Reader Comments
Post a new comment on this article
Post Your Discussion Comment
Please follow our guidelines for comments and review our competing interests policy. Comments that do not conform to our guidelines will be promptly removed and the user account disabled. The following must be avoided:
- Remarks that could be interpreted as allegations of misconduct
- Unsupported assertions or statements
- Inflammatory or insulting language
Thank You!
Thank you for taking the time to flag this posting; we review flagged postings on a regular basis.
closeStop Misleading Formula Advertising
Posted by leila1 on 24 Mar 2012 at 08:53 GMT
Thank you to the authors and to PLOS for publishing this article. Monitoring of the advertising of breast milk substitutes is the responsibility of all health workers. NGOs and international experts are important independent reporters of violations of the International Code. Local health professionals may be unable or unwilling to report violations. Advocacy for breastfeeding must continue, together with strengthening and enforcement of the Code.
Formula products should be in plain packages, in the baby product section of the store and not sold near products that may be confused as breast-milk substitutes (BMS), such as coffee creamer. Advanced formulas and “growing up milks” are unnecessary. These products, often very similar to formula products, make unscientific claims and advertise blatantly. The companies claim that they are not intended for infants, so not covered under the Code. These companies continue their unethical practices to sneak around the Code and promote their products to the public.
Despite the Bear Brand coffee creamer’s removal from the market, 98% of mothers recognize this product. Nestle revealed in their Roadshow 2006 that their consistent Bear Brand strategy penetrated 9.5 million Filipino households among lower socioeconomic classes.
The misleading Bear Brand logo, in all its forms, linked to severe malnutrition and death, should be banned throughout the world.