Underhand tactics - formula companies

[leelee]

Bottles , teeths and baby food are the same advertising laws as formula to. Its in the WHO code. https://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/code_english.pdf


Note in this they use the word Artificial feeding to.
THE CODE

In 1981, the World Health Assembly adopted The International Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes, as a tool to protect breastfeeding. The Innocenti Declaration of 1990 calls on all governments to implement the Code by 1995.

Formula marketing targets women. New mothers are given free samples of formula, babies are given bottles in hospitals, coupons or food samples arrive in the mail, or booklets and videotapes are distributed on breastfeeding and weaning. The Code prohibits marketing of these products in these ways. It covers formula, other milk products, cereals, teas and juices, as well as bottles and teats.
The Code has 10 important provisions.

* NO advertising of any of these products to the public
* NO free samples to mothers
* NO promotion of products in health care facilities, including the distribution of free or low-cost supplies
* NO company sales representatives to advise mothers
* NO gifts or personal samples to health workers
* NO words or pictures idealising artificial feeding, or pictures of infants on labels of infant milk containers
* Information to health workers should be scientific and factual
* ALL information on artificial infant feeding, including that on labels, should explain the benefits of breastfeeding and the costs and hazards associated with artificial feeding
* Unsuitable products, such as sweetened condensed milk, should not be promoted for babies
* Manufacturers and distributors should comply with the Code's provisions even if countries have not adopted laws or other measures.

I cant find it on google but I did read that bottle, teets and baby food are all under the code hence why you dont see them advertised .

It doesn't matter where it is mentioned, the point is that a lot of people don't like the 'usage' of the word artificial and people like you keep trying to back up the point and mention it again and again. I had never heard of the word until this thread.

You are just being unhelpful by bringing it up again and again. Have you absolutely zero respect for other people's feelings? Or are you more interested in making a point?

She has made the post to link the Code. The World Health Organisation have chosen the wording, not Dragonfly. I'm pretty sure she has just cut and pasted it from elsewhere.

I'm sure she has cut and pasted it from somewhere - but what is the point of it? To add fuel to the fire and annoy people further??? I had never heard the usage of the term 'artificial' until this thread. Certain people are aware that this term is offensive to others, so are we going to have it mentioned again and again in other threads too???

The point I am trying to make is to have a bit of respect for others on a forum. It is easy to say formula as that is what most of us called it before this thread anyway.

The point is to link the Code that is being discussed within this thread, i.e. Formula Advertising and whether the helpline constitutes a form of advertising.

Yes, but she couldn't resist pointing out at the start that they use the word 'artificial' as well.

 

[Melody74]

You know, as Mums (and parents) we are all under so much pressure to be perfect. It really is beyond ridiculous. If we don't breast feed, don't stay at home to look after the kids, don't give organic food - then we are deemed inferior. Where will it end? We all do the best we can. I'm sure even those Mums that really despise FF as a choice can't say hand on heart that they do everything textbook supposed "perfect". I'm afraid I don't do any of the things that I have just said, but I love my baby girl with all my heart. My decisions (or lack of an option) will remain with me alone, and a doubt anyone who has had to make difficult decisions have been swayed by any kind of advertising. In fact, surely if there was more information widely available we would be able to make better informed choices?
Irrespective, once decisions have been made - is it useful or positive to attach negative words to that option? Inferior, artificial, man made (thought it was nature made for baby cows and modified by man for human consumption??) - they may be words used by the industry, but personally I don't think it helps for them to repeated to try and get either sides point across.
BF will always be the optimum choice, it has to be. But for so many reasons FF has its place too and is a much needed alternative, for which information should be freely available and not have to be hunted down or spoken about it shame or hushed tones for fear of recrimination. I truly applaud BF mums - it is absolutely natures way and it's a shame that not every can do it or can take to it. But that doesn't mean there has to be this cloud of negatively surrounding FF either. It just doesn't make sense that alcohol can be freely advertised, when formula and it's equipment cannot.

 

[Gingerspice]

I don't know why people are getting so het up. You made the choices you did to get to wherever you are now, and those that FF whether by choice or design is still doing the very best thing. It doesn't matter, your baby is getting food and growing nicely. There is no denying though that formula is an alternative and will probably never be as good as BM, so fighting over the term artificial, which may not be an ideal word, it is what formula is.

The original post was asking about whether a formula company is being persuasive I suppose, by giving BF advice which could be phrased in a way to then lead mothers to formula when if they had received better advice and support then maybe they would be able to BF should they have wished to do so. I suppose this is possible, but at least they are giving advice and offering helplines which would allow someone to find out info about when maybe they weren't interested in BF at all and were set on FF. The end of the day, all the babys will grow up which is only possible from the milk given to them - it doesn't matter whether its BM or FF - they will get whatever problems in life dealt to them

 

[leelee]

You know, as Mums (and parents) we are all under so much pressure to be perfect. It really is beyond ridiculous. If we don't breast feed, don't stay at home to look after the kids, don't give organic food - then we are deemed inferior. Where will it end? We all do the best we can. I'm sure even those Mums that really despise FF as a choice can't say hand on heart that they do everything textbook supposed "perfect". I'm afraid I don't do any of the things that I have just said, but I love my baby girl with all my heart. My decisions (or lack of an option) will remain with me alone, and a doubt anyone who has had to make difficult decisions have been swayed by any kind of advertising. In fact, surely if there was more information widely available we would be able to make better informed choices?
Irrespective, once decisions have been made - is it useful or positive to attach negative words to that option? Inferior, artificial, man made (thought it was nature made for baby cows and modified by man for human consumption??) - they may be words used by the industry, but personally I don't think it helps for them to repeated to try and get either sides point across.
BF will always be the optimum choice, it has to be. But for so many reasons FF has its place too and is a much needed alternative, for which information should be freely available and not have to be hunted down or spoken about it shame or hushed tones for fear of recrimination. I truly applaud BF mums - it is absolutely natures way and it's a shame that not every can do it or can take to it. But that doesn't mean there has to be this cloud of negatively surrounding FF either. It just doesn't make sense that alcohol can be freely advertised, when formula and it's equipment cannot.

Well said

I have to say that I have never experienced such attitudes in real life - only online and I am grateful to have such good friends that respect and support my parenting choices, as I do theirs.

If I had a friend that continued to use words that I found offensive over and over again then they wouldn't be my friend anymore.

 

[Faerie]

I don't really care that it is the correct, medical term - the point of the matter is that more than one mother on here has said they find it offensive, so why carry on using it? Can't we all just have a little respect for each other?

 

[ellie]

Can this thread get to 100 pages ??!?

OK, the terms that apparently upset and offend people. I still don't know why they do ... aside from someone saying its a silly term, or its not quite accurate - I still don't understand why so many people seem to find it personally offensive? I'd still like someone to explain what it is that makes it actually offensive, not just silly or inaccurate (genuinely interested). However, no its not a widely used term generally - but no one on here has made it up !!! I don't know why certain people are saying we should ignore that it is out there. If it's so awful ... why are we going on at each other? We didnt invent it! If it's so awful ... why are the medical profession, WHO etc, allowed to get away with using it, as it seems to add to the guilt that FF mothers have? It';s really not helpful to pick on individuals on here and say 'oooh dont use that word we don't like it'. It's there ... and IMO, if mums don't like it, then it just adds to the wider medicalisation and dehumanisation of mothering, and the general 'inferior' view that society and authority has of mothers. Hows about an online petition or something to change it? (to what?)

 

[Wobbles]

Round and round the garden, like a Teddy Bear .... ♪♫ ♪♫ ♪♫ ♪♫

 

[Dragonfly]

Oh ffs I wasnt starting a row I was trying to point out why so many where puzzled to why you never see bottles advertised and yes I seen the word artificial in there, I didn't write it I did copy and paste it. I do not call it artificial myself its just formula to me. But as usual nit pick away and argue.

 

[Jolinar]

No they didn't invent it but they carried on using it when it became clear people didn't like it for wahtever reason it doesn't matter why really does it? Some people got upset and another group instead of modifying their behaviour carried on regardless because they don't respect other peoples feelings, why should they have to justify their feelings?

 

[Missy86]

Round and round the garden, like a Teddy Bear .... ♪♫ ♪♫ ♪♫ ♪♫

Rhys loves that

Round and round the garden like a teddy bear
1 step
2 step
tickle you under there

 

[Dragonfly]

Bottles , teeths and baby food are the same advertising laws as formula to. Its in the WHO code. https://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/code_english.pdf


Note in this they use the word Artificial feeding to.
THE CODE

In 1981, the World Health Assembly adopted The International Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes, as a tool to protect breastfeeding. The Innocenti Declaration of 1990 calls on all governments to implement the Code by 1995.

Formula marketing targets women. New mothers are given free samples of formula, babies are given bottles in hospitals, coupons or food samples arrive in the mail, or booklets and videotapes are distributed on breastfeeding and weaning. The Code prohibits marketing of these products in these ways. It covers formula, other milk products, cereals, teas and juices, as well as bottles and teats.
The Code has 10 important provisions.

* NO advertising of any of these products to the public
* NO free samples to mothers
* NO promotion of products in health care facilities, including the distribution of free or low-cost supplies
* NO company sales representatives to advise mothers
* NO gifts or personal samples to health workers
* NO words or pictures idealising artificial feeding, or pictures of infants on labels of infant milk containers
* Information to health workers should be scientific and factual
* ALL information on artificial infant feeding, including that on labels, should explain the benefits of breastfeeding and the costs and hazards associated with artificial feeding
* Unsuitable products, such as sweetened condensed milk, should not be promoted for babies
* Manufacturers and distributors should comply with the Code's provisions even if countries have not adopted laws or other measures.

I cant find it on google but I did read that bottle, teets and baby food are all under the code hence why you dont see them advertised .

It doesn't matter where it is mentioned, the point is that a lot of people don't like the 'usage' of the word artificial and people like you keep trying to back up the point and mention it again and again. I had never heard of the word until this thread.

You are just being unhelpful by bringing it up again and again. Have you absolutely zero respect for other people's feelings? Or are you more interested in making a point?

She has made the post to link the Code. The World Health Organisation have chosen the wording, not Dragonfly. I'm pretty sure she has just cut and pasted it from elsewhere.

That is correct


edited to something more pollte in case someone else gets hurt and crys.

 

[Dopeyjopey]

I understood why you said it dragonfly!

 

[Faerie]

Can this thread get to 100 pages ??!?

OK, the terms that apparently upset and offend people. I still don't know why they do ... aside from someone saying its a silly term, or its not quite accurate - I still don't understand why so many people seem to find it personally offensive? I'd still like someone to explain what it is that makes it actually offensive, not just silly or inaccurate (genuinely interested). However, no its not a widely used term generally - but no one on here has made it up !!! I don't know why certain people are saying we should ignore that it is out there. If it's so awful ... why are we going on at each other? We didnt invent it! If it's so awful ... why are the medical profession, WHO etc, allowed to get away with using it, as it seems to add to the guilt that FF mothers have? It';s really not helpful to pick on individuals on here and say 'oooh dont use that word we don't like it'. It's there ... and IMO, if mums don't like it, then it just adds to the wider medicalisation and dehumanisation of mothering, and the general 'inferior' view that society and authority has of mothers. Hows about an online petition or something to change it? (to what?)

Because we all know that the common term used is FF and formula milk right? So by continuing to use artifical milk (even though yes, it is the correct medical term) when mothers have said it upsets them is just being mean imo.

There's no need for an online petition, the word isn't commonly used!

 

[Missy86]

Just to change the subject why has Mark Ronson bleched his hair in his new video
it doesnt look good

 

[leelee]

No they didn't invent it but they carried on using it when it became clear people didn't like it for wahtever reason it doesn't matter why really does it? Some people got upset and another group instead of modifying their behaviour carried on regardless because they don't respect other peoples feelings, why should they have to justify their feelings?

Agree totally here.

Can people honestly say that if they had a friend who FF and you mentioned the word 'artificial' or 'inferior' and they said please don't use it again as it upsets me, would you continue to keep using the word?

Just because we are sitting behind screens here doesn't mean that we can't show a certain level of respect to each other.

I am all for a debate but it can be debated without jibes.

 

[Kitty23]

Dragonfly- the reason people are pissed off is because you keep bringing up the word artifical! Just stop saying it and no one will be offended!!

And to answer the question about why some ffers don't like the word artifical is because its a horrid way of saying forumla feeding! Do you call a c section an artifical birth? Who here before this thread would really say in everyday life "oh thats artifical feeding" as opposed to " oh thats forumla feeding" exacly you wouldn't.

Now countless people have said it is an offensive term so maybe people would like to stop using it and justifing that its a bloody medical word!!

 

[Dragonfly]

I understood why you said it dragonfly!

well thank god someone isnt on the bandwagon!

 

[NIfirsttimer]

Some people say formula, some people say artificial
Some people say couch, some people say sofa
Some people say pram some people say stroller

......... it's just what you are accustomed to.

People are not going to change how they naturally word things because of a forum.

i would?
if you told me that you were offended by me saying that your baby was born 'artificially' because you had a c section, then i wouldnt say it to you? in fact, didnt you post a reply in another thread yesterday saying 'id punch someone who told me i hadnt given birth'?
there are people out there who think nothing of calling our children b*****ds because they were born out of 'wedlock' it is the 'correct' term, the dictionary says so, but people would be offended by it, so its not used! come on, you need to look at the bigger picture here!

 

[Dragonfly]

Dragonfly- the reason people are pissed off is because you keep bringing up the word artifical! Just stop saying it and no one will be offended!!

I dont use that word it was in the copy and paste. Maybe I should censor my stuff before I post . wouldnt want to offend. ?

 

[Kitty23]

Dragonfly- the reason people are pissed off is because you keep bringing up the word artifical! Just stop saying it and no one will be offended!!

I dont use that word it was in the copy and paste. Maybe I should censor my stuff before I post . wouldnt want to offend. ?

Maybe you should censor what you post and then people wouldn't get offended