's easier to bf than others and I have no bias if the formula can be prepared safely. I also think childhood diet/exercise and general lifestyle has a much bigger bearing on future health than bf vs ff and to make a direct causal link is impossible when so many other factors come into play. My concern is the immediate health risks of poorly prepared formula, not the long term health impact which is much harder to ascribe solely to what kind of milk a baby has during infancy.

You'd think people would stop and think "babies are dying here" wouldn't you ?

But seems profits are more important.

Such a very sad world we live in

Though, as always, some signs of hope ...

(like what has been achieved recently with encouraging breastfeeding in Ghana and Sri Lanka)

Sirboob the facts aren't skirted over,the fact is any risks are low in this country.With smoking risks are high and easily attributed to the cause which is why we have rigorous controls.Blowing ffing risks out of all proportion in this country won't help mothers in third world.

Sooooo how exactly do warnings written in a foreign language help women who often can't even read in their own language?

It's not blowing them out of proportion. There are risks for formula feeding. That's a fact.

And the more we encourage formula feeding, and say "Oh but it's fine for us", the more these bastards will say "See, they don't really care...".

The labeling needs to be addressed, and the companies needs more moderation, because right now they are managing to get around it.

Would recommend anyone doubting the need for this reads The Politics Of Breastfeeding.

Look, everyone agrees breast is best and formula companies are evil.

I wish the people supporting the campaign would explain why they think this specific proposal will do anything to advance our agreed-upon aims.

Remember the petition is calling for this specifically:

"We?re asking you to dedicate a third of all your Breast Milk Substitute packaging to a label warning that formula is inferior to breast milk and dangerous when used inappropriately."

My questions are:

1. How realistic is it that formula companies will comply with this request?

1. Even if they did so, would it have any real impact on the use of formula, especially in developing countries?

Can the people who support the campaign take a shot at these questions?

Because I personally think the answers are 'not at all' and 'not very much', and that's why I don't think we should devote scarce resources to this specific proposal.

But there are other proposals included in the campaign dreaming - it's not only the issue of labeling and warnings. I think there are proposals regarding the relationship between the formula companies and health workers in developing countries for example ?

My feeling was that I was very happy to support the campaign as a whole.

Something has to be done !

(Though I do understand people saying that ideally labels should be different for different countries and circumstances. The WHO code already says this from what I've learnt here)

Certainly not disputing there are risks but they are small if it is prepared correctly and you enable your dc to follow a healthy lifestyle.There are plenty of other weightier parenting choices in this country.

Anyhow we aren't focusing on mothers in this country soooooo exactly how will this help third world mothers?

Maybe Juggling, but that's the only specific measure mentioned in the actual petition.

I think it's okay to support a general aim without supporting every proposed tactic.

I agree with a dreaming and also would like to know the wording as given the lack of breast feeding support in this country women and babies could be put at risk here if the wording isn't right.Given that both types of country have completely different needs in the wording I think it could be negative for both.

Excellent case of one size does not fit all.

I think what would be handy for any mum to know is the true cost of FF vs BF.

I had no idea that by stopping BF at 8 months, and switching to FF full time would cost me nearly £100 in just one month (LO was just starting on full-time solids, so would often reject food in favour of milk). Any way you can stick that on a label on the formula box? 'Breast-feeding is free - full time formula feeding will cost you X amount per week - wouldn't you rather put that money towards something else?'.

And the companies should not be allowed to give out free samples. EVER. I think this plays a big part in BF 'failing' a lot of the time.

My guess at answers to your questions.

1. Not very, especially when only two of the companies that produce formula are bing asked to comply. That's why I think the campaign doesn't go anywhere near far enough. If it was target at all formula companies, then there is more change of one taking it on, and if that gave them a better reputation, then others would be more likely to follow. But as long as only two of the formula manufacturers are being asked to do this, it's highly unlikely that they are going to make their packaging look less attractive while others aren't even being asked to do the same.

2. It has the potential to make a difference, yes. Even if people can't read the words on a warning, if the product has a bold black and white warning on it, that can be recognised even by someone illiterate as a warning, it will still send a message that there is something to be careful of. Which may then lead to mothers questioning their choice, and ultimately choosing against it.

I think that if it were to happen in western countries, not only could it lead to fewer babies being given formula that has been made up incorrectly, it could lead to mothers choosing not to use it, or to delay using it. Then, if formula is widely seen as nothing other than a substitute for when breastfeeding fails, mothers in the developing world will have less reason to believe that western, more affluent mothers actively choose formula over breast, which would then help them understand that formula is not a first choice for any baby.

Visualise I had twins and didn't spend that much. Danger of mums watering it down if you did that and to be honest mums don't switch because it comes in a pretty tin they are happy to pay for.Mums switch in this country for very good reasons and after a lot of thought.The cost is an unpleasant addition.

dreaming

I won't to stop needless poor health in women and children, but I don't believe that the right approach is to put warnings on FF.

I dislike the presumption that women in the developed world understand and can have a choice but we can infantalise women in the developing world and make decisions for them.

I do not understand why people would rather exercise their anger at baby milk corporations than on the governments that refuse to provide clean water for everyone.

Child-rearing is culturally specific and all health information is interpreted. Therefore global strategies will fail.

Women in all countries choose BF or FF for a variety of reasons, and more effort should be made to ensure that whatever choice they make, they are fully supported and can feed their babies safely.

So I do not support this campaign.

Visualise, how on earth did you spend that much? Even when we used only pre-made boxes and DS fed six times a day, we never spent more than £50 month.

Clouds -- thank you for answering my questions. I guess I disagree on the effectiveness bit. Any concerns raised by the label would likely be counteracted by the midwives pushing the product, I think.

I just looked at the petition wording again and the first thing asked of the companies is urging them to abide by the WHO code. So, that already includes many proposals that could make a massive difference to the situation in developing countries. Then it asks them to go further by devoting more space on their packaging to include a warning that formula is inferior to breast-feeding and can be dangerous when used incorrectly.
I do agree that this is information all mothers should have to inform their decision making. However I think it is right to recognise that the dangers of formula feeding in developing countries can be orders of magnitude higher, and very sadly not uncommonly fatal to babies in those situations.
Was surprised to see "Save the Children" not mention problems with clean water and sanitary conditions more in the campaign, but I guess they rightly wanted to keep the focus on the immoral marketing of substitute milk to vulnerable women by, yes, these evil companies.

How can you put a message on that a mother can't read.Illiteracy is like having black spiders crawling across a page.What are you going to put on a third of a tin that will tell one mother the contents could quite likely kill their baby whilst the other mother that it's safe if prepared correctly with equipment the other set of mothers has never clapped eyes on.

If you have decided to switch in this country it is because for whatever reason breastfeeding isn't working for you or your babies.Most mothers know the message,have a brain and want within reason what is best overall for their child.They weigh it all up,writing after you have made that choice won't change it but more support might.

creamteas, I totally agree with you

Any concerns raised by the label would likely be counteracted by the midwives pushing the product, I think.

I agree, and labelling alone will do very little if it isn't done in conjunction with a massive change to marketing practices as well as in the support given by healthcare workers.