I agree with you Little Miss Summer. As I said it's the whole "I educated myself and know whats best but what about the other poor people who didn't do that and are forced by advertising?"It's condescending and I think a bit patronising. The whole comment about the poster in the store because it was a low socioeconomic area. I must admit- my reaction to the comments was "Well, they can't have the ads telling them what to do but thank god they've got pz and her hubby telling them what to do.- I know that this might sound very unfair to you PZ and I understand where you're coming from but it just reeks (and other posters as well) of the whole "nanny state" thing that you can't trust other parents to make decisions so you'd better make them for everyone.
Also- if everyone who stated that they are so passionate about this donated money to the ABA, I'm sure they would be able to afford an advertising campaign. Just saying.
It's not about trust. It's about fair education. If all people are seeing is formula in the supermarket, mums bottle-feeding in the street and posters in their stores (which are not meant to be there), what do you think a possibly vulnerable feeling, uninformed person is going to choose? Heck, I AM informed and I STILL contemplated running out and grabbing a tin at 2am in those times I was struggling. If on top of struggling, I believed my BM was somehow inferior to formula (which was what the poster was inferring, that the formula would get your baby settled and sleeping through the night) then ofcorse I would switch to formula in a heartbeat, thinking it was better. Gosh, education is not condescending. If having correct, proper, and unbiased (selling a product for $$$) information is patronising...well, I don't even know what to say to that. It's not patronising to see people who ARE uneducated, ARE in a lower sociodemographic and ARE more likely to FF, and be concerned on top of that about a poster in a pharmacy window peddling untrue information about a product owned by a company who only seeks to make a profit, and couldn't give a rats about your child's welfare (Nestle, in case you were wondering). Eh. The right thing was done. I feel a little disheartened that so many of you think that is somehow condescending. I assure you DH an myself are not. Just concerned and angry at the owner for trying to take advantage. The area I'm talking about is Sunshine, btw. If they were stocking honest and true informational leaflets about FF, with info on all the brands etc, along with BF info, that would be awesome. That's true information. An advertisement should not be what you are basing a decision like feeding your child on, and it happens far too much. There's a huge difference between making a choice uninformed and making that same choice with all the info on hand. That was my point which seems to have been overlooked.
Last edited by PumpkinZulu; September 17th, 2011 at 07:22 AM.
I do get your point PZ- I really do and I agree to a certain point. I agree that the information/publicity is very one sided. I guess I have a sore spot when it comes to people (do-gooders) trying to make decisions for the rest of us. I'm not just talking about this issue now- I'm talking in general. I may not be explaining myself very well, I'm having trouble putting my thoughts into words. I guess the other thing is- you can disagree with the advertising, you can complain to the companies but I think it's the storming into a store threatening to report the owner (who was probably a poor, uneducated immigrant just trying to make some money for his/her family) that has upset some people.
I'm just trying to get my point across- as you did so well last post PZ. I completely agree with your last sentence and I know I went off tack there a bit and missed the main point you were trying to make.
My problem with the ad is it is not truthful. Baby Milk Action and the IBFAN (who's aim is to protect formula feeding mothers as well as support breastfeeding) have been tirelessly fighting the formula companies for years about unsubstantiated claims that their formulas support the immune system. To me it is like saying that a certain aftershave will make you able to pick up hotter women! However advertising aftershave is a completely different world to advertising infant nutrition and telling parents that formula supports their immune system when it doesn't. Don't mums who formula feed deserve the truth and proper information to help them decide, rather than lies??
I think the problem with trying to fight claims like this in advertising is proving that they are outright lying. Formula DOES support the immune system- so does air. Just not to a huge degree, and not as well as BF. Sayint formula supports the immune system better than BF would be a lie. Saying that it supports it without giving definite figures/degrees is not a lie. Yes it's misleading and yes it's sneaky but it's advertising- and that's what they do. Their job is not to provide information- their job is to sell a product. Advertising uses as one of it's main tools the ability to manipulate information/facts to support their product.
I think more would be achieved by picketing government etc about advertising/promoting bf rather than complaining about ads for formula. Technically the ad is doing/claiming nothing wrong. Especially since they begin the ad with "we all know that breastfeeding is best for baby"
Just Me - that is a very good point and it sort of follows onto a point where someone was talking about it being patronising to say that lower socioeconomic are targeted to buy formula.
Unfortunately in the past generations there was a belief that only the rich could afford formula and only the poor breastfed. I have heard older women discussing a breastfeeding mum and saying things like 'surely she can afford formula' My dad still boasts about being a 'Cow and Gate' baby (a UK formula brand) because Cow and Gate used to be fed to the Queen's children and had a crown on the lid to advertise the fact and was more expensive (and still is today.) So where I live in the UK there is a bit of status attached to the brand of formula you use.
On the other hand in a completely contradictory way there is also a status/class association with formula feeding and breastfeeding here in the UK. I have heard of women talking about breastfeeding mothers as posh, middle class, stuck up etc. One friend of mine while quietly trying to get her newborn baby to latch, had a stream of abuse hurled at her from a mum in the postnatal ward because 'that posh b**** is looking down on me with her breastfeeding' She had never spoken to my friend but she assumed that they were in entirely different social classes because my friend was breastfeeding. Even recently there was a documentary about breastfeeding and a group of young mums and mums to be said they wouldn't breastfeed because only 'posh/ middle class /older women breastfeed.'
So how is it patronising to say that these people don't need proper formula information? Surely it is patronising not to give them truthful, factual information about formula rather than the lies and misconceptions that are being passed around by those of the older generation and the formula companies.
Glenny - according to the code they are not allowed to have any unsubstantiated facts. So it is not a case of degree of truth. This is not just run of the mill advertising where anything goes and it is up to the consumer to 'buyer beware' This is infant nutrition and there is a code that needs to be followed.
And there is an argument that probably belongs in another thread about the whole 'breast is best' advertising. It doesn't work. Promoting breastfeeding does not work while formula companies lie about their product. Everyone knows breast is best...what they don't know is what formula actually is.
Last edited by Loveinamist; September 17th, 2011 at 08:47 AM.
Just as a side note...my DH strolled casually into the pharmacy (I think he was buying my haemorrhoid cream after DD lol!!) noticed the poster, and told the guy it should not be there. He said tough, DH said he would report him. The guy was Australian...not that that should even make a difference.
I too don't like the 'breast is best' campaign. There needs to be something more information-based, not just a sweeping statement.
Last edited by PumpkinZulu; September 17th, 2011 at 09:00 AM.
What's irking me at the moment is the inference that people who FF are either poor or dumb. That to me is offensive. I'm not poor and I'm not dumb and I FF. I have alot of friends who chose to FF and they are by no means poor or dumb.
And for what it's worth I have never used the follow on toddler formula and both my kids are and have been fully FF, so not every poor and dumb FF mum automatically moves onto toddler milk, but you know what? I dont care and I certainly don't judge any mum, weather they are a BF or FF mum who does.
Sorry if I come across narky, infact no I'm not sorry! I'm so freaking sick of this stupid FF v's BF debate...
Ok. I'm breathing deeply I have not once inferred that if you are FF your are poor or dumb. It is a fact that if you are from a lower socioeconomic background, you are *more likely* to FF.
Not at all lolpigs. I actually agree with many points in your post!
I'm not pro one over the other I'm pro choice! At the end of the day we are feeding our children anyway we can, isn't that the main thing?
I would love to see there be equal information out there fir both BF & FF, not one V's the other!
I guess they don't do studies around this area then PZ, I live in a rural area with a very very large low income and young parents percentage. My husband works with the youth here and I can assure you it's the opposite here. If they can't BF then the bubs are usually on cows milk at a young age as they can't afford $30 a week for formula wich is as cheap as it gets around here. And if they can their $$ goes on smokes, grog and maccas instead.
redrobin- I know they are not allowed unsubstianted facts but the fact that they are saying "formula supports the immune system" is not lying. It's true. But only in so far as everything pretty much supports the immune system. It might not do it very well, and certainly not as well as BF but it is being supported. If they said that formula babies wouldn't get sick or wouldn't get as sick as bf babies- that would be an unsubstianted fact. I was only referring to the particular discussion point by saying that technically they had done nothing wrong. Yes- the ad infers many things which are not true but does not actually blatantly lie.
Also- I wasn't saying it was patrionising to say people don't need information. Of course they do. I felt it was being patrionising to assume that because these people are making different choices that were they uneducated.
As a side note- can I just say that I'm sorry if any of my points have come across as attacking. I think everyone here is making valid points- I'm just trying to explain (not very well sometimes) my opinion. aren't we lucky that we live in a society where people are allowed to share different opinions.
And PZ- Just so you know- I have never once inferred from any of your posts that you are labelling ff mothers anything! I'm sorry others have taken that from what you have said. As I said in my last post- I'm sorry I got sidetracked as well and I agree with you that education (for both sides) is the key.
It just makes me cringe so much when people start using long phrases like "low socioeconomic background" - I am still cringing from when someone IRL mother's group was telling me a story about one of her pupils in her class.
I'm just poor I suppose. I didn't "choose" to use formula, far from it, but as Jim was starving, a doctor at the Children's Hospital, advised me to comp feed.
Honestly it is another expense, I wish I didn't have.
Now I wish people would think of the bigger picture, if some "study" is showing that poor people are more likely to formula feed, maybe think of why that might be, for example if someone is under a lot of stress, that can then affect their milk supply, that might mean, also they are less likely to be able to afford to see a lactation consultant.
Reply With Quote
I have not once inferred that if you are FF your are poor or dumb. It is a fact that if you are from a lower socioeconomic background, you are *more likely* to FF. 
Bookmarks