I’m not being a very good blogger lately am I?  No time to web surf you see. I’m also thinking that this blog is really pretty weird because of its scrapbook-type nature.  My last post was about the mafia’s [alleged] misdoings and it’s going to sit alongside a video of cute babies.  I am nothing if not totally random and diverse.

I’m not one of those women who coos, oohs and aaaahs at every baby on the planet but this ad is just adorable and makes me feel good every time I see it. There is something so sweet and special about hearing babies laugh and in this ad the third baby is positively creasing himself.  Wonderful!  Here’s a happy start to the weekend then…

Cow & Gate this week had a complaint against their advertising of follow on milk upheld by the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA). The ruling states that Cow & Gate’s claim that their follow-on milk “support[s] your baby’s natural immune system” is unsubstantiated. This complaint was brought by the NCT.  Baby Milk Action has also won a similar ASA ruling about Aptamil’s follow-on milk advertising.

NCT lodged a complaint with the ASA in July 2007 pointing out that Cow & Gate’s claim was unproven. The evidence that the company provided, purporting to support their claims, was based on a study which was not relevant for this product because:

• Follow-on milk is for babies who are aged 6 months or over. The study used as a basis by Cow & Gate for this claim recruited babies less than 4 months old who were fed on formula milk, not follow-on milk.
• The product in the study was different from the product being advertised with the claim. The formula milk provided to the babies in the study contained extensively hydrolysed cow’s milk*. Neither Cow & Gate’s formula milk, nor its follow-on milk contains cow’s milk that is extensively hydrolysed.
• The findings of the study are not necessarily relevant to babies who are not susceptible to allergies.  Because the babies selected to be part of the study, were all susceptible to having allergies (either a parent or a sibling had an allergy).

The ASA stated that Nutricia (manufacturer of Cow & Gate) needs to hold robust evidence to support their claims in any future advertising.

Parents are best served by talking to healthcare professionals and other bodies without a financial interest in formula, for their information.  By its nature, advertising is never impartial.

*Hydrolysing is where protein is broken down into amino acids and short chain peptides.

The Scientific Advisory Committee (SACN) which advises the government on nutrition, points out that the use of claims is ‘entirely unsupportable’. If an ingredient is beneficial it should be included in all formula milks. They said “We find the case for labeling infant formula or follow on formula with health or nutrition claims entirely unsupportable. If an ingredient is unequivocally beneficial as demonstrated by independent review of scientific data it would be unethical to withhold it for commercial reasons. Rather it should be made a required ingredient of infant formula in order to reduce existing risks associated with artificial feeding. To do otherwise is not in the best interests of children, and fails to recognise the crucial distinction between these products and other foods.”

www.sacn.gov.uk/pdfs/position_statement_2007_09_24.pdf

In a report published yesterday it was discovered by the children’s food campaign that many baby foods contain higher than recommended levels of saturated fats and sugars. (article here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8032105.stm)

In fact it was stated that some products were actually worse that junk foods in terms of their health content.  Farley’s Rusks, a well known product used for weaning, was found to contain more sugar than many adult biscuits. So it looks like food companies are getting in early now  to get the next generation sugar addicted and ready to be overweight.

That’s right; sugar is addictive. Proof of this can easily be found if you are a person who snacks semi-regularly during the day. Tomorrow try not putting any extra sugar on your cereal and in your drinks. Avoid eating anything that obviously includes a large amount of sugar (chocolate, cakes, deserts, soft drinks etc) and avoid eating white rice, pasta and white bread. I guarantee that by the evening you will know what a heroin addict feels like searching for their next fix. These kids will be addicted for life.

Your body uses energy from different sources in a certain order, white sugar being first, carbs next, protein and then fat. Our bodies use sugar as a burst of energy and will seek it out because, many thousands of years ago, it would have provided a rare yet important boost required to help hunt food which could sustain us over longer periods (its my completely unsubstantiated theory that this is why sweet things are so appealing to us).

Sugar causes our bodies to go into storage mode, whilst it’s instant energy is available other energy sources are stored as body fat for later use. Of course if the sugar supply is constant and you don’t exercise, you will never use these reserves and you will be overweight. It takes about 20minutes of  sustained exercise for you body to move on from sugar and carbs and actually start burning body fat.

The come down as you switch to reserves is (in simple terms) going to be much more severe if you eat a lot of sugar and fat since you won’t have anything useful to burn in between. The slightest hint of sugar and you will be racing for a snack top-up. It’s a nasty feeling and it takes a few days until you body starts adapting.

It was around the 1980’s that food companies moved from feeding the nation to feeding profit margins based on fufilling people’s needs for the lowest possible cost to them. Sugar is a really easy and cheap substance to use in anything to make sure it tastes good no matter what else is in it.

Look at Cola, where Sugar and caffeine combine to make a highly addictive concoction which, unsurprisingly, outsells everything else. Have you ever stopped to think what it might taste like if you took the sugar (and sweeteners in diet) out of it? A glance at the ingredients list will tell you they are not exactly filling the bottle with the fruits of the earth. Much the same can be said of many other products.

Other substances like salt and artificial flavourings are used in much the same way and often have health risks all of their own connected to them, without looking at what it is they are masking. (I won’t get started on Whey, that will take me another 1000 words, but I will say start looking at your chocolate bar wrappers for this nasty substance and prepare to be disgusted when you find out what it actually is).

But hey it’s all cheap and profitable isn’t it? and people like things that taste good so what could possibly be wrong with that? A lot, I would say.

Do you think that your child is a happy baby?If so, visit the Cow and Gate Website.

Upload your baby photograph or video and have the chance of winning £1500 in shopping vouchers of your choice. Or just vote for your favourite happiest baby and be entered into the competition to win a weekend away in a luxury hotel worth £750 from luxuryhotelbreaks.com .

Vote Now!

I’d like to take the marketing execs at Cow & Gate and smack them upside the head. Where do they get off advertising their formula with the slogan

Trust Cow & Gate…because healthy babies are happy babies

FFS, argh and argh again. And rollercoaster, shame on you for sending me such advertising in my email, have you no respect for the International Code at all?

And I’m sorry but who is uploading their babies to be used by a formula company for advertising purposes? There are babies on the site younger than 6 months, but of course it’s not formula advertising, it’s a search for Ireland’s happiest baby, isn’t it? And OMG if I upload my baby I could even win a maternity shirt or baby hat, isn’t that cool. Oh, it is too infuriating.

Rant over, there’s no point really is there. These people have infinite resources to throw at circumventing the Code and our ridiculously weak advertising laws, as long as they don’t actually say “Buy our formula for your newborn” every thing is legal.

So far on Irish forums, we have seen C&G advertising their “baby club” with the slogan “Your newborn’s tummy is only the size of an eggcup” but that was ok, because it was not an ad for formula, it was an ad for a “Baby club”. Okaayyyyyy.

And we had SMA actually sponsoring the entire Mums to be section on rollercoaster.ie, but the FSAI advised that they could do nothing as SMA was just advertising their brand not a specific formula product, gosh if there was ever a loophole that’s a loophole, their brand is predominantly baby formula, duh! Hmmm….

And that C&G laughing babies ad, again perfectly legal according to the FSAI who did admit that

…Your concerns in respect to advertising of follow-on formulae and its impact on breastfeeding are shared by the FSAI. These concerns are supported by recent surveys carried out by the FSAI and also in the U.K, which appear to show that consumers do not differentiate between advertising of infant formulae and follow-on formulae….

And most recently, Nestlé have started sponsoring Childline, at a coincidental time when they are planning to relaunch their formula into the UK market, Nestlé who had this gem to share about the China formula contamination

“All our products are 100 percent safe…Sales in China are rather being favoured,” Peter Brabeck-Letmathe told reporters in India’s capital, when asked whether the scandal would affect the company’s business.

“It’s rather positive than negative,” Brabeck said.

Nice.

Of course, many parents choose to formula feed, this is not an attack on them. It is important that they are given full, unbiased information on all the options available, but there is one source of this information that is shockingly unreliable, and that is the formula companies themselves, each of whom after all is a business, out to make a profit and convince you, the consumer, that their product is best. False advertising and exaggerated claims of wonderfulness should have no place on baby formula, it’s not right and we really shouldn’t stand for it.

There are many groups worldwide campaigning for more widespread and robust adoption of the International Code, Baby Milk Action, Baby Feeding Law Group & IBFAN are good starting points to learn more. In the meantime, complaining to the relevant authorities (FSAI in Ireland, ASA in the UK) is about all we can do, if they get enough complaints they might take notice, or more than likely, they won’t take notice but at least they’ll have to deal with the complaints!

And if you think this is all storm-in-a-teacup type complaining by “militant” (how I hate that phrase) breastfeeding mums, please take a few minutes to download & look through some of the reports on formula advertising that have been published by Baby Milk Action, it is eye-opening reading. It’s something all parents should be concerned about, regardless of how they choose to feed their babies.

disclaimer: this is not an attack on parents who formula-feed, this is about the companies involved and their often-illegal claims & advertising methods!

I got a reply from the FSAI (Food Safety Authority of Ireland) today to my recent Cow & Gate complaint. And just in case I felt even a little bit special and listened-to, I soon discovered that many of my online buddies got the exact same, word-for-word, reply today. And it doesn’t really say much, what do you think? I’ve bolded the bits I think are especially interesting…

Thank you for your e-mail of complaint in respect to the current Cow and Gate advertisement for follow-on formula. The FSAI supports the National Breast Feeding Policy and recognizes the importance of breastfeeding in public health.

Infant formulae are breast-milk substitutes for infants in good health during the first four to six months of life and are designed to satisfy all the nutritional requirements of infants of this age. Follow-on formulae are intended for children over this age and as such form part of an increasingly diverse diet.

Although there are stringent regulations in respect to the advertising of infant formula these do not apply to follow on formula as long as it provides appropriate information the use of the product and does not discourage breast feeding.

Your concerns in respect to advertising of follow-on formulae and its impact on breastfeeding are shared by the FSAI. These concerns are supported by recent surveys carried out by the FSAI and also in the U.K, which appear to show that consumers do not differentiate between advertising of infant formulae and follow-on formulae. While further work is needed to investigate these concerns, the FSAI does not advocate the showing of advertisements which would serve to undermine a woman’s wish to breastfeed or National policy on the promotion of breastfeeding.

In addition to current regulation the World Health Organization’s International Code of Marketing of Breast Milk Substitutes provides more rigorous standards and many individuals and organizations have signed up to these on a voluntary basis. The FSAI continues to work with industry with the objective of achieving best practice in this area.

The FSAI has considered the issues raised in your letter and in the first instance will write to the company seeking a response to these concerns.

So does that say “we agree with your complaint, surveys agree on how misleading follow-on formula advertising is and yet all we are going to do is write to Cow & Gate and ask them nicely for their opinion?” or am I reading it wrong? And I’m fairly sure that the industry’s concept of “best practice” would differ significantly from the WHO’s! Hmmmm….

Ah well, we shall keep on complaining! And supporting the groups that put in so much effort to highlight these issues and push for legislation changes, such as Baby Milk Action & The Baby Feeding Law Group in the UK. Why not pop over to Baby Milk Action and buy something nice from their store, they have t-shirts, mugs, fridge magnets, calendars and lots, lots more – you might find some lovely Christmas presents there!

disclaimer: this is not an attack on parents who bottle-feed, this is about the companies involved and their often-illegal claims & advertising methods!

Digg this :: stumble this! :: share on facebook :: kirtsy this

I’m sure most of you folks in the UK & Ireland have seen Cow & Gate’s latest tv advertisement with the laughing babies. It’s on YouTube if you haven’t (is everything in the world on YouTube now one wonders?). It’s been around for a few weeks now, but we don’t have broadcast tv so I only saw it last week.

Basically, it’s more of the same, only now Cow & Gate are essentially making a mockery of all the known facts about formula feeding. Formula fed babies are more likely to experience tummy problems, catch more bugs & experience a range of health issues which breastfed babies are not as susceptible to.

This ad is using “idealising imagery” to push C&G’s formula and with all the lines “Do I look like my tummy’s unhappy” etc. along with the voiceover is implying that formula is best for babies.

Now I realise they are advertising their Follow-On formula which, although it is nearly identical in packaging to the their newborn formula, is allowed under Irish Law, but if you watch this ad I think you’ll agree some of these babies look very young, and very close to the 6 month threshold. And we all know that Follow-On milk was only created to circumvent the ban on advertising formula for newborns.

These kinds of formula ads perpetuate the idea that formula is as good as breastmilk, it’s not, and it should not be allowed to be marketed as such. This type of advertisement is not a source of reliable information for parents, it is more akin to a Coke or Pepsi ad, trying to sell their brand based on a feel-good factor.

The argument that parents need advertising in order to be informed consumers just doesn’t wash, especially when it comes to formula, have a look at Baby Milk Action’s analysis of the claims of the major formula brands.

Cow & Gate are clearly doing what all of the formula companies are doing and are skirting around our insanely weak formula advertising laws. Do you remember the recent SMA ads that were on a popular Irish parenting forum? The FSAI were unable to stop those ads as despite the fact that they were targeting pregnant women, they made no mention of the word “formula”, so the ads were ok!

Anyway, if you haven’t done so already, please take a minute to watch the ad and pop an email to your relevant advertising standards group to complain. In Ireland this is the Food Safety Authority of Ireland (The FSAI handles all issues to do with formula advertising in Ireland) and in the UK it’s the Advertising Standards Authority.

The FSAI responded to my complaint with the following:

Thank you for contacting the Food Safety Authority of Ireland.  We have received other complaints regarding the Cow & Gate advertisement and are currently looking into this.  We will get back to you as soon as the matter has been reviewed.

In the UK, the Baby Feeding Law Group is actively monitoring the marketing practices of the various formula companies. Their most recent report was in May 2008, and is well worth a read (pdf).

As well as lodging an official complaint with the Advertising Standards Authority, the BFLG asks people to let them know about dubious formula marketing through their monitoring page.

The BFLG is coordinated by Baby Milk Action who are currently pursuing a complaint about this ad with the Advertising Standards Authority and Trading Standards in the UK.

This is all an uphill struggle, the formula companies have massive advertising budgets and are constantly skirting around any new restrictions, just think of SMA’s logo change last year!

If you’re reading this and wondering what all the fuss is about, please pop on over to IBFAN’s website and read their guide to the International Code, both Ireland and the UK’s laws are based on extremely watered-down versions of this Code.

Still though, a watered-down version of the code is at least a starting point, have a look here for some advertising from the US, which has no such restrictions, it is absolutely astonishing the claims that are made over there!

I’ll keep you all posted if I hear anything more from the FSAI, hopefully if enough people complain about these ads, they may be eventually inclined to strengthen the laws here!

disclaimer: this is not an attack on parents who bottle-feed, this is about the companies involved and their often-illegal claims & advertising methods!

Digg this :: stumble this! :: share on facebook :: kirtsy this

Above is an advert that is doing the rounds in the UK, for baby formula.  It shows babies giggling!  How cute!

Ok, am I the only person that finds these babies CREEPY AS FUCK? (Had to do a ‘Kanye capslocking’ there for added emphasis.)

I’m sorry, I’m sure they’re are lovely and cute really, but whenever the advert comes on and the first baby starts to laugh I jump out of my skin, thinking: “Argh, what’s that?”

Then it goes onto the second blued-eyed babe who is actually quite sweet and I almost let myself go “awww”… then the third one comes on and I’m screaming: “EVIL!!!”

Am I the only one who sees this?

Ooooh, Britain’s Next Top Model has started.  Why write about evil babies and milk formula when I can be drinking a glass bottle of wine while watching evil teenage girls clawing one anothers eyes out?