Posts
If you've been reading this blog for any amount of time, you know that I and other lactivists have a huge problem with the aggressive marketing employed by the formula companies. The three biggest brand names, Enfamil, Similac and Nestle, spend big bucks every year to get moms to choose and stick with their particular brand of formula. This includes, but is not limited to, advertising in parenting magazines as well as mainstream magazines like People, giving out freebies to pediatrician's offices and hospitals, sending samples to the homes of moms-to-be, sponsoring studies to tout the benefits of formula, and making shady if not outright outrageously false claims about how closely they approximate breast milk.
A few months ago, Enfamil lost a court case brought by PBM, the makers of the store-brand or "generic" formulas you'll find at drug stores and warehouse stores like Target and Sam's Club. A district court in Virginia ruled that Mead Johnson, makers of Enfamil, had mislead the public in its advertising that suggested that store brand formula was not as nutritious as their own. The text of one of their ads read, "It may be tempting to try a less expensive store brand, but only Enfamil LIPIL is clinically proven to improve brain and eye development," and "there are plenty of other ways to save on baby expenses without cutting back on nutrition" (like say, breastfeeding....heh). Anyway, Enfamil was ordered to pay PBN $13 million and is barred from making these types of claims again.
Of course there is not really any difference nutritionally between the expensive name-brand formulas and their store-brand counterparts. All of this is regulated by the FDA and all infant formula has to meet the same standards. You may find some variation in things like color or consistency, but nutritionally, it's the same. In the past when I had friends who were weaning or needed to supplement with formula, I'd tell them to just buy the store brand. After all, it is the exact same ingredients and you'll save yourself a ton of money that could be better spent elsewhere. But I've begun to notice that PBM is working on several social media campaigns using mom bloggers to advertise its products and the fact that they will save you money over the name brands, and their marketing is beginning to make me uncomfortable.
I first noticed sponsored tweets that were linking to this YouTube video, where moms and dads on the street are asked to compare the ingredients on a can of Enfamil to those in PBM's formula. The tweets from people read "Save money, buy store brand formula." Then I noticed bloggers being paid or otherwise compensated to blog about how much money using store-brand formula saved them. Even breastfeeding moms have gotten in on the act, tweeting and blogging PMBs press releases for pay. It has gotten so insidious that I see one of these tweets almost every single day in my Twitter stream and a simple Google search will lead you to a ton of blog posts sponsored by PBM.
Of course this is a WHO Code violation, and although PBM would like you to think they are more ethical than the brand name formula companies, they're not (in fact, PBM has paid for celebrity endorsements from Brooke Shields and Tori Spelling for their Bright Beginnings formula). They also recently announced they've hired a new Executive VP of Marketing to help them increase their sales and market share.
So what is next for PBM? Will they, too, begin mailing out freebies to new moms and creating "breastfeeding support bags" for moms to take home with them from the hospital? Will they expand their social media campaign?
What do you all think of these marketing tactics? Is PBM going too far or is this just a smart business move in this economy? And what of the bloggers being paid to advertise store brand formula? Do they need an education on all of the problems aggressive formula marketing can cause?
What do you think? Has PBM gone too far?
Never want to miss an update of the Blacktating Blog? Subscribe here.
Twitter me- I'm blacktating
Monday, February 1, 2010
Should You Buy Generic Formula?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
This is an interesting topic for me, honestly. I breastfed my first until she was 3, my 2nd will be 3 in April and she's still having a nibble at bedtime. But my son was born with a weird, rare little problem with his tongue (he has a rear tie) that is only correctable via surgery (and no, clipping his frenulum did not work and he ended up in the hospital with FTT because he wasn't growing). I am and always will be a staunch supporter of breastfeeding so it is with a sense of irony that I'm going to sit here and type that my son is formula fed, now. He is growing and at this point, that's what matters because he *was* starving to death.
Anyway, it was agonizing choosing a formula to supplement him with (originally it was just supplementation, of course) and I must've read the back of every can in that stupid "evil" isle (and that is how I've thought of it for years, lol.) I spoke with his doctor about it, too (I'm blessed with one of those peds that truly supports breastfeeding) and he shared my frustration with the choice. In the end, I did choose a name brand and I'm not sorry I did so, marketing practices aside. The very first ingredient on the off brands? CORN SYRUP SOLIDS. I mean, true, it's in EVERY formula (seriously, that stuff is so disgusting I don't think any child would eat it if it wasn't sweetened) but I went with the brand that seemed to have the least amount in it. That, and I have to go with the brands that WIC will pay for because not every parent can afford to buy formula, of any brand, in the quantaties needed to feed an infant. That's something that's always baffled me, why poor women don't just nurse! It's FREE.
I am so sorry my little son doesn't get breastmilk but I have to admit I'm glad that there is something he can have and that he's not, you know, starving to death *shudder*. I guess what I'm getting at is that there is only so far "boycotting" will go. I chose what I felt was the lesser of two evils, I guess. I really wish we'd have laws in this country that made it so that you needed a prescription or something like that, to get formula. I know laws like that exist in other countries and it seems to work well.
Rebekah,
I never meant to insinuate that I think anyone should boycott formula or that it isn't absolutely necessary in some cases. The issue I had is that I always thought store brands were a better choice, for both the cost savings and not having to support the terrible marketing practices of the big 3 formula makers.
What's really interesting is the corn syrup. I'd never heard that before. I'm glad you were able to work with your pediatrician to find the best choice for your baby.
Hi! I just came across your post, and really felt like I should reply.
I am a blogger, and I write frequently about Store Brand Formula. I have a good relationship with Parent's Choice, as I used them for my twins when they were babies. I could not breastfeed. I had surgery in May 2000 that prevented me from being able to produce enough to feed one baby, let alone two. I tried, oh how I tried to increase my production... I saw nurses, I went to LLL meetings. After 2 months of pumping, trying, crying, and feeling like a failure, I finally gave in and went exclusively formula. The guilt that I had, feeling like a failure was immense. We had used up the Enfamil the hospital gave us by then, and saw that there was no way, even with coupons that we were going to be able to buy a can every couple of days at that price, so we took a look at the ingredients and nutrition facts. Contrary to what your previous poster had said.. Not all Store Brand's list Corn Syrup Solids as the first ingredient. I'm finding it only in the Gentle, Soy & Sensitive formulas. BUT, Enfamil's Gentlease has the 1st ingredient as Corn Syrup Solids (https://www.wegmans.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?langId=-1&storeId=10052&catalogId=10002&productId=381725) as well as Simliac's Sensitive formula (http://abbottnutrition.com/products/similac-sensitive) so it IS in the National Name Brands too.
We used the Parent's Choice Milk Formula, with DHA & ARA, and it's first ingredient is Nonfat Milk. Here's the ingredients list on their website. http://www.parentschoiceformula.com/milk-formula-ingredients.aspx And it was perfect for us. My girls thrived on it, and they are now 4 years old, rarely sick, and they are not even close to being obese from having formula instead of being breastfed.
I agree with you on the point that breastfeeding is the healthiest option for babies, and the least expensive option for parents, BUT, I know I'm not the only mom out there that couldn't/can't breastfeed for one reason or another. Unless they want to starve their babies, they have to formula feed them. It is in this respect that PBM, Parent's Choice, Store Brands are looking to help parents save money. They don't have huge marketing campaigns, they don't give massive amounts of free samples to hospitals, they don't take out magazine, or television ads. They save that money so consumers can save money. Yes, they're working with Social Media folks, like myself, because it's a whole lot less expensive to get the word out on the money savings with bloggers than it is to pay for the major marketing spots. They are in no way pushing moms to breastfeed, but rather trying to get the word out that if they are ALREADY using formula, why not save money where you can? Just like anything else you buy, if there's a great alternative that saves you money, wouldn't you get it? Please excuse me if I'm naive here, but I don't see where this is any different.
*Full Disclosure, I was not paid for writing this comment. I used Parent's Choice before I formed any relationship with the company and now I use my experiences to help other parents save money. I found your post via Google Alerts for Infant Formula
I don't disagree with your statements to be a pita, but it was Parents Choice with ARA and DHA that I was thinking of. I did this less than 6weeks ago so I know I'm not crazy, lol. My son is not on Enfamil and I didn't meant to imply that the name brands don't have it as their first. I can say that the formula my son is on does *not* have it listed as the first ingredient though it is certainly in there (he's on Similac Advance). He actually has pretty severe reflux so I'm going to be switching him soon so it's BACK to reading cans again *sigh*.
All of this said, I'm sure things change and I'm not like, trying to start a debate. I was only trying to point out that sometimes, the choice isn't which company is the evilist, marketing-wise (and wow, they are all awful!) but what is best for the individual child in question. :)
Monica, I don't mean to suggest that anyone should starve their baby if they are unable to breastfeed for whatever reason. I am not sure how many times I have to say that. I also don't think this is about any person's individual decision on whether or not to formula feed. The issue is the marketing of breast milk substitutes and how aggressive the marketing of these products has become. When even the generic brand is launching big marketing campaigns, I think it says a lot about how huge this problem is. And for the record I have a problem with ALL WHO Code violations, whether they be by Medela, Enfamil or PBM. You may not want to think so, but campaigns like this do affect whether or not a mom chooses to breastfeed and for how long. It's been documented time and again that the marketing works. As a mom blogger you have a lot of influence with your readers and your relationship with this company make a mom switch from name brand to generic formula....or maybe stop breastfeeding all together because there's a cheaper alternative than name brand formula available. How can you predict? All of the formula makers pay lip service to the fact that "breast is best," but at the end of the day it's in PBM's best interest for women to use formula.
I was talking about this thread with my dh and he was saying it was almost a shame breastfeeding didn't bring in any money because if it did, we could all band together and afford our OWN marketing campaign!
Although breastfeeding doesn't bring in money, it does save money...a lot. Think about all of the formula given to women on WIC. As a taxpayer, my money goes to fund these social programs (and I have ZERO problem with that), but think about how much money the government could save if those women were all breastfeeding. Same thing with Medicaid. Think of the cost savings related to medical care for babies who would have less ear infections, colds, asthma, etc. if they were breastfed. There is also the savings to the environment to consider. No bottles to sterilize, no mass production of giant cans of formula, no plastic bottle liners in our landfills, etc.
Oh no doubt. It always surprises me that DSS and WIC don't push a little harder. I think part of that goes back to what you had said in a previous post (a while back) regarding the poor and culture. A lot of people have said that Black women and Hispanic women have cultural bias against breastfeeding and I can't speak for that (obviously) but I CAN say that poor white women in my area generally don't breastfeed either. I wonder if it's as much a class issue as it is a cultural one. I mean, when I go to DSS or WIC offices, it's a RARE breastfeeding mother I run into and I know that WIC recently cut it's benefits to breastfeeding mothers past 6mo. When I asked about it the woman helping me explained that in the last three years, I'm the first woman of ANY ethnicity she has come across that actually nurses that long. That is really, really sad. It's a shame that funding is just hacked off instead of figuring out some way to push those rates UP. I mean, heck, the WIC office is right around the corner, I'd volunteer time if it would help! (Though I'm NOT IBCLC so I'm not as qualified as others.)
Some people have to use formula, and if that is the case then they should do so. Feeding the baby is ALWAYS the first priority, and I say that as a breastfeeding advocate. I do not judge anyone for their feeding choices.
I am also a supporter of the WHO's International Code on Marketing of Breast-Milk Substitutes. I believe that formula marketing can undermine breastfeeding. After all, its underlying purpose is to promote and sell a product. We know that the breastfeeding rate is much lower than it should be. There are people who absolutely can't breastfeed exclusively, but without adequate support and information many more people will fail in spite of their own best efforts and their body's ability. I believe that marketing campaigns contribute to the overall culture that does not support breastfeeding and leads to a lower breastfeeding rate.
I have seen sponsored posts and tweets on this topic, and it really turns me off. In fact, I stopped reading one blog because of it. Of course, it's your right as a blogger to make your own choices, but it's also my right as a reader to opt out of reading formula ads. I found the one case I'm thinking of even more troubling as the mom was breastfeeding - she clearly did not believe in the product, she was just in it for a payday. :(
I agree, Amber. Personally, I think of formula as medication and to me, that's where it belongs, behind an RX. Just me, though.
Amber,
I wonder if we were reading the same blog. I was really disappointed to see a mom who breastfeeds taking money from a formula company to promote its products.
Post a Comment