Food Standards Agency pushes for changes to baby formula ad rules
Share
The Food Standards Agency and the Department of Health have published an independent review looking at the effectiveness of controls on the advertising of follow-on formula, calling for changes to the ways in which they are advertised.
The agency says that the review focuses only on formula intended for babies over the age of six months.
It follows a number of concerns about the way these products are advertised and also deals with consumer fears that it might be confused with infant formula.
The report was commissioned by the then minister of state for public health, Dawn Primarolo, who asked an independent panel of experts to assess whether the new rules on advertising in the regulations were working.
The review found that current controls are having the desired effect in the main, but some adverts are not always clearly understood as being for follow-on formula rather than infant formula.
Infant formula is not allowed to be advertised and action is recommended to address this, the review says.
There is also not sufficient evidence of confusion between infant formula and follow-on formula to justify a ban on the advertising of follow-on formula.
The review also recommends that manufacturers should make changes to advertising, to make it clear that follow-on formula is intended for babies over six months. This includes clearly representing the age of babies in the adverts.
Any problems encountered with the enforcement of the regulations should be addressed through clearer guidance for enforcement bodies.
European regulations have been in place in 2006 which, among other things, aim to reduce confusion for parents.
The panel’s report has now been submitted to Gillian Merron, the Minister of State for Public Health, for her consideration.
Heinz is considering axing its range of Nurture baby milks in the UK.
The move follows the Advertising Standards Authority banning a TV advertisement for Heinz’s Nurture for misleading consumers.
Readers' comments (5)
Lorraine | Fri, 12 Mar 2010 12:02 pm
A perfect example of the government approaching an issue from the wrong angle, and I say this as a mother, not an advertising professional.
Greater regulation of the advertising of formula milk isn't the answer to encouraging more women to breastfeed for longer, addressing the social issues that put women off breastfeeding is - particularly in the light of this recent news story which sadly isn't as uncommon a situation as it should be: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/humiliated-mother-forced-off-bus-for-breastfeeding-1910528.html
As I understand it, in Scotland women have a right to breastfeed in public (and a person asking them to stop would be the one falling foul of the law), however in England and Wales no such law exists. An easy win surely?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | Fri, 12 Mar 2010 2:46 pm
CCTV footage has proven that the bus driver did not speak to the breast feeding mother, and she has since appologised from making up the story, covered in the independent.
Post natal depression is an excellent example of why some mothers resort to formula dispite current government guidance.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Mike Brady | Fri, 12 Mar 2010 5:28 pm
The report does not say clearer guidance is needed for enforcement authorities, rather that there need to be 'steps taken' to address problems of enforcement. The report quotes Trading Standards and LACORS regarding the difficulties presented by treating follow-on formula and infant formula differently in the Regulations - both have called in the past for advertising of follow-on formula to be prohibited as with infant formula, in line with international standards.
The Food Standards Agency provided an incorrect summary of the recommendations on its website suggesting it was just a matter of providing clearer guidance, which has since been removed. Health advocates are calling for the Government to implement the minimum standards adopted by the World Health Assembly, including a ban on follow-on formula advertising. See:
http://info.babymilkaction.org/pressrelease/pressrelease11mar10a
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | Fri, 12 Mar 2010 8:54 pm
thats complete crap, Anonymous!! you sound like a man who is childless. post-natal blues are far below that majority of reasons women may choose not to bf.
along with Lorrain's idea- I agree....another major issue with baby formula are the man-made oils they are adding- DHA/ARA. they are sometimes harmful and their long term effects have not been documented as they have only been added for a decade.even worse- there is now only one company left that has a baby formula without these toxins...Baby's Only. Nestle just discontinued the only formula they made w/o the oils. THIS is outrageous!! we need to have options to feed our babies!
Thank you for this article and please consider writing a report on the above issue.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | Mon, 15 Mar 2010 2:03 pm
This is stupid. I am a mother and I tried breast-feeding for 2 months then I "dried up" because I wasn't eating properly. NOT because I had post-natal depression because I didn't. I just didn't have an apetite. I'm very petite and eat like a church mouse. ANYWAY I am so grateful for formula milk that came to my rescue when I couldn't feed my baby. I didn't even realise they had banned infant milk advertising which is outrageous. Isn't it up to the mother how she feeds her child? Yes breast is best BUT what if like me, she can't feed them? Stop pressuring women to breast-feed, some want to, some don't, some can't. Leave it at that.
Mine is now 2 and a half and she still has two beakers of follow-on milk a day. Oh and I know it's not right to say this but, I hated getting my breasts out in public. I didn't want the world and his missus seeing my breasts, nor did I like looking at other peoples. Sorry!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment