Monday
Sep142009
Are we asking the wrong people to comply with the International Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes?
Monday, September 14, 2009
The World Health Organization (WHO)'s International Code of Marketing of Breast-Milk Substitutes was adopted by the World Health Assembly in 1981 as a minimum requirement to ensure appropriate feeding of infants and young children. According to the WHO 's FAQs on the International Code:
In developing countries, the difference between being breastfed and being bottle fed truly is life or death. Around 1.4 million lives could be saved every year with improved breastfeeding . In the developed world, formula feeding isn't as likely to kill a child, but not breastfeeding does come with a whole host of health risks for both the baby and the mother. It can lead to deaths as well as increased health problems and increased health costs (whether you have a public system or a private insurance system, you do pay for other people's health care to some extent).
Bottle imagery is powerful. Everywhere you look you see babies being bottle fed. At the mall, on television, in magazines, on wrapping paper and gift cards, in children's books, in your doctor's office, at the pool, on the bus, at the park, at day care, and so on. In addition to just being what is considered "normal", the bottle industry and the infant formula industry are spending large sums of money to ensure that you see bottles everywhere. There are segments of the population in the United States where young adults have never seen a baby being breastfed and where they may not even know that breasts can be used to feed a baby.
The International Code was put into place partially to try to combat that bottle imagery. The Code sets restrictions on marketing and related practices of the following products:
There are a number of restrictions covering a number of different stakeholders, but one in particular says that "there should be no advertising or other form of promotion to the general public of products within the scope of this Code."
I don't use Google Adsense to generate revenue on my blog because of the incredibly deceptive marketing practices that formula companies use on Google (e.g. tricking people into thinking they are getting breastfeeding help when they are really getting a formula ad).
I am a member of the BlogHer ads network. Generally, I have been impressed with the way the program is run. Until recently, I was able to indicate certain categories of ads that I would not allow on my site. That changed and I now have to ask to have ads removed if I feel they are inappropriate. Unfortunately, since there is no option to preview the ads in advance of them showing up on my blog, this means that numerous visitors to my blog might see an offensive ad before I have the chance to remove it.
I do understand that bottles are sometimes used to feed breast milk. As a former pumping mom myself, I did allow a bottle ad on my blog in the past that specifically mentioned using the bottle for breast milk and that didn't point to any specific super powers of the bottle. I know that in theory it is a violation of the Code, but personally I didn't feel that it crossed the line. Others may disagree, but given all the extremely unethical and deceptive marketing practices by manufacturers of breast milk substitutes, I felt this one was acceptable.
But this week a line was crossed that I wasn't comfortable with. This time, the offending ad was an overt animated AVENT ad that said:
If you click on it and scroll down to the fine print you would find out that these claims are in comparison with other bottles, not with breastfeeding. But most people don't click. They just see the images. See the words. And internalize that message. Bottles = better sleep. Buy AVENT = get sleep. Buy AVENT = happier baby. Cue the breastfeeding moms with colicy babies running out to the store to buy AVENT bottles instead of addressing the three known situations in the breastfed baby that may result in fussiness or colic. This is not about using a bottle to feed breast milk while you are at work (except maybe for moms on a night shift I guess). This is about blatantly advertising a bottle as the best alternative for nighttime sleep. A time when usually the mother would be right there with a boob on the ready.
So I blocked the bottle ad, but not before it was viewed 662 times. In addition, there was a link in the text links below the ads to a contest allowing moms to win $500. The text link, which showed up for a certain time period under all ads (not just the AVENT ad), must have been viewed thousands of times. I'm sorry.
Advertising is powerful. Although there are numerous societal barriers to breastfeeding, the fact that people see babies bottle feeding everywhere and rarely see babies breastfeeding is a problem. I made $3.00 in return for 662 people being force fed bottle feeding imagery. It isn't worth it to me. To try to make it up to the world, I have replaced my BlogHer ads for a period of time with some beautiful breastfeeding imagery. I am also a big supporter of the Best for Babes campaign that is attempting to spread a positive message about breastfeeding and have a permanent link to their site in the right column.
But here is the problem. No one is making a profit from you using your breasts to feed your babies. At least not the type of profits made from bottles and formula. The government may save some money by virtue of having a healthier population, so they invest a bit in promoting breastfeeding. But the scant amount they can afford to spend is nothing in comparison with the abundance of funds breast-milk substitute manufacturers and distributors are willing to pour into advertising in order to increase their profits.
Encouraging people to make the healthier choice, in cases where the healthier choice doesn't make anyone any profits, needs to be regulated. This is why tobacco advertising is regulated. There are no anti-smoking companies to pour money into anti-tobacco advertising. Only the limited funds of the government and NGOs. So instead the government has to create balance in the message by regulating the way the message is communicated. This is what the International Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes is trying to do with regards to formula, bottles and the like.
The government has, in more than 60 countries, adopted the International Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes and made it law. Some countries have gone a step further. For example, as explained by UNICEF:
In the absence of legislation, the Code encourages manufacturers and distributors to comply with its provisions. Some do so voluntarily. Some pretend that they do, but instead blatantly lie, do not fully disclose ownership, or make other choices that compromise their compliance. Others just don't care at all about compliance and care only about profits.
So if governments are not legislating and we can't count on manufacturers and distributors to police themselves, whose assistance can we solicit to combat bottle imagery and increase breast feeding imagery?
To answer that question, we need to ask where the images are most pervasive. Sure, product labeling is part of the issue and health professionals are often accomplices. But I would like to think there is an opportunity to engage advertisers, broadcasters, and publishers and get them to help enforce the Code and concurrently ramp up breastfeeding imagery.
When I questioned why BlogHer continues to allow bottle and formula ads in violation of the Code, the reply I was given from the executive team and sales management was:
Is that good enough?
For me it isn't. This goes beyond something I disagree with or something that is not my cup of tea. It is about a practice that the United Nations attributes to millions of deaths each year. I know we can't count on the formula and bottle manufacturers to comply unless they have to. So here I am, begging the advertising, broadcasting and publishing industry to do the right thing. To seek out ethical companies to work with. To ideally avoid all bottle imagery, but to at least not accept messages that deceive people into thinking that formula might be better or that a bottle might be better.
If BlogHer won't do that for me, will someone else? Are there any ethical blog advertising networks out there (the equivalent to ethical funds in the advertising world)?
I guess I could be altruistic and not have any advertising on my blog, but I tend to be a blue sky capitalist type and believe that I should be able to earn a living and make the world a better place at the same time. While I mull this over, enjoy the boobies that I put up in place of the BlogHer ads.
UPDATE: BlogHer agreed to create an opt-out category that would allow its bloggers to have Code compliant blogs. Thank you BlogHer!
The protection, promotion and support of breastfeeding rank among the most effective interventions to improve child survival. It is estimated that high coverage of optimal breastfeeding practices could avert 13% of the 10.6 million deaths of children under five years occurring globally every year. Exclusive breastfeeding in the first six months of life is particularly beneficial, and infants who are not breastfed in the first month of life may be as much as 25 times more likely to die than infants who are exclusively breastfed.
In developing countries, the difference between being breastfed and being bottle fed truly is life or death. Around 1.4 million lives could be saved every year with improved breastfeeding . In the developed world, formula feeding isn't as likely to kill a child, but not breastfeeding does come with a whole host of health risks for both the baby and the mother. It can lead to deaths as well as increased health problems and increased health costs (whether you have a public system or a private insurance system, you do pay for other people's health care to some extent).
The power of bottle imagery
Bottle imagery is powerful. Everywhere you look you see babies being bottle fed. At the mall, on television, in magazines, on wrapping paper and gift cards, in children's books, in your doctor's office, at the pool, on the bus, at the park, at day care, and so on. In addition to just being what is considered "normal", the bottle industry and the infant formula industry are spending large sums of money to ensure that you see bottles everywhere. There are segments of the population in the United States where young adults have never seen a baby being breastfed and where they may not even know that breasts can be used to feed a baby.
The International Code was put into place partially to try to combat that bottle imagery. The Code sets restrictions on marketing and related practices of the following products:
- breast-milk substitutes, including infant formula, other milk products, foods and beverages, including bottle-fed complementary foods
- feeding bottles
- teats, like bottle nipples and pacifiers
There are a number of restrictions covering a number of different stakeholders, but one in particular says that "there should be no advertising or other form of promotion to the general public of products within the scope of this Code."
I don't use Google Adsense to generate revenue on my blog because of the incredibly deceptive marketing practices that formula companies use on Google (e.g. tricking people into thinking they are getting breastfeeding help when they are really getting a formula ad).
I am a member of the BlogHer ads network. Generally, I have been impressed with the way the program is run. Until recently, I was able to indicate certain categories of ads that I would not allow on my site. That changed and I now have to ask to have ads removed if I feel they are inappropriate. Unfortunately, since there is no option to preview the ads in advance of them showing up on my blog, this means that numerous visitors to my blog might see an offensive ad before I have the chance to remove it.
I do understand that bottles are sometimes used to feed breast milk. As a former pumping mom myself, I did allow a bottle ad on my blog in the past that specifically mentioned using the bottle for breast milk and that didn't point to any specific super powers of the bottle. I know that in theory it is a violation of the Code, but personally I didn't feel that it crossed the line. Others may disagree, but given all the extremely unethical and deceptive marketing practices by manufacturers of breast milk substitutes, I felt this one was acceptable.
But this week a line was crossed that I wasn't comfortable with. This time, the offending ad was an overt animated AVENT ad that said:
The AVENT Bottle
Clinically proven to reduce fussing in newborns
zzzzzzzz
So everyone gets a good night's sleep
Click to find out how AVENT helps reduce fussing
If you click on it and scroll down to the fine print you would find out that these claims are in comparison with other bottles, not with breastfeeding. But most people don't click. They just see the images. See the words. And internalize that message. Bottles = better sleep. Buy AVENT = get sleep. Buy AVENT = happier baby. Cue the breastfeeding moms with colicy babies running out to the store to buy AVENT bottles instead of addressing the three known situations in the breastfed baby that may result in fussiness or colic. This is not about using a bottle to feed breast milk while you are at work (except maybe for moms on a night shift I guess). This is about blatantly advertising a bottle as the best alternative for nighttime sleep. A time when usually the mother would be right there with a boob on the ready.
So I blocked the bottle ad, but not before it was viewed 662 times. In addition, there was a link in the text links below the ads to a contest allowing moms to win $500. The text link, which showed up for a certain time period under all ads (not just the AVENT ad), must have been viewed thousands of times. I'm sorry.
Can we combat it with some breastfeeding imagery?
Advertising is powerful. Although there are numerous societal barriers to breastfeeding, the fact that people see babies bottle feeding everywhere and rarely see babies breastfeeding is a problem. I made $3.00 in return for 662 people being force fed bottle feeding imagery. It isn't worth it to me. To try to make it up to the world, I have replaced my BlogHer ads for a period of time with some beautiful breastfeeding imagery. I am also a big supporter of the Best for Babes campaign that is attempting to spread a positive message about breastfeeding and have a permanent link to their site in the right column.But here is the problem. No one is making a profit from you using your breasts to feed your babies. At least not the type of profits made from bottles and formula. The government may save some money by virtue of having a healthier population, so they invest a bit in promoting breastfeeding. But the scant amount they can afford to spend is nothing in comparison with the abundance of funds breast-milk substitute manufacturers and distributors are willing to pour into advertising in order to increase their profits.
Encouraging people to make the healthier choice, in cases where the healthier choice doesn't make anyone any profits, needs to be regulated. This is why tobacco advertising is regulated. There are no anti-smoking companies to pour money into anti-tobacco advertising. Only the limited funds of the government and NGOs. So instead the government has to create balance in the message by regulating the way the message is communicated. This is what the International Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes is trying to do with regards to formula, bottles and the like.
Now to my point
The government has, in more than 60 countries, adopted the International Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes and made it law. Some countries have gone a step further. For example, as explained by UNICEF:
In Iran, the Government has taken control of the import and sale of breastmilk substitutes. Formula is available only by prescription, and the tins must carry a generic label - no brand names, pictures or promotional messages are allowed.
In India, legislation requires that tins of infant formula carry a conspicuous warning about the potential harm caused by artificial feeding, placed on the central panel of the label.
In the absence of legislation, the Code encourages manufacturers and distributors to comply with its provisions. Some do so voluntarily. Some pretend that they do, but instead blatantly lie, do not fully disclose ownership, or make other choices that compromise their compliance. Others just don't care at all about compliance and care only about profits.
So if governments are not legislating and we can't count on manufacturers and distributors to police themselves, whose assistance can we solicit to combat bottle imagery and increase breast feeding imagery?
To answer that question, we need to ask where the images are most pervasive. Sure, product labeling is part of the issue and health professionals are often accomplices. But I would like to think there is an opportunity to engage advertisers, broadcasters, and publishers and get them to help enforce the Code and concurrently ramp up breastfeeding imagery.
When I questioned why BlogHer continues to allow bottle and formula ads in violation of the Code, the reply I was given from the executive team and sales management was:
BlogHer does or would accept advertising for bottles, formula, and a variety of other products that might be polarizing in our community. That is why we have always and will continue to give every blogger the option to opt out of any ad featuring any product or service with which they disagree.
Is that good enough?
For me it isn't. This goes beyond something I disagree with or something that is not my cup of tea. It is about a practice that the United Nations attributes to millions of deaths each year. I know we can't count on the formula and bottle manufacturers to comply unless they have to. So here I am, begging the advertising, broadcasting and publishing industry to do the right thing. To seek out ethical companies to work with. To ideally avoid all bottle imagery, but to at least not accept messages that deceive people into thinking that formula might be better or that a bottle might be better.
If BlogHer won't do that for me, will someone else? Are there any ethical blog advertising networks out there (the equivalent to ethical funds in the advertising world)?
I guess I could be altruistic and not have any advertising on my blog, but I tend to be a blue sky capitalist type and believe that I should be able to earn a living and make the world a better place at the same time. While I mull this over, enjoy the boobies that I put up in place of the BlogHer ads.
UPDATE: BlogHer agreed to create an opt-out category that would allow its bloggers to have Code compliant blogs. Thank you BlogHer!
Related reading:
- International Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes
- WHO 's FAQs on the International Code
- A close look at Nestle's letter in the RCSLT Bulletin shows the dishonesty used to protect this company's unethical practices on Boycott Nestle
- Taking Down the Almighty Bottle on Mothering.com
- The Case Against Reasoning on one-of-those-women
Reader Comments (55)
[...] and has demonstrated the power of social media to bring about change. For example, because of Annie’s advocacy efforts, –and the timing would suggest that it is precisely because of the Nestle firestorm– [...]
I am currently pregnant with my second child, my son has just turned 4...and I recall how many samples were given at the hospital, at the pediatricians (which I said thank you but no thank you), and randomly delivered to my door in boxes. Even my mom received coupons when I had him...which was strange to me how they found her address and connected it to me but that is besides the point. This was a really good read on many points. I was young (in today's terms) when I had my son,23. I also felt a bit like I didn't know what to do. I have always had strong views (I have been vegan through many years and other people/advertisements never seemed to deter it), yet when I was a new mother, completely opposed to formula....something happened. I began with breastfeeding and very little support; if anything I felt uncomfortable and alone...my own baby nurse was shocked I didn't have formula in the house and told me I needed to get some immedietly because if not I may wishing I did, then at the first checkup (I think in a couple, or 6 or something days...I don't recall exactly) My doctor said we needed to go out immediatly and get bottles and bottle feed atleast once a day (with my pumped milk) or the baby would never want to take a bottle or a pacifer [I didn't have pacifiers either at the time]. We went home. I felt lost again. I thought I was doing what was right but according to everyone else I was doing everything wrong. My husband and baby nurse went to BBRus and bought the "essential" I had forgotten...the Born Free bottles, a container of organic formula, and pacifiers. I ended up using some formula to supplement....as was advised by the uninformed/trying to be helpful advisors.....and a few months later my son had come down with a cold. A really bad cold/cough....needed to go to hospital a day then inhalers(pulmicort/xoponex) nearly a month. He had RSV. I wasn't told that at the time...the doctor told me once he got better....she said she didn't want to frighten me. He was around 3 months when this occured. Things happen. People and babies get sick. I live a very natural lifestyle usually and honestly believe most sicknesses are preventable if the immune system is fed strongly. Lots of chlorophyll and and alot of plants, nuts, beans, and seeds. I don't know the cause for certain....but I have always had a gut feeling my baby's immune system was compromised from not having mommies milk completely. This makes me sick every time I think about it and saddens my heart. My son has had a few other colds and they go straight to his chest when he does. This happens to my hubby as well. (He wasn't breastfeed either). The doctors say it's genetic. I disagree. I have barely been sick my whole life (knock on wood)....I was purely breastfed. This time around I will not give in to anything. This just shows how even strong willed people, and people with really strong beliefs can be sucked in. I hate using myself as an example, (and really wish I wasn't) but hopefully this will help someone who may be convinced in the wrong way. This time around I am prepared to be stronger :)
You have a right to your feelings and I can't blame you for being angry that you were given bad information.
I just hope you don't beat yourself up.
All three of my kids breastfed/feed (my youngest is not yet even 6 mos). My first breastfed until 18 mos and hardly ever gets sick. My second breastfed to 2 and a half years and he gets everything. Likewise, my husband and I were both bottlefed formula and he's healthy like a horse and I have had a cold for the last two months.
There are risks to formula and benefits to breastmilk...but you can't predict what would have happened in any one given case.
Your child is loved and nourished by a mother who cares deeply--that's the essential thing.
Thanks Candace. I agree that is is tough to put the blame on a specific thing, when there are so many factors involved in one's health. I just have always been upset about the fact that I didn't stick up for what I believed in at the time, then again...that time has long past and I am much more informed and prepared this time around. Thanks again and I hope your cold goes away soon :)
Hi everyone. My name is Francine and I just started a petition calling for the United States to adopt the International Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes law. Please take the time to sign and share it!
http://www.change.org/petitions/president-barack-obama-united-states-congress-adopt-the-international-code-of-marketing-of-breast-milk-substitutes-as-law