Hi JP. Funny that I did not notice na wala na palang adverstisement para sa mgs infants. I remember so well na noon marami di ba? Now, I am really at a lost why WHO decided to ban the adverstisements for infant formula considering that the harm brought by formulated milk is never harmful in any way only that it decreases the immunity of infants from certain sickness—this I read somewhere in a medical book.

But why allow ads for cigarretes and alcohol when infant formulas are banned? I just do not get it.

Cool Blog…………. God you do write alot…….

a breastfeeder for 3 years. i agree that it's up to the mother to decide giving breastmilk or formula. but think again, it also is possible having hazardous agents in formula, heheh… anyway, i'm so surprised reading this. considering you're not a breastmilk provider

Hi JP. Just hopping around. I nevr really realize that there is a ban on advertising on infant formula. Its a little surprising but maybe they are just encouraging the use of the very nutritious mother's milk. Thanks and God bless.

I happened upon your site when I did a google search for "biohazardous breastmilk"- wow, I never thought I'd find a site saying that the WHO code on breastmilk substitutes should be lifted! It surprised me because many of us here in the U.S. look to countries like the Philippines and others that uphold the Code as models that we wish the U.S. would follow. The main reason is because, contrary to what someone else here has posted, infant formula can be very dangerous. I hope you and anyone else who reads this post will check out some of these links on the problems with formula. I'm also posting some links on the research on the presence of rocketful in breastmilk. In particular, there's a letter written by one of the original researchers saying she never dreamed their research would be misterpreted by the media.

I appreciate what you're saying, about wanting to give people a choice, but my concern with marketing formula to parents of new babies is that it undermines new mom's ability to get breastfeeding established. The way hospitals here send new parents home with free samples and stuff- it totally sets parents up for breastfeeding failure. It's my hope that the U.S. will follow the Philippines, and ban the advertising of infant formula! Thanks for hearing me out.

Links:
Perchlorate in Breastmilk
http://www.kellymom.com/health/chemical/dasgupta-response.html…

Various Levels of Perchlorate Exposure Found Not to Be Harmful to
Newborns, Pregnant Women, and Other Adults
http://www.thyroid.org/professionals/publications/news/04_10_01_perchlorate.html…

Perchlorate Contaminates in Human and Cows Milk http://neonatal.ama.ttuhsc.edu/lact/html/perchlorate.html…

What Should I Know About Infant Formula?
http://www.kellymom.com/nutrition/milk/infant-formula.html#formula…

Risks of Artificial Feeding
http://www.kellymom.com/newman/risks_of_formula_08-02.html…

Toxins and Infant Feeding
http://www.kellymom.com/newman/28toxins_in_breastmilk.html…

Hi Seamama,

Thanks for dropping by. I am well aware of your concerns and I very much respect your opinion about this matter. But let me give you a little insight on what is currently happening in a third world country like the Philippines. Nutrition has become one of the biggest concerns in this country. A huge percentage of the population are living below the poverty line with both parents living in a miserable $30 per month. We have been advocating Breastfeeding as the best nutritional supplement for babies. Unfortunately, what happens if the moms themselves are malnutritioned? What happens if these mothers are working a 12 job just to make it through the day? How will the baby achieve the his/her nutritional requirement? Did you know that because of some misconception on the manner of breastfeeding infants caused parents to give GOAT'S MIlk to their babies? How about those in the rural areas that believes Water and sugar are good supplements for the baby? I am neither for nor against Infant Formulas. But what they are doing in terms of implementing the Milk Code is pathetic. They allow this but does not allow that. The samples that occur in the United States for New Mothers are also happenning here. But has the government actually halted these illegal activities? NO. How about health education? Still, it has not reached the whole population. And why? Lack of funds. With Infant formula marketing a huge chunk of the consumers will be educated on the importance of nutrition for their babies. Alternative feeding protocols other than breastmilk are harmful for the babies. Given this scenario, I think infant formulas are a suitable option for breastmilk but i am not advocating that it replace mothers milk. Certainly not. That is why we need to monitor the ingredients and how these infant formulas are made. Just imagine seamama, alot of milk formulas here in the Philippines are just made available on supermarket shelves and with physicians being sponsored for foreign trips, where will the consumer turn to for help? This is a very sensitive issue but i really do believe that with infant formulas, the concept of breastfeeding will be strengthened. Believe me when I tell you this, infant formula marketing in the Philippines is more aggressive than that of the U.S. There are unconventional tactics being employed everywhere and you will be surprised with what is happening.

Hi JP-

Thanks for your reply. I am generally very interested in this issue but also am interested in how it plays out in the Philippines as my husband is a first generation Filipino who still has some family in the P.I.

My heart breaks to read what you’re saying. If I understand right, you are saying that because the government can’t/won’t do a better job getting proper breastfeeding and nutrition education out to people, we might as well allow formula companies to market to people because at least then we know kids are getting some kind of decent nutrition (even though it’s not as good as breastmilk). I find this an interesting argument and I can actually see where you’re coming from— basically, if the public sector can’t do it, allow the private sector to step in. I still maintain, though, that increasing formula marketing in can only serve to make things worse for Filipinos.

For one thing, with an income of $30/month, how can families even afford to buy formula? And why would you want to when breastmilk is FREE— no formula company can beat that. Even if families start out with free samples, the samples run out eventually. Then what do they do? I have heard that many poor families around the world try to make the formula last longer by mixing less powder than required, leaving babies malnourished. When the family realizes that they can’t keep buying formula and the mom tries to breastfeed, it’s too late because by now her milk has dried up. Also, what about the problem of ensuring safe drinking water, which is needed to add to the formula powder? I have heard of stories of babies dying from dehydration due to diarrhea from bad water. Formula companies take no responsibility for this- they just shove their products on people and leave them to their own devices after that. It makes me so sad to know that all of this happens and there’s no need for it.

As for parents giving goats’ milk or sugar water to babies, I don’t think making formula more available will lessen the likelihood of that. Rather than making formula more available, why not focus more on breastfeeding education? AND instead of changing the trying to abolish the WHO code, why not focus on breastfeeding legislation that ensures working moms have adequate breaks to pump their milk for their babies? (I totally agree w/ you that it’s a serious problem when a mom works 12-hr days and can’t breastfeed or pump for her baby during that time). But again, allowing formula marketing will not help the situation. It’s not like formula isn’t available in the P.I., right? Women know about and I’m assuming already use it in situations like that- how will allowing more aggressive marketing help?

I think the bigger question is what happened to breastfeeding? Obviously in a time before formula existed, women did something and I’m willing to bet that the something was breastfeeding—otherwise a lot of babies would’ve died, right? Sure there are some backward practices out there but how did people get those ideas? I don’t know the answer to that but I am really curious because they can’t have always had them, otherwise entire barrios would’ve died out. So what did women do in the Philippines (and all over the world, for that matter) before formula was invented? They taught each other how to breastfeed and encouraged each other through the problems that often occur in the beginning. There are actually very few women who are truly not able to breastfeed (http://www.breastfeeding.com/reading_room/bottle_culture.html…) and for those women, I thank God for formula, but for the rest of us, I say get those formula companies off people’s backs and allow them to do what is safest and healthiest for babies.

Thanks for listening.

(PS: Your concern about malnourished nursing moms is understandable and a common concern, but here’s a link talking about how even malnourished women can provide good milk for their babies: http://rehydrate.org/breastfeed/faq-maternal-nutrition.htm…. Also, here’s a recent article I just came across talking about how apparently the WHO code is implemented slightly differently in the P.I., which may explain the aggressive marketing practices that you’re talking about: http://www.voanews.com/english/2005-09-22-voa5.cfm…).

Hi Seamama,

To expound further on our discussion on this issue, lifting the ban on infant formula marketing can enhance our call for breastfeeding. Why? Basically, if these private companies flex their financial might, health education will spread throughout the outskirts of the country. Remember, these companies are trying to benchmark their formulas with breastmilk. They are all trying to copy the gold standard of infant nutrition which is mother's milk. Of course, in the context of health education, people will be more aware that breastfeeding is the main point of comparison for these formulas. Then why would they need to buy something that they can get for free? Furthermore, as I have said, lifting the milk code also would create the right synergy for self monitoring and will somehow lessen the biases placed forth by alot of physicians. Why would the companies then invest so much money on doctors when they could go directly to the mothers? In addition, with regards to the samples, yes they will run out eventually, but as I have said, those companies doing these marketing promotions are just doing so to suddenly increase usage for their products and not promote its repurchase. Its bad business if you try to analyze it. I agree wth your comment on news that some families tend to put less powder to save on the formula. This case occurs because of lack of follow up and no economic activity in that particular area. As I have pointed out, if big companies are allowed to market their formulas, they will definitely expand their reach to these people in terms of health education. Given this scenario, people will then realize that what they are doing is harmful and it would be best to shift to breastfeeding. In whole honesty, we already have alot of legislation in terms of breastfeeding. Unfortunately, it is not implemented quite well. With the lack of manpower and resources, the far flung areas are not reached. Allowing these firms to freely market their products will make mothers more aware of infant nutrition. This will then open their eyes on several issues. They will be more curious on what is the best nutritional supplement for their babies. With the milk code, alot of companies are trying to bend the law. Their are alot of gray areas in this respect. Just imagine, the milk code stipulates that infant marketing in all segments whether it be at the starter or follow on are not allowed. Then the government compromised saying that companies can now market follow on formulas as long as they coincide with the Executive Order. This is so sad. I believe lifting the milk code will open the minds of the consumers. I agree with Seamama, potable drinking water is a problem and still is. But given this fact, people will then be more aware that with infant formulas, you need to do more compared to breastmilk.
Well this is just my opinion. But anyway, I would like to thank you for the links that you have given me. They are truly informative. Nice to this discussion with you Seamama!

Hi JP-

Ok, I will just say a few more things and then I’ll stop posting because I know we could go back and forth like this forever…

You raise an interesting and legitimate point that at least with formula companies having unrestricted marketing, parents will get better nutrition education than they’re getting now. And you’re right that the formula companies are only trying to approximate breastmilk and they freely admit that, so hopefully people would see that they don’t need pay money for second-best when they’ve got the first-best available for free! But let’s use the U.S. as an example- here, we don’t follow the WHO Code and what I see are a lot of formula feeding moms DESPITE the fact that the first thing all formula companies say is that “Breast is Best.” In fact, only 2-10% (depending on whose research you believe) of 1 year olds are still breastfed (http://www.mothering.com/articles/new_baby/breastfeeding/formula-profit.html… and http://www.breastfeeding.com/reading_room/what_should_know_formula.html…) despite the fact that our own American Academy of Pediatrics recommends breastfeeding at least one year and the WHO recommends at least 2 years (http://www.kellymom.com/bf/start/prepare/bf-benefits.html…). Why is this? Because formula companies have gotten very smart about their marketing. Back in the 50’s they used to tell people that it was better than breastmilk because it was scientifically made and surely science could come up with a better and more consistent product that little ol’ Mother Nature (http://www.mothering.com/articles/new_baby/breastfeeding/formula-profit.html…). Even the name, formula, implies some kind of scientific superiority. When research came out that formula is not better (and is in fact worse), formula companies changed their tune. Now they admit breastmilk is better but use much more insidious ways to get parents to buy their products (see, for example, the description in the second-to-last paragraph at http://it.stlawu.edu/~advertiz/andrew/contemporary.htm…).

You mentioned that you thought the formula companies were only hoping to “suddenly increase usage for their products and not promote its repurchase.” I disagree. Don’t you think that most business models are based on a plan to get the consumer to buy and buy again? Even if, for the sake of argument, that’s not their plan, that is the certain effect of free samples because of how milk production works. When a baby is born, the mother’s body begins producing milk. If the milk is not removed from the breast regularly, the body assumes the baby has died and the milk is not needed so the milk “dries up.” If the mom had started the baby on the free samples of formula and either wasn’t breastfeeding at all or even was breastfeeding but not every 2-4 hours, the milk will definitely disappear. If not too much time has passed, it is possible to re-lactate (http://www.alisaikeda.com/Clients_Clips/Relactation/body_relactation.html…) but it takes a lot of patience and support (and sometimes even special equipment) and it may never be possible to get back to full milk production, so a mom would still have to supplement with formula. In other words, once a mom starts a baby on formula, she IS most likely to stay on it even if she doesn’t want to. You can be sure that formula companies know this.

You’re probably right that unrestricted marketing would allow formula companies to educate consumers about the danger of mixing formula with less powder than required. So at least babies wouldn’t theoretically become malnourished for that reason. But it doesn’t help a family to know that they need to buy more formula if they also can’t afford it. Your hope is that families will then realize that they should just breastfeed instead but as explained above, that isn’t always possible.

I totally agree with you that the government compromise on allowing the advertising of follow-on formulas is horrible. In fact, it’s the perfect example of how tricky these companies are. They can’t advertise formula for newborns but they are sure to get their name out there in the public by advertising formulas for babies a little older! Frankly, though, I just don’t have a lot of faith in the consumer (nothing against the intelligence of Filipinos, this is my view of all people generally)— I don’t think that unrestricted marketing will allow them to open their eyes. You’ll just have the same problems you have here- out of control consumers, blindly buying “the next best thing”- whatever someone else tells us that is.

Thanks for the opportunity to debate this issue civilly. As promised, I won’t keep going on and on about this— thanks for letting me put in my “two cents”.

With much respect, Seamama

Hi Seamama!

Your insights are surely something to ponder upon and with whole honesty, I enjoyed our discussions. We may have different point of views but we still agree on one fact, BREASTMILK IS BEST for BABIES! Anyway, thank you very much for this. Its an honor to discuss with you.

All the best and God Bless

JP