Showing posts with label breastmilk substitutes. Show all posts
Showing posts with label breastmilk substitutes. Show all posts

Wednesday, February 22, 2017

How Formula and Fear Ended My First Breastfeeding Journey

The year was 1997, and I entered the hospital where I was planning to birth my first baby. I had read all the books, taken the classes and prepared to the best of my ability for my impending birth. My rolling luggage contained all the supplies recommended by the Lamaze teacher and close friends. I had a well-thought out Birth Plan. In all honesty, my entire plan consisted of avoiding medications and birthing a baby. I assumed that the hospital staff would fill in any blanks I had forgotten to complete. My "water broke" at home, so the hospital policy stressed the importance of remaining in bed to avoid "severe infection." Since we had not discussed this in prenatal classes, I deferred to the attending nurse.

The contractions were as regular as the hands on a clock, which caused the staff to predict a "fast labor." The nurse approached me and explained that the labor could and should be hastened, so I could deliver my baby before the day was out. I excitedly agreed--not comprehending that I was consenting to Pitocin administration. Almost immediately, I was consumed with incredible pain and fear. My body was reacting in a way that seemed uncontrolled or understood by my mind. I was still trying to focus, but was not as successful as I had been the previous hours.

Again, I was approached with an option of "lessening the pain" and "taking the edge off." The nurse offered a visit from the anesthesiologist who would happily provide the epidural--resulting in a "pain free birth." I declined, not because I did not want the relief, but because I had predetermined my pain management goals.

A few hours of intense labor and my son joined us earth-side. I was holding my perfect little baby and, for a time, everything was well in my world. I cuddled and stared in awe until we slept. I felt completely as ease while my baby and I synchronized our breaths and adjusted to our surroundings.

The shattering news was delivered only a few, short hours later. A new nurse (who replaced my kind, supportive day nurse) brought the discovery to my attention. She entered my room and abruptly stated that my son was jaundiced! I looked at her in confusion because we had not discussed this diagnosis in my prenatal classes. I asked if he would be all right. She said that his numbers were at eleven and he needed formula. She also stated that since my seven pound baby was very large, formula was a necessity. I reluctantly explained that I desired to breastfeed. Her quick, rehearsed response was, "Do you want this baby to live, or do you want to breastfeed?" What a terrifying question to be presented with just hours postpartum. What is jaundice? Why is my baby's weight an issue? There were no explanations, just fear and accusations. I immediately consented to formula--considering the alternative that was provided.   I was extremely vigilant in offering a bottle, along with breastmilk for every feed, until I left the hospital. The following day, I was applauded for my baby's progress, which the nurse attributed to the formula. She discharged me with several containers of formula and admonished me to continue feeding formula to safeguard against tragic results.


I took my bundle of joy and bundle of formula and left the hospital. I religiously offered a bottle of formula several times a day to prevent whatever condition would develop without it. I was too afraid of putting my baby at risk to exclusively breastfeed. I never spoke of my breastfeeding journey with friends. I was too embarrassed about them knowing I almost put my baby's life in danger by my "selfish" desire to breastfeed.

My six week check up resulted in more congratulatory remarks about my baby's development. When asked about feeding, I responded with a pro-formula remark since I understood there was a "danger" associated with exclusive breastfeeding. My schedule of formula feeding was positively reinforced and I conceded that my pediatrician was favorable of formula feeding.

At six weeks, when my baby experienced "frequency days," I was convinced that my milk was insufficient to satisfy my baby. I increased the amount of formula, not realizing that in doing so, I was signaling my body to actually slow milk production. By now the free samples had disappeared and I was investing hundreds of dollars into a breastmilk substitute. I read all the propaganda and purchased the most attractive cans that touted a closeness to breastmilk. Once again, my ignorance won out. I invested in a product that was trying its best to mimic the fluid I had in abundance.



My breastfeeding journey ended so much sooner than I desired. I had a personal goal of nourishing my outside of the womb just as I had for nine months. No one questioned how my body could grow a baby for forty weeks. No one questioned if I was providing adequate nutrition in utero. No one questioned how my body sustained life, but outside of the womb, apparently, my body failed miserably at the task. I questioned everything about my parenting choices. I felt like a failure because I was pronounced a failure. Perception is reality.

My second child made her debut twenty-two months later--at a Baby Friendly designated hospital. My labor plan was supported and within a few hours, I held my daughter skin-to-skin and was breastfeeding. I was prepared to defend my choice this time. I had researched the AAP jaundice guidelines and realized that jaundice was a common condition due to extra red blood cells and I understood what numbers would constitute a legitimate concern. I was ready to confront the fear--but the fear never came. I also anticipated being judged for "giving only breastmilk" to my large baby. After all, she was about the same size as her brother at birth. The judgement never came. My little girl was weighed, her diapers were counted and I was encouraged to "keep up the good work." The following day, an IBCLC visited me to ask how breastfeeding felt and if I was experiencing any pain. She requested that I allow her to observe a feeding session. My little girl latched, sucked and fed for several minutes. The session was used to educate me on signs of milk transfer and recognizing swallows.

The following day, I left the hospital with my bundle of joy and bundle of confidence. I was equipped with knowledge and confidence. I knew my body was capable of nourishing my baby. I knew I could provide milk for my offspring just as every mammal does. I was not going to be bullied or scared into making a choice that I did not agree with. I was older, bolder and more educated.

The combination of advocating for myself and a hospital that supported breastfeeding made my dreams a reality. Breastfeeding continued until her first birthday--and a breastfeeding advocate was born.

My third child presented some feeding challenges. We worked through issues with an IBCLC and each problem I encountered was resolved with a solution that allowed me to continue my breastfeeding relationship. When the issue of jaundice surfaced this time, I supplemented for twenty-four hours with my own expressed breastmilk. I was surprised that this little girl trumped her brother in size. Her birth weight prompted the nurse to advice breastfeeding "every chance I got." A quote that was not followed up with any severe warnings or fear mongering. My hospital stay consisted of small snacks, skin-to-skin holds and frequent feeding. My baby and I were only separated when I showered (at which time she transferred from my chest to her father's). I could not help but contrast this scenario with my first birth. I wondered what that event would have looked like had I been knowledgeable and supported.

Yes, hindsight it 50-50, but I hope foresight can be as well. We have come a long way in our birth and breastfeeding practices. The Baby Friendly Hospital Initiative has laid some great ground-work and provided a foundation for providing in-hospital breastfeeding support. The initiatives, protocols, policies--all aided by skilled and educated health professionals are helping to bring instinct and the biological norms back into the highly medicated and routinely intrusive process of hospital birth.

For those who find themselves where I was as a first-time mom, let me offer you the information and support I so desperately needed. First, you need to know you are amazing. You are, after all, capable of making a person! Your body is a super-factory that is able to create the most intricate life form known. Simultaneously, your body is preparing the perfect nourishment for its creation. What a spectacular system you are equipped with.

Secondly, know that you will face adversaries in your quest to breastfeed. There are people who have made a point to question your ability. I am both saddened and angered that instead of celebrating the power and strength of a woman, some choose to undermine and minimize the uniqueness of our gender. I suppose there are many reasons for the skepticism. Some sabotage breastfeeding for a profit, some out of ignorance and a few from habit. Old wives' tales are difficult to shake.

Here are a few reassuring points you need to commit to memory.


  1. Your baby is not born "starving." Although food is often withheld from the laboring woman, the baby's access to nourishment is not interrupted in the womb.
  2. Baby's are not born with an "empty" stomach. There is research on how much fluid a baby's empty stomach can hold and malicious people are using that information to question a woman's ability to satisfy her newborn. Remember, baby's gauge is not on "empty" at birth.
  3. Mammals have milk for their offspring and instinctively nurse. Visit any zoo, wild animal park, pet store, etc. and ask to see the resident "lactation consultant." You will be met with blank stares and confusion. Mammals have been feeding their newborns for generations.
  4. Babies have very tiny tummies. They are born with a desire to suck and suck they will. The more frequently the better. Because the suck reflex exists, if a baby is placed on the breast, he will often begin feeding spontaneously. The baby that is fed frequently, will be satisfied and signal (through hormones and biology) for the mother's breasts to make more milk. 
  5. Moms have thick, rich milk the first few days that is full of protective factors and concentrated nutrients. This milk also has a mild laxative effect that encourages the expelling of meconium and reduces the risk of jaundice.
  6. Since babies have tiny tummies and moms have small amounts of colostrum, the baby can eat constantly and not get overfed.  In fact, when the baby is satisfied, the suck will change from active eating to pacifying--another way a newborn instinctively stops himself from eating to the point of discomfort. 
  7. The best way to make milk is by removing milk. Early, frequent feeds is the key. If a mom and baby are separated at birth, mom should remove milk manually or with a pump within six hours of delivery.
  8. For full-term, healthy newborns, breastmilk intake is not measured. It is preferred to allow mom and baby and partner time to recover and bond. Measuring intake is not necessary since there are more favorable ways to ensure milk transfer.
  9. Babies should have one wet diaper for every twenty-four hours of life until around day six, when they will begin having 8-10 wet diapers daily. 
  10. Initial weight loss is common. Babies should return to birth weight by two weeks of age. It is important to get a good weight at discharge or the first week of life to make certain baby is gaining weight. 

Christy Jo Hendricks, IBCLC, invented the Lactation Lanyard to remind mothers that their milk supply is the standard for feeding, NOT the formula bottles.

The first few days after delivery is mostly about bonding, recovery and feeding. Most women who can birth can also breastfeed. It is the way a mammals body works. There are conditions (like the ones I had after delivering my third child) that require intervention and support.

Warning signs can include:

  • No, or little diaper output
  • Discontent, inconsolable infant
  • Continued weight loss
  • Signs of dehydration
  • High billirubin
  • Constant feeding without satisfaction
The breastfeeding mother may show warning signs:
  • Little or no change in her breasts during pregnancy
  • Breasts that do not feel softer after a feeding
  • Pain while breastfeeding
  • Diagnosis of retained placenta
The above is not an exhaustive list nor is it a list of reasons to abandon the breastfeeding path. These are, however, a few reasons to involve an IBCLC in your journey. Occasionally, temporary supplementation is necessary or even long-term supplementation, but a lactation professional can advise you on how much more milk is needed and what kind of supplementation is available.

Data shows that most moms want to breastfeed. Who are we to downplay their desires. We should do all we can to support the goals of women in our society, who, after all, are creating society. To effortlessly dismiss a woman's goal of providing human milk to her newborn or to sabotage her goals with fear and false information is disgraceful.

I have spoken with many women who feel robbed of the breastfeeding experience and others that are angry that they did not have the support or education that would have resolved their issues. The groups that are preying on these women to gain followers or instigate more anger and resentment are indeed deplorable. I hope we can see our government, communities, families, health agencies and medical professionals working to support breastfeeding and empower moms rather than stripping them of their goals and power.



Thursday, December 15, 2011

Formula Companies Dare to Compare Imitations to the Real Thing

This post is about advertising, marketing and deception.  We as educators, public health professionals, moms, citizens, consumers, tax payers, etc.  have to demand honesty in advertising--especially from the formula companies.  These companies use inferior ingredients, cut corners in production, and then lie about its value, causing customers to flock to the registers with complete peace of mind.  As consumers, we question the quality of what we purchase and we want what we pay for...then there's formula...


I made some tongue-in-cheek posters last week.  I am a very visual learner, so I created a visual.  I was attempting to show the stark difference between formula and breastmilk in a vivid, humorous way, but the humor was lost on some.


My posters showed the stark contrast between artificial infant milk and breastmilk.  The superiority of breastmilk is not a new concept, but rather a well-documented, well-established, scientific fact. The two are NOT created equal.  In fact, by law, every can of formula must explain that breastmilk is superior to the product contained therein.  One is a man-made, synthetic recipe; the other a natural, organic species-specific food.  Just like vitamin C tablets are not as potent or healthy as natural vitamin C from real fruit consumed; formula (artificial breast milk) is not as healthy as natural, species-specific breastmilk.




Most of the people who viewed the photos I posted gave it a "thumbs up" and some re-posted. Facebook is pretty good at tracking where posts travel via shares and the subsequent comments.  It was the dialogue that surfaced on some of my friends' pages that truly concerned me.  I realized for the first time how successful the formula companies are at not only dominating the infant feeding market, but also controlling the critics that may voice any opposition.  They conjure up feelings of guilt, anger, fear, disappointment and frustration--not for their product or marketers--but at those who may want to point out that their product is inferior...how did they accomplish that?


One irate commentator "shouted" obscenities and cursed the person who made the poster...strong, emotional response--was this response to the false advertising and implied similarities of formula and breastmilk?  No, as far as I could tell, the reader took offense at what she perceived the message insinuated...that she was a "bad" mother. Nothing could be further from the truth.  I even prefaced the ad with the following remarks
"Just a visual reminder that no matter how the formula companies try to package it, formula and breastmilk are NOT created equal...another thought on the deceptive advertising of formula...(not-and never will be-an attack on those who use it...)"

If a mom gives her infant formula to ensure survival she is definitely a good mom!  There are many legitimate reasons to use or supplement with formula (adoptive moms, foster moms, dads with custody, moms on certain medications...all rely on the nutrition adequacy of artificial infant milk), but still the reader saw:  formula=bad mom; breastmilk=good mom; and I was absolutely, positively judging them!  When a company can cause formula-using moms to take things personally they have achieve a great accomplishment. These companies have undoubtedly succeeded in attaching feelings to facts and substitute perception for reality.


Then there was responses from colleagues in the lactation field.  A couple stated that although they know the risks of formula feeding, they anticipated that people might be offended and riddled with guilt if they were to share my photo on their wall.  Now, this is where the formula companies really hit the jackpot.  Not only do they promote their product, but they also have successfully silenced the opposition.  Really?!  Professionals can't share that there are risks to formula-feeding without retaliation?  Are we free to share risks of not using a car seat or feeding infants honey, egg whites and peanut butter?  What if parents want to give these foods to their children?  Does that mean I am prohibited to share the information for fear of causing guilt? Of course not, but these other safety and feeding recommendations do not elicit the same emotional response the formula warnings do.


It appears as though formula companies have even found a way to convince breastfeeding advocates to keep silent about opinions and concerns.  Even as I write this, I have a bit of fear and trepidation about how this blog will be received.  Will people understand that I want to educate, and that my heart is in helping moms regardless of what their feeding choice is?  Will readers understand I am campaigning for honesty in advertising, or will I fall victim to the scandal that all opposition is insensitive and cruel?  I really am at a loss for how to change perception.  I hope others will help me turn the tide of perception by sharing this post.


What other company can get the loyal consumers on board and silent the opposition? Formula is a taboo subject to discuss in any circle. It has a protective barrier around it and is off-limits when it comes to criticism.  How did they ever achieve this marketing phenomenon?


I am also a bit perplexed and maybe even in awe at how the big formula companies have succeeded in promoting their imitations as "close to the real thing." No one believes that artificial infant milk is as good as breastmilk, but the nation accepts that it is "close enough."  I have to congratulate the conglomerates for their marketing genius and their ability to control perception.


I often stand in front of a group I am teaching and take a side step to my left and boldly announce, "I am now one step closer to China." Of course, I am no where near China, but one step closer.  Recently, I created this poster to convey the same message:


Here's another way for me to put this in perspective.  If a young couple walked into a jewelry store, while window shopping for an engagement ring, and a savvy salesman produced the sugar-coated ring pop with the description that it is "closer to a diamond than ever before," the customers would be outraged, insulted and storm out of the shop (of course the guy may still nonchalantly ask, "how much for the beautiful topaz").  The point is, we are wise to manipulation--especially from salespeople. The candy sentiment may be beautiful, shiny, slide nicely onto the ring finger, but it is not the same as a diamond--and how dare a jeweler insinuate that it is!




Would honesty be appreciated?  Absolutely...the same salesman could have said, "I have this replica that could serve the purpose of a symbol during the nuptials.  It isn't a diamond.  It is made of hard sugar, but you can use it as a stand in."  Then the couple could make an informed decision.  Most would prefer the diamond, but no one but they know all the circumstances.  Maybe a diamond is not an option.  Perhaps the bride has adverse reactions to metal and the plastic alternative is perfect!  They can confidently select the confectionery token without any guilt.  Content with their choice, they are still happy for those who can buy diamonds and understand that diamonds are superior, they do not try to argue the incredible investment that ring pops are and become outraged when anyone suggests that diamonds are superior. It would be ludicrous.


Take the next scenario.  A customer steps onto a used car lot.  Just the location puts people on the defensive by anticipating lies or stretching of the truth.  I'm not saying it's right or even warranted, just a matter of  car lot facts. The car salesman approaches the on-looker with a beauty to sale.  It has four wheels, a new paint job, will get you where you need to go and is "just as good as" the Lamborghini parked adjacent.  Really, who are you kidding?!  Consumer Reports are out and the little, plastic toy does not beat the sports car in any category (well, except MPG--which could actually be a good selling point in this gas war).  The real kicker comes with the sticker price...the dwarfed vehicle is actually priced higher.  The salesman blames inflation and the premium parts that have been used in construction.  Once again, no sale.  We are not going to be duped by a smooth talker.  We are going to look under the hood, kick the tires, and we may in all actuality purchase the little car...not because it is better--or even as good as--the hot rod, but because we need transportation and it is a viable option, but not because we "bought the lie."




Now, let me attempt to share the how these same analogies are used in formula promotion. The impracticable, ridiculous sales tactics mentioned above are laughable, but when marketing experts use them to promote formula, they now miraculously work!  The company passes off an inferior product as the real thing.  Customers are promised that it is "closer than ever to breastmilk."


How can they make these unsubstantiated claims?  Professionals working in the advertising world will attest that these phrases can be legally used if even the color is closer to breastmilk than it was previously.  The American Academy of Pediatrics, World Health Organization, UNICEF and the Department of Public Health all try to expose the deceptive marketing to no avail. These companies seem to be untouchable--even with facts.


Not only are established organizations' warnings rejected, friends and family attempt to share the truth about formula and the "Ring Pop crowd" embraces a mob mentality.  All of the sudden well-meaning friends are labeled "Breastfeeding Nazis" or "Lactivists."  Why is the truth so threatening?  Why would sharing the truth be interpreted as "making formula-feeding moms feel guilty"?


Here's a confession, just because I feel like readers may think I cannot relate.  I formula-fed my first child.  Not exclusively, I breastfed when it was convenient. Do I feel guilty when I hear how certain risks are increased with formula-feeding.  No, absolutely not.  I was convinced that formula and breastmilk were equal.  My nurse gave my son formula...she was older, "wiser" and had more children than I, so I deferred feeding to the lady Nightingale.  Now, I am upset that no one shared the truth with me. No one said the manufacturers cut corners, use inferior ingredients and market their product in order to please the share holders because it is a commodity that people heavily invest in...that would have been helpful.  I also put my son on his belly to sleep--another sign of the times.  I would do things differently now.  A lot of us would.






I have friends, family and clients that have had to use formula to feed their infants.  They do not feel guilty either.  It is a matter of fact.  They almost all would have preferred breastmilk, but it wasn't an option.  They knew the facts, were informed and also admit that scientists and other experts are correct in stating that breastmilk is the best choice. They are not part of the crowd that takes remarks personally.


Remember, by law every formula company has to confirm that breastmilk is superior to formula.  They have to print it right on the packaging labels, but do we get angry at the formula companies for this atrocious declaration? No, we direct our anger at a friend, family member or random individual that posts something on Facebook.  Wow, how do they do it?




Why have my ads elicited such emotional responses from some people?  Once again, I think it is part of the marketing.  


Please indulge me as I share another personal analogy of artificial food.  TPN  (Total parenteral nutrition) keeps getting improved upon...it is "closer than ever to nutritious food."  My dad had to be on it to get nutrients that he couldn't get by eating food, we appreciated the medical advance, but wouldn't have chosen it as our first choice, we knew food was preferable...it was just a matter of fact that we would need to use it to replace food to sustain life...we didn't feel guilty for using the TPN, or offended when professionals explained there were risks to using TPN as a food alternative, I understood it was lifesaving, but I was also happy for the rest of my family that could eat whole food...no one ever tried to convince us that TPN was equal to whole food...doctors and nutritionists were very transparent. Why is formula any different?



These are some final remarks and observations that I believe help the formula companies perpetuate a feeling of guilt when someone mentions the formula vs. breastmilk topic.  Moms feel guilty. That is a fact. Formula companies know this and they take advantage of moms during a vulnerable time in their lives...they play on a temporary weakness.  Moms assume the "fight or flight mode" and fight off a perceived attack...guns are cocked and everyone is ready for a fight...we will defend ourselves at all costs...good meaning friends must also be aware of this delicate time in a mother's life and assume a protective role as we educate.  That may seem like an oxymoron, but it is possible and preferred. 



How else can we combat the advertising moguls?  We must figure out a way to remove feelings from formula.  Just like readers had to try to remove feelings from fact as this article was being read.  It's difficult because perception is reality.


So what can we say about formula?  The truth.   formula was created to sustain life by trying to replicate breastmilk, much like TPN is used, but that does not make it the same as breastmilk...education and truth can go along way, and everyone deserves to be informed...

Sometimes there is no choice, but given a choice, it only makes sense...

I hope this doesn't come across as segmented.  I have a lot of thoughts and this blog has taken way too much time to compose, but I have been cautious and rewritten it a few times.  I will just have to submit it to the public after I make a final note to my lactivist friends: we must be extremely cautions to never confirm what the formula companies try to insinuate: that guilt and fear, depression and anger should be directed at lactation consultants.  If we make clients defensive, we are promoting the formula companies agenda.  We must be honest, sincere, gentle, supportive and loving (in fact, maybe even a little more than we naturally are).



Hope this provided some food for thought...
Christy Jo Hendricks, IBCLC, RLC, CD(DONA), CAPPA CLE Faculty


Hope you can join me for a lactation training in the future...together we can make a difference
http://www.birthingandbreastfeeding.com/

Sunday, August 7, 2011

Preface to The Truth about Infant Formula

I have been asked to share the information about formula and advertising that I presented at a recent conference concerning infant formula and how it is marketed in our Western Culture. This will undoubtedly have to be a multi-part series, so let me begin with the Preface.

Scientists, doctors, nurses, medical professionals--all agree and validate the fact that breastmilk is not only the ideal food for infants, but also that children can experience sickness and disease if it is withheld from them, yet, mothers still turn to formula as a legitimate alternative to breastmilk.  Families are targeted by an industry that spends millions of dollars annually to advertise.  They invest heavily in misleading unsuspecting audiences and unfortunately, the payoff is great. According to Companiesandmarkets.com, baby foods and infant formula market is projected to reach about US $2.3 billion by the year 2015.



There's an entire history of formula that hopefully I will be able to write about later.  But in a nutshell, formula was just that a "formula" concocted to sustain life in a moment's notice--in emergencies when a mother was unable to provide breastmilk and a wet nurse was unavailable.  It was a scientific breakthrough and an incredible contribution to the medical world.

History does not only repeat itself in regards to formula advertising...it practically mimics the tone and inflection of each word as noted in this 1920s ad.


A good history lesson written can be found at Dispelling Breastfeeding Myths

I like to compare infant formula to Total Parenteral Nutrition (TPN). TPN is nutrition given via a catheter when a person cannot tolerate food.  There are risks of infection, blood clots and other complications.  It is not ideal, but is a legitimate substitute in dire circumstances.  As useful and necessary as TPN is, a medical professional would never say, "TPN is easier than preparing food and it has all the ingredients that food has, so you can just TPN feed."

I hope my point comes across graciously.  I know there is a place for formula (artificial baby milk), but its place is not in the gut of a baby when it is not medically necessary.  There is a hierarchy of infant feeding that begins with mother's own milk, goes through the list of donor milk and finally ends with formula, but make no mistake, formula does do it's job at sustaining life, and the "formula" has improved over the years. I don't think the formula product is the real culprit in our battle to encourage breastfeeding or to educate moms, but the advertising techniques and the misleading information being promoted is what we must expose and combat.

My next posting will undoubtedly contain several photos and formula labels depicting the false advetising, but as a sample, I will demonstrate some "misleading" advertising on the new Enafamil Premium box...the side of the box boasts: "New! Natural Defense Dual Prebiotics for digestive health.  Enfamil Premium provides these three proven* benefits...

The front of the box mirrors these statements:

The discerning individual will trace the asterisk (*) and try to locate the information that expounds on the study, one must look hard to locate the additional information...kind of like "Where's Waldo"...not only is it small print, but it also lays at an unnatural angle.  People read left to right and would naturally turn their head to read the statement, but the clever (well planned) placement of the note forces the reader to turn the box upside-down to solve the puzzle...yes, this is strategic.  Also, the phrase "Natural Defense" is a trademark, it does not mean that this formula has an actual natural defense, the trademark name suggests the like, but once again it is strategic advertising. Even the packaging and labeling attempt to lure consumers.  The new packaging is a gold, metallic box with the name "Premium." posted predominately on the front. Just a glance across the supermarket shelves reveals that a savvy advertiser has this box shouting, "Pick me!"

Another aspect of advertising would be the violation of the WHO Code, once again something that needs mentioning, but would constitute another writing segment.  There is some good information already in print about the Code and how it is being violated on a regular basis by formula companies.  Jump over to the 24 page pdf of the WHO Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes to read the original Code, then dive into some of the blogs and articles showing how the Code is violated on a regular basis.


My favorite media clip of the Code violation was created by some of my GOO Students as a class project this year.  They used the "CSI" approach and arrested a can of formula for being in violation of the Who Code and announced that the formula was going to be put in the "can."  I had it posted on my site for awhile, but lost it over time...great concept though...someone needs to hold the companies accountable.

This part may get a little off track, but what about Fair Advertising, violations of the WHO Code and class action litigation, and the National Advertising Division's involvement with regulating advertising?  Well, STATE COURT CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENTS:  A PATTERN OF ABUSE AND A 
PROPOSED SOLUTION made the following observations and cited the lawsuit Free v. Abott Laboratories

Every year, thousands of class actions are filed in the United States – the vast majority in our state court system.  The attorneys who file these lawsuits purport to represent thousands or even  millions of allegedly injured individuals.  But too frequently, the interests of the supposedly
injured parties are not really represented at all.  Instead of pursuing the interests of their supposed clients, the attorneys strike a deal under which the money ends up in their own pockets– rather than the hands of the supposedly injured parties they claim to represent.  The result is more and more class action filings, concentrated in certain state courts, and a growing pattern of settlement abuse.
 Free v. Abbott Laboratories
 In this infant formula antitrust action, the district court concluded that the proposed settlement was neither fair, nor adequate, nor reasonable, because members of the class would receive no more than four to six dollars (a tiny fraction of the $4.3 million dollar settlement) each, while their attorneys would receive $1.5 million dollars.  
Even when these companies have to "pay the price" they pay it to the pockets of attorneys and the media rarely considers the rulings newsworthy.  Exposure of lawsuits, recalls, detrimental chemicals found in formula, bug parts discovered in powdered cans--all need exposure and media attention on a regular basis, not just as a means of promoting breastfeeding, but to scrutinize formula for mothers that trust it to nourish their young.  Accountability is always a good thing.