Well, I will try to keep it little, anyway. There’s sooooo much to say on the matter that it’ll be hard, though.
Apparently Aptamil brand artificial baby milk (I do not use the term ‘formula’ because that is a pseudo-scientific nonsense word invented by doctors and milk makers in the early 20th century to make their product seem more sciency and appealing) in the UK is now advertising itself as ‘containing immunofortis’. Which, I’m sure I don’t need to point out, is yet more pseudo-scientific mumbo-jumbo. Look how little has changed! The babymilk makers are still doing their utmost to wow us with their jargon, while they still continue to aggressively push a product that very, very few babies actually need.
Please, don’t get me started on the recent spate of television adverts in the UK for these products. It is illegal under the International Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes (the Code) to market breastmilk substitutes to mothers directly. The babymilk companies get around this in the UK by advertising ‘follow-on milks’ which are intended for use after 6 months. They state ‘not intended as a breastmilk substitute’. Really? So are they suggesting that you should be feeding your child breastmilk and artificial milk, and no solid food? Because the WHO guidelines advise exclusive BFing up to 6 months, and then the introduction of complementary foods, and continued BFing for AT LEAST TWO YEARS. So if follow-on milks aren’t replacing breastmilk, I guess it’s the solids? Ahem.
And naturally all these ads are choc-full of pseudo-science and statements which demonstrably undermine continued breastfeeding. Nevermind that the children in these ads usually appear to be under 6 months old, so the ads really are advertising at parents of younger babies…
Then there’s the continued barrage of advertising aimed at healthcare practitioners. This is also illegal under the Code, but who cares? Certainly not the babymilk makers. I have recently heard a midwife say that she isn’t swayed by advertising. So why, pray tell, do the companies spend gajillions of pounds on it? They have a legal obligation to defend their stockholders’ money – trust me, they don’t waste it. They spend huge amounts on advertising to HCPs because IT WORKS. When you go to see the midwife and she calculates your due date using a little wheel that says ‘Aptamil’ that plants a seed in your mind that, should you end up feeding your baby artificially, that’s the brand to choose. And she looks at that logo a hundred times a day. So when you go and ask her what brand to use, are you really going to tell me that having that logo burned into her retina won’t make her think of it first? Well, the babymilk makers are banking on the fact that it will, and they’re laughing, all the way to the… bank.
So, to sum up the rant for the evening:
all advertising of artificial babymilk, whether to parents directly via TV adverts for ‘follow-on milk’, through branded freebies in hospital packs (illegal, but rampant), branded ‘parenting clubs’, etc etc, and to HCPs via free pens, due date calculators, and sponsored conferences in the Bahamas (I will leave ranting about babymilk companies sponsoring scientific research for another post), is wrong.
The manufacturers don’t make this stuff to fill a pre-existing demand, they create the demand and then push their products on an unsuspecting public, all through the glories of advertising.
Tuff Titties 