She highlighted the deception of the strategy that had been on display at the shareholder meeting the previous year: logos on
formula labels claiming the product will «protect» babies.
Not exact matches
One particular concern we are campaigning on at present is new
formula labels Nestlé has rolled out around the world that
claim its
formula «protects».
The new guidelines will require sun protection
formula labeling to have proven effectiveness against ultraviolet rays such as UVA and UVB to
claim protection against skin cancers.
In April 2009 Nestlé unveiled its new marketing strategy for infant
formula and other breastmilk substitutes — logos on
labels claiming it «protects».
At past shareholder meetings, the Chair repeatedly defended promoting infant
formula with strategies such as logos on
labels claiming «protects» babies, despite knowing that babies fed on breastmilk substitutes are more likely to become sick than breastfed babies and, in conditions of poverty, more likely to die.
For example, Danone has pledged to remove the Immunofortis
claims we highlighted in Update 43 (shown left) from all
formula labels in all countries.
Claims made by the manufacturers of infant
formula on
labels and in their advertisements are marketing tools to glamourize these products.
«We find the case for
labelling infant
formula or follow on
formula with health or nutrition
claims entirely unsupportable.
Members of the European Parliament have moved to block a baby food company from using a health
claim on
labels of follow - on
formula.
The most important being that Member states will not be allowed to stop advertising and promotional
claims for
formulas above 6 months (they can stop advertising of infant
formula from birth) or stop the
labelling of baby foods from 4 months (with 30 % sugar).
The WHO recommends that powdered
formula be reconstituted at 70 degrees centigrade to kill E. sakazakii, but the Nestlé
label tells parents to reconstitute their probiotic
formula at 40 degrees in order to protect its «natrual cultures»
claim, putting Canadian infants at risk for E. sakazakii infection.
The
label below shows that Nestlé
claims its BEBA Junior
formula for use from 12 months of age is not a breastmilk substitute — despite the product being fed in a bottle (a surrogate breast) and its
claim to support the recommendation of breastfeeding into the second year of life and beyond.
This is a laudable first step toward resolving an urgent public health issue: The current lack of oversight for infant
formula manufacturers»
labeling claims.
The Food and Drug Administration is considering tougher oversight of infant
formula labeling and advertising to ensure that the often misleading «structure / function»
claims companies make («comfort proteins»; «designed to be more like breast milk») are valid.
We need improved workplace accomodations, imporved maternity care practices, and improved consumer protections regarding infant
formula labeling and marketing
claims.
And in 2011, in the wake of heavy lobbying by infant -
formula makers, the European Parliament fell short of the vote needed to prevent a disputed DHA
claim from being made on
formula labels.
put health and nutrition
claims on
labels (unless on a small list of permitted
claims) or use other idealising text or images on infant
formula (such as hearts, shields, animals)(RG 17 / GN 32).
In addition,
labels can not make nutritional and health
claims or include images that idealize infant
formula.
«Let's not forget that the existing ban on such text and images on infant
formula labels is routinely flouted by companies in many Member States, with images such as shields, polar bears and unauthorised health
claims appearing.
Health Canada should decide if these ingredients should be in all
formulas to eliminate the false and misleading
claims for these additives and the highlighting of these additives on
labels in the promotions by the
formula industries.
Nestlé currently
labels its infant
formula around the world with idealising
claims such as it is the «natural start» and «protects» babies.
Weighing in, Marsha Walker, executive director, National Alliance for Breastfeeding Advocacy,
labelled IFC's earlier
claims a «diversionary response... designed to shift responsibility from the
formula manufacturers.»
This second best puppy food
formula is made without any byproducts or meat meals, and the company
claims this as «holistic» food, although this marketing term has no meaning under FDA and AAFCO pet food
labeling requirements.