Mass. group takes aim at formula gift bags
As readers of our book BABY BARGAINS know, we
aren't big fans of the swag that formula companies sling at parents of newborns.
We think they give a not-so-subtle message that formula is better than
breastmilk.
Well, a group in
Massachusetts has put together a petition to convince the governor there to ban
such gift bags. Alison Stuebe of the Mass. Breastfeeding Coalition told us the
state's Public Health Council voted to band the bags, but Gov. Mitt Romney has
tried to scuttle the recommendation.
So
take a second to sign their
petition:
http://www.massbfc.org/petitionIntro.html
And
the group has asked us to reprint our rant on formula marketing in hospitals. So
here it is:
Baby Formula
Manufacturers: Out of Control?
In the
past few editions of this book, we issued a long rant about the marketing
tactics of the formula manufacturers. And we still feel that way today. When you
check into the hospital to give birth, you start the long promotional parade of
formula freebies—most new parents emerge after birth with formula samples,
diaper bags emblazoned with formula logos and more. Is this good for parents?
For the country?
Considering the fact
that breast-feeding rates still trail national goals, we say no. We realize
formula makers have the right to market their wares as they see fit . . . but we
argue that hospitals and doctors’ offices should be no-pitch zones. The
subtle and not-so-subtle effect of all the endless formula freebies is to
undermine moms who choose to breastfeed. While we realize most moms and dads are
intelligent enough to recognize the formula hype as just that, we are concerned
that less-educated parents are led to believe that hospitals and doctors are
endorsing formula over breast-feeding. And statistics bear that out—moms
who are from lower socioeconomic groups are most likely to turn to formula
instead of trying breastfeeding.
Nestle,
maker of Carnation Good Start formula, deserves special scrutiny. In 2004,
Nestle started targeting Hispanic mothers in California with its Nan formula, a
leading formula brand in Latin America. Unlike other brands that shun direct
consumer marketing, Nestle has run ads in Spanish language magazines and radio,
plastering the Nan brand on billboards in Hispanic sections of Los Angeles and
handing out free samples at baby fairs.
The key question: is Nestle exploiting a
vulnerable population that gets very little or no info on the health benefits of
breastfeeding, in order to fatten market share?
Ironically, Nestle does not advertise
this brand in countries like Mexico. Why? In 1981, the World Health Organization
devised a voluntary code to curb the marketing of formula after allegations
that—guess who?—Nestle exploited the world’s poor to pitch
formula, which was often misused. While the U.S. signed the code, it never
passed laws to enforce it. Hence, that’s why we have a formula marketing
free-fire zone in hospitals, doctors’ offices and billboards in the
barrio.
As a country, we have to ask
ourselves—shouldn’t hospitals and doctor’s offices be a
pitch-free area for formula? And should formula companies be allowed to target
vulnerable populations with formula pitches?
Posted: Mon - April 3, 2006 at 05:14 PM