A series in the Lancet breastfeeding details the strategies used by commercial formula makers to undermine breastfeeding to transform the infant feeding and young children in a multibillion-dollar business that generates approximately $55 billion in revenue annually. The Lancet has issued an urgent appeal to protect breastfeeding.
Infant formula marketing tactics are exploitative, and regulations urgently need to be strengthened and properly implemented, the three-piece series argued. The authors of the series argue that in addition to influencing political organizations, infant formula companies they also draw on the credibility of science by sponsoring professional organizations, publishing sponsored articles in scientific journals, and inviting public health leaders to committees and advisory boards, leading to unacceptable conflicts of interest.
“THE infant formula industry uses little science to suggest, with little evidence to back it up, that their products are solutions to common children’s health and developmental challenges. Advertisements claim that the specialized formulas ease fussiness, help with colic, prolong nighttime sleep, and even encourage higher intelligence. Labels use words like ‘brain’, ‘neuro’ and ‘IQ’ with images highlighting early development, but studies show no benefit of these product ingredients on academic achievement or long-term cognition,” she said. Professor Linda Richter, Wits University, South Africa.
“Breastfeeding has demonstrated health benefits in both high-income and low-income settings: it reduces childhood infectious diseases, mortality and malnutrition, and risk of subsequent obesity; breastfeeding mothers have a reduced risk of breast and ovarian cancers, type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease. However, less than 50% of babies worldwide are breastfed according to WHO recommendations, resulting in economic losses of nearly $350 billion annually. Meanwhile, the CMF industry generates approximately $55 billion in revenue annually, with approximately $3 billion spent annually on marketing efforts,” said a Lancet editorial.
The series details how marketing practices in violation of the Voluntary Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes, developed by the World Health Assembly in 1981, have continued in nearly 100 countries and every region of the world since the code’s adoption more than forty years ago. The series argues that voluntary adoption of the Code is not enough and calls for an international legal treaty on the commercial marketing of baby food products to protect the health and well-being of mothers and families.
“Only 32 countries have legal measures broadly in line with the Code. Another 41 countries have legislation that moderately aligns with the Code, and 50 have no legal measures at all. As a result, the Code is routinely violated without sanctions,” the editorial.
An analysis of the series describes how the profits made by the infant formula industry benefit companies located in high-income countries, while the social, economic, and environmental harms are widely distributed and most damaging in low- and middle-income countries.
The authors emphasize that breastfeeding is a collective responsibility of society and call for more effective promotion, support and protection of breastfeeding, including a much better trained health workforce and an international legal treaty to end to the marketing of infant formula and ban political lobbying.
Infant formula marketing tactics are exploitative, and regulations urgently need to be strengthened and properly implemented, the three-piece series argued. The authors of the series argue that in addition to influencing political organizations, infant formula companies they also draw on the credibility of science by sponsoring professional organizations, publishing sponsored articles in scientific journals, and inviting public health leaders to committees and advisory boards, leading to unacceptable conflicts of interest.
“THE infant formula industry uses little science to suggest, with little evidence to back it up, that their products are solutions to common children’s health and developmental challenges. Advertisements claim that the specialized formulas ease fussiness, help with colic, prolong nighttime sleep, and even encourage higher intelligence. Labels use words like ‘brain’, ‘neuro’ and ‘IQ’ with images highlighting early development, but studies show no benefit of these product ingredients on academic achievement or long-term cognition,” she said. Professor Linda Richter, Wits University, South Africa.
“Breastfeeding has demonstrated health benefits in both high-income and low-income settings: it reduces childhood infectious diseases, mortality and malnutrition, and risk of subsequent obesity; breastfeeding mothers have a reduced risk of breast and ovarian cancers, type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease. However, less than 50% of babies worldwide are breastfed according to WHO recommendations, resulting in economic losses of nearly $350 billion annually. Meanwhile, the CMF industry generates approximately $55 billion in revenue annually, with approximately $3 billion spent annually on marketing efforts,” said a Lancet editorial.
The series details how marketing practices in violation of the Voluntary Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes, developed by the World Health Assembly in 1981, have continued in nearly 100 countries and every region of the world since the code’s adoption more than forty years ago. The series argues that voluntary adoption of the Code is not enough and calls for an international legal treaty on the commercial marketing of baby food products to protect the health and well-being of mothers and families.
“Only 32 countries have legal measures broadly in line with the Code. Another 41 countries have legislation that moderately aligns with the Code, and 50 have no legal measures at all. As a result, the Code is routinely violated without sanctions,” the editorial.
An analysis of the series describes how the profits made by the infant formula industry benefit companies located in high-income countries, while the social, economic, and environmental harms are widely distributed and most damaging in low- and middle-income countries.
The authors emphasize that breastfeeding is a collective responsibility of society and call for more effective promotion, support and protection of breastfeeding, including a much better trained health workforce and an international legal treaty to end to the marketing of infant formula and ban political lobbying.
