If you wanted to eat a healthy lunch, but had a craving to scarf down two Mars bars instead, would you call the Mars company for advice on how to curb your cravings? If you were trying to get in shape and exercise, but didn't feel like going for your morning run, would you call your couch potato friend who always tries to convince you to skip your workouts and join her on the couch? If you were struggling to remain faithful to your spouse, would you call the hot guy who is always flirting with you at work for advice? If you were struggling with breastfeeding, but really wanted to continue, would you call an infant formula manufacturer for advice?
I hope the answer in all cases is an emphatic "NO!"But if you were an online media property that is trying to turn a profit, would you be willing to sell-out your breastfeeding readers, by feeding them a wolf in sheep's clothing? Would you be willing to partner with Similac, an infant formula company, on your
Breastfeeding Guide?
I wouldn't. But apparently Babble and Similac see nothing wrong with this scenario.
Most of us (including Dou-la-la and I) realize that infant formula companies are not really there to support breastfeeding moms, they are there to sabotage them. The Similac sponsorship of the Babble guide goes beyond simple advertising and takes things to a whole new level. The Common Breastfeeding Problems section of the Breastfeeding Guide is clearly marked as being "brought to you by Similac". It includes a large banner at the top encouraging you to call a Feeding Expert for your baby's breastfeeding problems. They indicate that "lactation consultants" are available, but I doubt they are International Board Certified Lactation Consultants (IBCLC), since their Code of Ethics would prevent them from working for an infant formula company. The huge ad to the right of the content even encourages you to enter your mobile number so that someone from Similac can text you their phone number, but who knows what else they will do with your phone number.
Want to take action?
If you want to take action against this ridiculous pairing, I have a few suggestions.
Mystery Calls to Similac
The information in Babble's breastfeeding guide is lightweight at best and doesn't even begin to provide true guidance for dealing with breastfeeding problems. So if you are left wanting more, you may be tempted to pick up the phone and call that number for Similac, especially when they are promising lactation consultants and the text of the guide tells you over and over to contact a lactation consultant.
But what is the quality of the advice you would be getting?
I know a few people who have called already today and I have been told that the advice they were given was not necessarily wrong, but it also wasn't complete. They would give people one small tip that might help with a problem, rather than truly assessing the problem or giving full information on possible solutions to the problem.
Do you want to test the quality of the advice that Similac is giving?
If you do, here is what I would suggest:
Tell Babble this is not appropriate
For Similac and the other infant formula companies, this is nothing new. They will do anything they can to get breastfeeding moms to call them and talk to them. They would love nothing more than to have moms think that they will get good breastfeeding advice from them, while attempting to subtly sabotage their attempts at breastfeeding (see, for example, the quality of breastfeeding advice offered by Nestle). So telling them what you think of their marketing campaign may not get you very far.
However, as I've said before, it may be more effective to express our concerns to the intermediaries that help formula companies spread their message. So tell Babble that you do not think it is appropriate for them to have a Breastfeeding Concerns section that is sponsored by Similac because it is deceptive and because it violates the WHO Code of Marketing of Breast Milk Substitutes.
You can do this by:
- Sending an e-mail to Babble: Send an e-mail to the Babble CEO Rufus Griscom at rufus@babble.com and copy Alisa Volkman at advertising@babble.com (she is listed on their website as being the contact for advertising).
- Expressing your concern on Babble.com's Facebook page: Tell Babble what you think of its infant formula sponsored breastfeeding guide by leaving a comment on the wall of the Babble Facebook page. You will have to become a "fan" of Babble to be able to leave a comment and need to go to the "Babble.com + Others" tab to see what people are saying about Babble.
I truly hope that this was a mistake by someone who obviously doesn't understand the role that infant formula companies play in trying to sabotage breastfeeding women and that once it is pointed out to them, that they will take down that section and consider linking to some real breastfeeding support websites like La Leche League or Kellymom or others.
Help spread the word
Please help inform people that breastfeeding support from a formula company is not okay and encourage them to put pressure on Babble too by sharing this post with your friends on facebook, twitter, StumbleUpon and elsewhere. Just click on the Share button at the bottom of this post for options on where to share it. Thank you.
Friday, September 3, 2010 
Reader Comments (232)
Susan @WhyMommy:
Thank you for sharing that. Every day I learn about another tactic that formula companies are using to try to dupe moms.
Turns out it isn't just parenting websites like Babble sharing the Similac number, doctors are doing it too. I'm horrified.
http://tumblingboobs.tumblr.com/post/1065910428/its-not-just-parenting-websites-promoting-similacs
It's actually well-documented that stress can negatively impact supply. I was pumping and dumping, since YOU ASKED, but because we were supplementing, we realized that the reason our son hadn't gained weight in six weeks wasn't because he had reflux, which was suspected, but rather, because he was starving. In the end, formula likely saved my child's life just like a vacuum assisted delivery (that I also was very much against to start). But really, who are you to ask me to defend my decision to formula feed my son?!
Here is just one study that examines breastmilk storage and subsequent makeup: http://www.news-medical.net/news/2004/10/21/5707.aspx
Really, I am sad that this discussion has veered so far off course from its original topic. Why does this always come down to the merits of formula feeding as a choice?
It's actually a myth that stress can negatively impact supply & not documented in a single study.
I did not asked what you did or to defend your choice on your child, i simply write to you not to misguide other mothers that read this stuff about breastfeeding and put their child's health into risk as you are not a certified person to give any such advice and state false & unaccurate things.
That one study is not published in the international literature (give the name of it, the writer, date e.t.c., the whole study link is not accessible).
I'm sad that the original topic is not clear enough to you. I'm sad that there will be women that they won't "know thyself".
As a mom who supplemented with formula for ~ 8-12 months, but breastfed for 34, I think a more apt comparison between breastfeeding and formula would be processed foods... something like the difference between whole grains and enriched white flour. It's not quite candy, but the good stuff has been removed and artificially replaced.
Artemi / Brooke:
Breastfeeding has saved lives in disaster situations, with breastfeeding moms not only feeding their own children but also keeping the children of others alive. At the same time, stress can also impact a mom's milk supply. It is not a black or white issue.
The topic of this post is not to delve into the specific details of what has been scientifically documented or not. This is also not the place to judge or question another mom's reasons for choosing formula.
Next person who uses this as a forum for arguing the merits of breastfeeding or formula instead of the question of whether or not a formula company should be accepted as a sponsor of a breastfeeding guide owes me a Pepsi Max.
Also, formula is totally awesome and gives kids x-ray vision.
Isn't it funny how they now have a more appropriate Medela breastpump ad on the breastfeeding guide? If they had thought that out sooner, they could have saved a lot of trouble for themselves!
One of my Facebook friends pointed out that Similac was a sponsor of the entire site, not specifically the breastfeeding guide, and I had to remind him that Babble was perfectly able to NOT have formula ads on their breastfeeding guide, as evidenced by the new Medela ads now in their place.
Don't you know that Pepsi is poison? ;)
LoriNKY:
They always had the Medela ad on the main page of the breastfeeding guide, but had the Similac ads and "feeding line" info on the common breastfeeding concerns section. As if to say: "Have problems? Call us...we'll fix you up."
Pepsi MAX, I said.
Haha! Awesome comment!
My oldest never had a drop of formula, while my youngest was exclusively formula fed after 10 months old (I hated that!). I fall on both sides of that particular argument (somewhat), but it doesn't matter because the POINT of the issue is that Babble should not have allowed the formula ad on the breastfeeding guide. It could be all over their site, but that location is highly inappropriate.
According to my lactation counselor training class, stress does NOT affect a mother's supply. However it can affect letdown as well as impact the frequency that she may breastfeed due to being upset or otherwise occupied which affects supply. It is the side effects of stress that can impact supply, not the stress itself. The example they cited was women in World War Ii France and Bosnia still being able to breastfeed but I don't have the studies handy to share.
Danielle:
Thank you for clarifying that.
I do know that many women are able to breastfeed in very dire disaster situations. Personally, I never had any problems with letdown, even when stressed. However, I do know moms who were stressed at work and unable to letdown to their pump, which in turn meant they weren't emptying their breasts as they should have been, which did end up impacting their supply. So yes, it is a secondary impact on supply and not a primary one, but I don't think it is something that should be simply dismissed.
Stephanie-
I agree that there is often a lot of judgement from breastfeeding "activists" onto formula-feeding mothers, and I'm saddened to see that. It doesn't help *anyone*. But that's not what this post is about (yes, some of the comments have been out of line... but the post itself doesn't seem to be). This post isn't about breast vs formula and what's "the better choice" (that differs for every mother & baby). It's about not allowing a corporation to mislead women who have one goal, into doing something they didn't want to do. Isn't that part of "women rallying for support for each other"?
It's easy to blame stress. My son was starving and I didn't have the ability to make my primary focus breastfeeding my child, regardless of the cause that created a low supply issue.
Man, my son is going to be the coolest kid in first grade!
Poison MAX!
Brooke - I don't think Artemi's intent was to ask you to defend your choice. As Stephanie said above, there is an awful lot of judgment...but it goes both ways. I think I speak for alot of nursing mothers when I say that many of us support your right as a parent to weigh all of your options and make the decision that best suits you, your baby, and your family unit as a whole. For some families, that decision is breastfeeding. For others, it is not. That can occur for a variety of reasons, but I think what people are trying to argue with relation to Similac here is that maybe it doesn't need to happen as often as it does. When armed with information or a different set of cultural norms, sometimes people make different decisions than they would otherwise. That doesn't mean that their choices the first go-around were wrong, it just means that we all adapt our behavior to what we feel is best for our families AT THAT TIME. For example, when my daughter was first born, I supplemented with formula. If she had been born under different circumstances, though, I probably would not have done so. The only reason I stopped supplementing was because we ran out of formula and the gas tank was empty so I couldn't get more. It shocked the hell out of me that I was able to exclusively breastfeed my child that day and I felt so empowered that I never looked back. But if I'd had gas in the tank? If I hadn't felt empowered? Maybe I would have continued. Likewise, if I'd never had access to formula in the very beginning, I probably would have exclusively breastfed from the start. Whether we like it or not, the formula industry can only increase profits by selling more formula. The only ways to do that are to aggressively advertise and to marginalize the common competition, which happens to be breast-milk. Whether we like it or not, the very fact that Similac is a profit-based formula company means that they have a conflict of interest with regards to providing lactation support. It's a bit like having SlimFast sponsor a webpage about size acceptance, or having BP sponsor a webpage about biofuels. The problem isn't the company or what they produce, it's that they have a conflict of interest that cannot be denied. And while some people might not mind that sort of thing, other people do.
Anyway, I think it's important that we give people like Artemi the benefit of the doubt that they aren't trying to be offensive or force us into a corner. Being tactful and refraining from judgement is a two-way street, isn't it? She disagreed with your statement about stress and wanted you to either back it up with evidence or realize that it was misinformed. With regards to formula feeding - Brooke? You clearly made a choice that you feel was best for your family given your circumstances. I, for one, applaud you for that. Nobody here has walked a mile in your shoes and none of us can reasonably judge you for that decision. So be confident about it.
My personal experience (I am not a lactation consultant) is that stress does not affect my supply...but it does affect my let-down. I will always let down eventually, but I let down more readily when I am calm. General life stress like bills will not affect my let down, only immediate life stress like an earthquake.
@ Backpacking Dad: xaxaxa!!! sorry for the arguing earlier, i think i owe you a pepsi max but it will delay a little bit if i send you one from Greece!!!
Someone from the comments above would have thought that i'm a lactation "activist" or whatever; I wrote that i'm just a mother; what is more, i formula feed my baby but that is personal and has to do with bad advices during crucial time in the past for BF. But that doesn't stops me from getting informed for example that companies like the one mentioned in here do what they do to misguide and raise their profits or that anyone can write his opinion right or false & i could agree or disagree with him.
Interesting. I have volunteered at my local food bank and they do distribute formula (of course only when a package has not been opened and is not expired).
In any case, I would still rather the food bank make that call and offer the option rather than just throwing it in the garbage at home.
[...] in Parenting posted this weekend about Babble and Similac’s breastfeeding guide and also about WebMd and Gerber (Nestle) doing the same [...]
As women I think the most important thing we can do is support each other. I feel that there is a caste system when it comes to feeding our babies. On the top there are the breast only feeders or EBF- they just whip out their boobs and pure golden nutrients flow to their children. In the middle there are the exclusive pumpers or EP that the EBF look down on. EP's work twice as hard to maintain supply, clean bottles and pump parts just so their little ones can get some of that gold. And then there are the Formula Feeders or FF's- oh these are the women that just don't care. The FF's might as well be feed their little ones McDonald's milkshakes because the "studies" show they are going huge and sickly anyways.
I think we need to stop stigmatizing each other. Of course mothers try to do the best for their children. I think there is needs to be more encouragement and education provided for new mothers on the choices they can make. When I was going in for prenatal visits there were all the free diaper bags with formula information at my OBGYN. If I wanted to learn anything about breastfeeding I had to go out on my own and sign up and pay for a class at the local hospital. The way to get get more women to breastfeed successfully would be to have a built in support system before the child is born. Because the formula companies sure do make themselves known before the child is born with all that free swag.
Also, lets stop ripping each other.
FFF - in Britain the formula companies are SUPPOSED to point out the dangers of formula feeding (in accordance with the WHO code). * Section 4.2 "where needed, the proper use of infant formula, whether manufactured industrially or home-prepared. When such materials contain information about the use of infant formula, they should include the social and financial implications of its use; the health hazards of inappropriate foods or feeding methods; and, in particular, the health hazards of unnecessary or improper use of infant formula and other breast-milk substitutes." http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/code_english.pdf*
I haven't seen them discuss the risks of FFing on their websites but I would be interested if anyone else has? We have similar issues with formula companies offering 'carelines' to breastfeeding mums too. The internet legislation is currently under review and anyone wishing to bring pressure to bear (perhaps in relation to ads for these sites coming up when you google common breastfeeding concerns!) in the UK should write to codepolicy@cap.org.uk http://asa.org.uk/Media-Centre/2010/ASA-digital-remit-extension.aspx
www.babymilkaction.org is one of the groups which fights to keep these companies in check and support formula feeding mothers to do it as safely as possible.
@ Kathleen - Yes, I agree!. Women DO often stuggle with breastfeeding and that's why we need better support and a change in the prevailing attitudes! We also need stronger rules to deal with the unscrupulous behaviour of these companies so that they cannot 'prey' on the vulnerable.
If you're interested in submitting your story to my blog I would be glad to share it. I have stories from other mothers on there who found themselves unable to breastfeed through no fault of their own. I believe when their stories are very important when it comes to dispelling myths and helping more mothers to breastfeed. Explain what TRUE low supply is versus what a NORMAL feeding pattern is, and the number of mothers who perceive a supply problem dwindles closer to it's true level of 1 or 2%
The grief and guilt felt by many mothers who really did their best does nothing to help lactivism. It often turns to anger and serves no-one, least of all the babies. We all need to take responsibility for each other.
[...] an important part of a community. Just this weekend Rufus from Babble added a very long comment at phdinparenting that included these two paragraphs: I encourage everyone who is concerned about this to spend some [...]
For mothers who are concerned about their milk production, there are some excellent resources on the web. Here are two of my favourites:
Is your milk supply really low?
http://www.kellymom.com/bf/supply/lowsupply.html
This website provides information and support to mothers who are experiencing low milk production. It is also an online resource for healthcare providers who help mothers breastfeed.
www.lowmilksupply.org
Hear hear for more support, less negativity, and more education.
Maybe someone can clear this up for me.
I keep reading tweets and blog posts about various formula company activities and WHO code violations.
I was under the impression that the United States has NOT adopted the WHO code. So while sending unasked for samples and coupons in the mail, providing new mothers with the hospital "goody bag" and certain advertising practices may be unsavory, they aren't actually against the code. Not in the US anyway. So taking pictures of formula sales and sending emails about code violations in the US isn't likely to change anything. Right?
As far as Similiac, Nestle, etc, it seems pretty straight forward to me. Why would any mother go to a FORMULA company looking for BREASTFEEDING advice and think there weren't strings attached? That would be like me calling Willy Wonka for diet advice.
Kayris:
The WHO Code was developed and adopted by the World Health Organization. It encourages countries to initiate legislation to make the WHO Code into law (and many have done this). It also encourages companies, regardless of the law, to comply with its provisions. Voluntary codes of practice exist in a lot of industries and are often supported by governments (perhaps not as law, but as strong suggestion, with threat that they could be made law) or by industry associations.
In the case of the WHO Code, it has not been made into law in the United States, does not appear to be supported by the U.S. Government in any concrete way, and is not supported by the infant formula industry. However, some companies (like Evenflo) are choosing to comply with the WHO Code as part of their ethical business practices and also as a way of setting themselves aside from their competitors.
In Canada, it is a bit different. Canada is a signatory to the WHO Code. It has not made the Code law, but it has drawn up guidelines for infant formula companies, which it expects them to follow. However, recent studies by the government have shown that the industry ignores those guidelines and does whatever they want. I wouldn't be surprised if the Canadian government came out with something stronger as a result (e.g. regulations enforceable by law). Companies would be smart to abide by the guidelines wherever possible to avoid getting into a situation where they can face fines and other sanctions, not to mention legal costs, when they step out of bounds.
To answer your question, yes the business practices you describe ARE against the Code. They are not, however, against US Law. Taking pictures of formula sales and sending e-mails about code violations in the United States can help international organizations that monitor the Code to build a case for why it needs to become a law in the United States, so it is useful from that perspective.
I have a military website. I do not accept ads from short term (aka "Pay Day") loan businesses.
But even if I did, I would not have them sponsor a guide to finances for military families or allow them to display an advertisement with a family finance "help line" on that guide.
Does credit serve a legitimate need? Absolutely. But have members of the short-term credit industry used predatory practices, particularly directed at the military? Yes.
It is not to call anyone "stupid" or to "protect" adults from making their own decisions--I just have a choice who to accept as advertisers and I believe that this would be a clear violation of my ethics as a publisher.
To those who think marketing does not influence these decisions, why else does a corporation, with vast resources for testing its messaging, employ these tactics? It could be PR to increase its market share of the small number of women who either cannot or choose not to breastfeed from the beginning. Or it could be to increase the size of the market...
I'm a big advocate of "choice" and "individual responsibility" but to pretend that marketing and advertising has no influence on behavior--especially on a topic many moms obviously feel vulnerable--that seems disingenuous.
I'm not especially interested in placing legal limits on formula marketing in my own country, the US, but I do think it is reasonable, as readers and consumers, to ask publishers and others to consider their advertising partners.
@Rufus -- Your comments are pretty dismissive of the concerns presented here. It is a neat rhetorical trick to shift the conversation to one of personal liberty--but as a libertarian-leaning person, I'm not buying.
You aren't addressing the substance here--which means you are either skimming the post and its comments and writing them off or purposely trying to shift the conversation.
The ethical and proper place to point breastfeeding moms for further support is an independent source of actual, certified, LC's, not a formula company line staffed by people who have taken an 8 or even a 40 hour course.
Or maybe you could just refer them to the big breastfeeding company--oh, wait, that's right, there is no big money to be made from breastfeeding itself.
But advertising is separate from editorial, right? Wouldn't pretty much any company marketing to new moms want to sponsor a breastfeeding guide?
As to the guide itself, I think the other commenters have already pointed out the booby traps in the article itself--it is hardly unequivocal in its support...
There is absolutely a place for offering support to the women who cannot or who choose to not breastfeed...but it is not in a breastfeeding guide.
For what it's worth, my strictly BF son was sick (UTI) at 3 weeks, RSV at 4 months (turned into pneumonia), and again at 18 months.....
My also strictly BF daughter was not sick until 15 months (she is the only one who avoided the H1N1 in my house and she was not vaxed for it either) and at 21 months she rarely gets more than a sneeze while the rest of us are in misery.....
Just sayin.... it can go either way even with an exclusively BF baby!
It's certainly hard to reconcile what's in the WHO Code versus what we see on the ground in hospitals, grocery stores and magazines... In fact, I often find myself having to prove to people that the Code actually says the things it does because they seem to be so far from the reality of what is happening in Canada (with its "voluntary" compliance).
Honestly, I understand the position on certain areas of Code compliance - formula companies have shareholders too and it's difficult to defend choosing to hand over market share by complying with something that has no consequences for non-compliance.
Regulation is required to even the playing field and force formula makers to focus their profit-making effort on making the product more affordable for consumers who need it and safer/more effective for babies whose lives are saved by it instead of paying their PR and ad agencies to one up each other.
That aside, there are also practices that extend beyond compliance and fall into the category of being clearly unethical, whether there's an law/regulation/international convention in place or not. This is one of them.
In the United States there is an enormous divide between what the government says and what it enforces. The Center for Disease Control (pat of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services) prioritizes breastfeeding through its Healthy People 2010 Objectives for the Nation (http://www.healthypeople.gov/) which includes a goal of 50% mothers breastfeeding at 6 months postpartum yet the lack of regulation in the marketing of breastmilk substitutes makes it impossible to defend breastfeeding. This is clearly a case of the right hand not knowing whom the left hand is wooing. In other parts of the world that enforce the WHO Code, including programs like UNICEF baby-friendly hospitals, the breastfeeding rate is extremely high, even in developing nations.
I work at a WIC, and we, like *most* WICs, have a breastfeeding peer counselor program. I meet with expectant moms daily to talk to them about why breastfeeding is best. I also tell women that there is usually a learning curve with breastfeeding, like in everything related to parenting. Then, we follow up with lots and lots of support and encouragement for our nursing moms. I mail breastfeeding milestone certificates, I make phone calls, I refer to LCs, I help with latch, et cetera. There's for sure resources for everyone out there - and GOOD resources, not crap like this.
I also want to mention that when I get a mom who can't bf for whatever reason (And, yes, I do get them,) I use our meeting to discuss how to best use formula, instead of ending the meeting or trying to guilt trip her.
They too called me. And, here's the kicker. I was a breastfeeding mom and my daughter died while breastfeeding. I was SO upset. I tried to call back to get out of their system and couldn't find any way to opt out or stop getting the calls. I never signed up for any of their stuff. It's not right.
I think they're so persistent in giving you samples even though it's been awhile since you had your baby because they are hoping you will give the samples away to friends who are around the same stage in life you're in.
Thank you so much for writing that, Elle. We need to speak up for each other, most of all for the women who are not writing here, not reading along, not even interested in the topic.
I too received formula samples when my daughter was well past the age of drinking it. My theory is that they think it's time for you to have another baby. My daughter was almost 3 and it seems that most of my friends had had their second kids by then so maybe they thought I had too!
I totally agree. These "my baby turned out fine" or "I'm not going to let a free sample sway me" stories detract from the point. Your personal experience is just an anecdote. It doesn't matter if you and 20 of your best friends experienced the opposite of what the evidence lays out - the scientific and statistically significant data show that people who were breastfed are without a doubt healthier than those who are not, not just as children but throughout their lifetimes, just as the research shows that formula samples hurt breastfeeding relationships.
Wow how awful!
[...] plan for this week to be a series of anti-Babble rants, but it is turning out that way. First Babble tried to deceive nursing moms experiencing difficulties by telling them to call Similac’.... Then I found out that they have been violating the trademark of Ann Douglas, one of my favourite [...]
[...] over a week ago one of my favorite bloggers, Annie of PhD in Parenting, wrote an article about Babble.com’s partnership with Similac formula company. Babble.com is a website geared towards mothers. They have a collection of breastfeeding articles, [...]
[...] AAP is not alone in forming partnerships with the formula industry. Babble.com was recently criticized for allowing Abbot Laboratories (maker of Similac infant formula) to sponsor its breastfeeding [...]
While I hate their strategy and wouldn't trust them long term, I can't say I would fault that basic advice. Saying "eat oatmeal and quinoa" isn't exactly saying "cut all dairy, soy, nuts, etc" from your diet. It isn't saying alter anything at all. Stay hydrated was the single most often repeated advice I heard from all LCs and pediatricians and other bf-ing moms. And teas are gross to many, but the advice was to take the herbs - didn't say tea. You can take them in pill form and it's really easy. And remove milk so more milk is made? That's the basics of breast milk production and something - scarily - that a lot of moms don't know. I know we want to hang-em-high, but let's not make up reasons to dislike them - there are plenty already. That advice isn't one of them.
And my breast fed kid had two decent head colds in the first 3 months. (I think the bullet-proof-via-breastmilk thing is a bit overdone.)
As someone who did a mix of breast and formula, I always have to brace myself before clicking on these sort of links. Because most of the time, there is some form of "formula is ebil, and YOU ARE KILLING YOUR BABY WITH IT!!1!!elventy!" And then I wind up biting my tongue over it, because I truly do think breastfeeding is portrayed wrongly, and undermined a lot of the time. And I would love to see that corrected.
I was sooooooo absolutely thrilled to see that this wasn't another one of those links:)
And I agree that it's disturbing that they are using "lactation consultants" that aren't certified. I also suspect that they might not be setting out to give bad advice, but build their image so that when breastfeeding problems do overwhelm a person they are more likely to choose their brand. Honestly, rather than hire dubiously qualified advice-givers, I think they would be better off setting up some sort of charity, where they could help woman and infants fill a need. It wouldn't even need to be a feeding need to polish their image, you know? Or lowering the price of that $15+ can of powder formula. That would be good, too....
[...] post It’s Not Just Parenting Websites Promoting Similac’s Latest Ploy is in reference to the Babble incident that some of us wrote about earlier this week. Unfortunately, as Kate shows us, there are DOCTORS [...]
It's interesting for me to read all these comments as I am a neonatal nurse. We do use formula in our hospital out of necessity for mom's who cannot produce milk or simply choose not to breastfeed. I think I know why Similac is stepping up their marketing. In the state of Texas for example all the State programs like WIC will contract out with a specific formula company and unless a doctor writes an order for something different WIC will only supply that brand of formula. In Texas it was Similac for years and about two years ago Enfamil won the new contract. I'm sure Similac took a big hit from this. The bottom line is that Similac is just like any other major pharmaceutical company. Don't you find it sort of disturbing how they advertise the heck out of all these drugs on television. (HhMMM? You really don't see many formula commercials on t.v. do you?) They have so many more ways to advertise to new mothers, as you have pointed out. I do think formula is a necessary evil, so to speak, but if you are stupid enough to decide to formula feed ONLY because a formula company told you to, then you have bigger problems!
Oh, additional note. I'm not a "Certified Lactation Consultant" but I have ten years experience working with breastfeeding mothers and babies (term and preemie). I probably know more about it than some of these "Certified" L.C.'s do. My point is, if you think you have to have that certification to make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside about who is teaching you about breastfeeding, I'm sorry. MANY nurses are qualified to teach and "consult" about that topic.
Just realized I had that backward. Enfamil used to be the supplier and NOW it's Similac. I guess they just need to continue to find a way to rake in the dough. Like any other drug company would do.