Campaign to permenantly reduce the cost of formula

[Tasha]

I think the problem is the higher the costs get the more likely people are to one or two less scoops in every bottle to try and spread the tin more. Not everyone obviously but some will.

As for feeding parents in hospital, when Morgan had menigitis at six weeks old they either provided formula if baby was FF or a meal for mum if baby was BF, it was about making sure mum had eaten enough to give baby enough milk so they could get better easier. One mum I know supply dwindled when her LO was in hospital, but she ate a banana in two days, and she was there for a few weeks.

 

[midori1999]

i dont think formula milk is expensive, so many times i have read people grumbling about the cost and it baffles me why they even have a child as the costs only go up as they get older, surely these are things we should all be aware of before deciding to have a child? i wish i could feed my 3 for less than a tenner a week each lol

The point is, it needn't be so expensive. Advertising by formula companies accounts for a large proportion of the cost of formula milks, so if they cut out advertising it would cut the cost. There's no benefit to parents from advertising, only the companies who want to maximise profits and it pushes the cost up for parents needlessly.

 

[honeybee2]

It doesn't make sense imo.

You get special formula on prescription if your baby is lactose intollerant or whatever.
Some babies don't latch sufficiently enough and some ladies physically cannot BF- and yet they have to pay.

How is it fair?

I agree to a price drop- or at least more consideration for women for a prescription who tried but for some reason or another just can't BF. The price of FF its taking advantage of these women imo.

But then, we get child benefit.

I know some women choose to FF without considering BF- in that case they should pay.

 

[Tasha]

You get special formula on prescription if your baby is lactose intollerant or whatever.
Some babies don't latch sufficiently enough and some ladies physically cannot BF- and yet they have to pay.

I think because special formula is so much more expensive, that they worry people will just use normal formula when their little one needs the special formula. The consequences of that could be huge, my daughter would most likely of died without her special formula.

And also how do you define who gets it free? How long is considered a long enough try for the LO to latch?

 

[Missy86]

Yeah I think you can pay £20 a tin for the special formula, normal is only £9.00

 

[Tasha]

Also that would cost the NHS a fortune, for everyone who tries but it doesnt work for them to get it for free. Then there would also be the people who pretended to try in order to get it free.

 

[suzib76]

i dont think formula milk is expensive, so many times i have read people grumbling about the cost and it baffles me why they even have a child as the costs only go up as they get older, surely these are things we should all be aware of before deciding to have a child? i wish i could feed my 3 for less than a tenner a week each lol

The point is, it needn't be so expensive. Advertising by formula companies accounts for a large proportion of the cost of formula milks, so if they cut out advertising it would cut the cost. There's no benefit to parents from advertising, only the companies who want to maximise profits and it pushes the cost up for parents needlessly.

Arguably the same could be said for many things our kids need though. nappies, wipes, clothing, food and so on


I would understand if it was massively expensive and a blanket ban on formula advertising introduced, however the reality the effects of not advertising would be minimal. could even have the opposite affect and drive the cost up

 

[midori1999]

i dont think formula milk is expensive, so many times i have read people grumbling about the cost and it baffles me why they even have a child as the costs only go up as they get older, surely these are things we should all be aware of before deciding to have a child? i wish i could feed my 3 for less than a tenner a week each lol

The point is, it needn't be so expensive. Advertising by formula companies accounts for a large proportion of the cost of formula milks, so if they cut out advertising it would cut the cost. There's no benefit to parents from advertising, only the companies who want to maximise profits and it pushes the cost up for parents needlessly.

Arguably the same could be said for many things our kids need though. nappies, wipes, clothing, food and so on


I would understand if it was massively expensive and a blanket ban on formula advertising introduced, however the reality the effects of not advertising would be minimal. could even have the opposite affect and drive the cost up

However, formula is the sole source of nutrition for many infants, for which there is a free alternative that formula companies undermine (for example, their 'breastfeeding helplines', which are actually a form of advertising and which they often give crap advice out on that undermines breastfeeding. Not great for women who want to breastfeed but are struggling).

The effects of not advertising would be huge, formula companies spend a fortune on it each year. Plus, in countries where no advetising of formula is allowed, (although it is freely available in the shops) breastfeeding rates at uptake are very high.

 

[suzib76]

i dont think formula milk is expensive, so many times i have read people grumbling about the cost and it baffles me why they even have a child as the costs only go up as they get older, surely these are things we should all be aware of before deciding to have a child? i wish i could feed my 3 for less than a tenner a week each lol

The point is, it needn't be so expensive. Advertising by formula companies accounts for a large proportion of the cost of formula milks, so if they cut out advertising it would cut the cost. There's no benefit to parents from advertising, only the companies who want to maximise profits and it pushes the cost up for parents needlessly.

Arguably the same could be said for many things our kids need though. nappies, wipes, clothing, food and so on


I would understand if it was massively expensive and a blanket ban on formula advertising introduced, however the reality the effects of not advertising would be minimal. could even have the opposite affect and drive the cost up

However, formula is the sole source of nutrition for many infants, for which there is a free alternative that formula companies undermine (for example, their 'breastfeeding helplines', which are actually a form of advertising and which they often give crap advice out on that undermines breastfeeding. Not great for women who want to breastfeed but are struggling).

The effects of not advertising would be huge, formula companies spend a fortune on it each year. Plus, in countries where no advetising of formula is allowed, (although it is freely available in the shops) breastfeeding rates at uptake are very high.

so is the op really about lowering the cost of formula?

or is it about increasing breastfeeding rates?

seems to have taken quite a turn

 

[Tasha]

Not at all suzi, the campaign has always been about reducing costs AND increasing BF rates because the public wouldnt be fed lies through the advertising. Advertising, costs and BF rates are all very much intwined

 

[SnuggleMum]

However, formula is the sole source of nutrition for many infants, for which there is a free alternative that formula companies undermine (for example, their 'breastfeeding helplines', which are actually a form of advertising and which they often give crap advice out on that undermines breastfeeding. Not great for women who want to breastfeed but are struggling).

The effects of not advertising would be huge, formula companies spend a fortune on it each year. Plus, in countries where no advetising of formula is allowed, (although it is freely available in the shops) breastfeeding rates at uptake are very high.

so is the op really about lowering the cost of formula?

or is it about increasing breastfeeding rates?

seems to have taken quite a turn

There is absolutely no benefit to anyone (apart from the formula companies) in advertising formula.

Research suggests that most women who stop breastfeeding, stop breastfeeding before they wanted to. Formula advertising and naughty tactics contribute to this greatly. It isn't about making women breastfeed, it is about enabling women to make a genuinely free choice, free from coercion, persuasion or malicious 'advice'.

 

[suzib76]

However, formula is the sole source of nutrition for many infants, for which there is a free alternative that formula companies undermine (for example, their 'breastfeeding helplines', which are actually a form of advertising and which they often give crap advice out on that undermines breastfeeding. Not great for women who want to breastfeed but are struggling).

The effects of not advertising would be huge, formula companies spend a fortune on it each year. Plus, in countries where no advetising of formula is allowed, (although it is freely available in the shops) breastfeeding rates at uptake are very high.

so is the op really about lowering the cost of formula?

or is it about increasing breastfeeding rates?

seems to have taken quite a turn

There is absolutely no benefit to anyone (apart from the formula companies) in advertising formula.

Research suggests that most women who stop breastfeeding, stop breastfeeding before they wanted to. Formula advertising and naughty tactics contribute to this greatly. It isn't about making women breastfeed, it is about enabling women to make a genuinely free choice, free from coercion, persuasion or malicious 'advice'.

i responded to the op which was about removing advertising in order to make formula milk cheaper, it had nothing to do with free choice initially. thats a whole different thread entirely

banning advertising of formula milk would be more detrimental than beneficial.

 

[suzib76]

Not at all suzi, the campaign has always been about reducing costs AND increasing BF rates because the public wouldnt be fed lies through the advertising. Advertising, costs and BF rates are all very much intwined

my apologies then

i read, and answered the question in the op which asked about reducing the cost by removing advertising

i understand they are connected, but i just answered the simple question, not the big picture

 

[Tasha]

i responded to the op which was about removing advertising in order to make formula milk cheaper, it had nothing to do with free choice initially. thats a whole different thread entirely

banning advertising of formula milk would be more detrimental than beneficial.

How so? Genuinely interest btw, not a dig or anything.

 

[suzib76]

i responded to the op which was about removing advertising in order to make formula milk cheaper, it had nothing to do with free choice initially. thats a whole different thread entirely

banning advertising of formula milk would be more detrimental than beneficial.

How so? Genuinely interest btw, not a dig or anything.

cross posted i guess

 

[SnuggleMum]

I'm interested in why you think banning advertising of formula would have a detrimental effect.

 

[suzib76]

I'm interested in why you think banning advertising of formula would have a detrimental effect.

i ment cost wise, just to clarify that.

its basic marketing, the less they sell the more production costs will rise

 

[midori1999]

i dont think formula milk is expensive, so many times i have read people grumbling about the cost and it baffles me why they even have a child as the costs only go up as they get older, surely these are things we should all be aware of before deciding to have a child? i wish i could feed my 3 for less than a tenner a week each lol

The point is, it needn't be so expensive. Advertising by formula companies accounts for a large proportion of the cost of formula milks, so if they cut out advertising it would cut the cost. There's no benefit to parents from advertising, only the companies who want to maximise profits and it pushes the cost up for parents needlessly.

Arguably the same could be said for many things our kids need though. nappies, wipes, clothing, food and so on


I would understand if it was massively expensive and a blanket ban on formula advertising introduced, however the reality the effects of not advertising would be minimal. could even have the opposite affect and drive the cost up

However, formula is the sole source of nutrition for many infants, for which there is a free alternative that formula companies undermine (for example, their 'breastfeeding helplines', which are actually a form of advertising and which they often give crap advice out on that undermines breastfeeding. Not great for women who want to breastfeed but are struggling).

The effects of not advertising would be huge, formula companies spend a fortune on it each year. Plus, in countries where no advetising of formula is allowed, (although it is freely available in the shops) breastfeeding rates at uptake are very high.

so is the op really about lowering the cost of formula?

or is it about increasing breastfeeding rates?

seems to have taken quite a turn

Not at all suzi, the campaign has always been about reducing costs AND increasing BF rates because the public wouldnt be fed lies through the advertising. Advertising, costs and BF rates are all very much intwined

Thanks Tasha, that is exactly the point.

I'm interested in why you think banning advertising of formula would have a detrimental effect.

i ment cost wise, just to clarify that.

its basic marketing, the less they sell the more production costs will rise

I can see why you would say that. However, the money spent on promotion by formula companies is immense and we know that in countries that have the most promotion and advertising (the USA for example) the prices of formula are highest.