We need improved workplace accomodations, imporved maternity care practices, and improved consumer protections regarding
infant formula labeling and marketing 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.
All
our infant formula labels contain the following text: «Important notice: Breast milk is best for babies.
All of Nestlé's
Infant Formula Labels contain the following text in the local language: «Warning: Unboiled water, unboiled bottles or incorrect dilution can make your baby ill.
Article 17 of the law prohibits text and images on
infant formula labels that may idealise use of the product.
Section 31 of the Guidance Notes gives examples of representations which may be considered to «idealise» the use of infant formula should they feature on
infant formula labelling.
However, as IBFAN has pointed out to FTSE, PricewaterhouseCoopers «rigorous evaluation» not only missed the fact Nestlé Instructions are weaker than the Code and Resolutions, they apparently missed the fact that Nestlé's
infant formula labels in India are in breach of the Infant Milk Substitutes Act.
Has Health Canada mandated that
infant formula labels have warnings about the lack of sterility and that products must be carefully reconstituted at 70 degrees C to destroy the lethal Enterobacter sakazakii as recommended by the World Health Organization?
Requiring
infant formula labels to carry warnings that powdered infant formula is not a sterile product and may contain pathogens capable of causing serious illness.
The scheme involved the purchase of bulk
infant formula labeled «for export only» from a legitimate manufacturer.
Parents should pay close attention to expiration dates on their baby's infant formula and refer to specific instructions provided on
the infant formula label.
«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.
It states that: «
Infant formula labels must contain a statement about the superiority of breastfeeding... and not use pictures or words that idealise the use of infant formula — that, in effect, discourage breastfeeding.»
They are usually indicated as «MCT» on food, supplement, and
infant formula labels.
Not exact matches
One such product is Gerber Products Co.'s «Good Start Gentle Stage 1»
infant formula which transparently
labels its whey protein concentrate as «from milk, enzymatically hydrolyzed.»
APMEA shoppers are too, along with clean
label snacks,
infant formula and meat.
Bellamy's — the biggest of Australia's ASX - listed
infant formula companies — is hopeful it can get CFDA approval within six months, with the company confirming at its interim result last month it expected «zero» sales in the current half from Chinese
label products, which represented about 15 per cent of annual sales in 2016 - 17.
Feeding a Colicky Baby
Infant Formula If your baby is formula fed and you believe she may be suffering from colic, you may have a lot of questions surrounding the use of formula and this baffling
Formula If your baby is
formula fed and you believe she may be suffering from colic, you may have a lot of questions surrounding the use of formula and this baffling
formula fed and you believe she may be suffering from colic, you may have a lot of questions surrounding the use of
formula and this baffling
formula and this baffling
label.
As parents, it is important to read
labels, known what the ingredients are, and learn which
infant formulas are safe for your child.
In April 2009 Nestlé unveiled its new marketing strategy for
infant formula and other breastmilk substitutes — logos on
labels claiming it «protects».
• All products should be
labelled and presented in such a way as to avoid any risk of confusion between
infant formulae, pre-term / specialised
formulas and
formulas for older babies.
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.
Interestingly, it was after the Clean
Label Project investigated pet food that consumers expressed interest in contaminants found in
infant formula and baby food, perhaps a testament to our national priorities.
Article 19 of the Regulations states: «
Infant formula and follow - on formula shall be labelled in such a way that it enables consumers to make a clear distinction between such products so as to avoid any risk of confusion between infant formula and follow on formula.&
Infant formula and follow - on
formula shall be
labelled in such a way that it enables consumers to make a clear distinction between such products so as to avoid any risk of confusion between
infant formula and follow on formula.&
infant formula and follow on
formula.»
For example, the
formula brand name should not be the focus of
labels: the type of milk («
infant milk», «follow - on milk») should be in text at least as large (past analysis here, quoting regulations).
• specifies that products are
labelled and presented in such a way as to avoid any risk of confusion between
infant formulae, specialised
formulas and
formulas for older babies.
That this House is concerned that the provisions of the
Infant Formula and Follow - on Formula Regulations 2007 are disrespected in the UK, as evidenced by the current promotion for Nestlé SMA infant formula by Tesco in breach of Article 23 of that regulation, the near identical labelling of infant and follow - on formula to make them cross-promotional in breach of Article 19 of that regulation, the widespread advertising of infant formula brand names and logos in breach of Article 21 of that regulation and the use of idealising text and images on labels in breach of Article 17 of that regulation; therefore rejects the Department of Health's proposals to decriminalise certain of those requirements, such as labelling provisions in planned draft legislative proposals, related to EU Regulation 609/2015 which will replace these 2007 regulations; and stresses that any move to a system of Improvement Notices must have the purpose of speeding up compliance and be backed by prosecutions rather than giving companies who have flouted the law for many years additional time to c
Infant Formula and Follow - on Formula Regulations 2007 are disrespected in the UK, as evidenced by the current promotion for Nestlé SMA infant formula by Tesco in breach of Article 23 of that regulation, the near identical labelling of infant and follow - on formula to make them cross-promotional in breach of Article 19 of that regulation, the widespread advertising of infant formula brand names and logos in breach of Article 21 of that regulation and the use of idealising text and images on labels in breach of Article 17 of that regulation; therefore rejects the Department of Health's proposals to decriminalise certain of those requirements, such as labelling provisions in planned draft legislative proposals, related to EU Regulation 609/2015 which will replace these 2007 regulations; and stresses that any move to a system of Improvement Notices must have the purpose of speeding up compliance and be backed by prosecutions rather than giving companies who have flouted the law for many years additional time to
Formula and Follow - on
Formula Regulations 2007 are disrespected in the UK, as evidenced by the current promotion for Nestlé SMA infant formula by Tesco in breach of Article 23 of that regulation, the near identical labelling of infant and follow - on formula to make them cross-promotional in breach of Article 19 of that regulation, the widespread advertising of infant formula brand names and logos in breach of Article 21 of that regulation and the use of idealising text and images on labels in breach of Article 17 of that regulation; therefore rejects the Department of Health's proposals to decriminalise certain of those requirements, such as labelling provisions in planned draft legislative proposals, related to EU Regulation 609/2015 which will replace these 2007 regulations; and stresses that any move to a system of Improvement Notices must have the purpose of speeding up compliance and be backed by prosecutions rather than giving companies who have flouted the law for many years additional time to
Formula Regulations 2007 are disrespected in the UK, as evidenced by the current promotion for Nestlé SMA
infant formula by Tesco in breach of Article 23 of that regulation, the near identical labelling of infant and follow - on formula to make them cross-promotional in breach of Article 19 of that regulation, the widespread advertising of infant formula brand names and logos in breach of Article 21 of that regulation and the use of idealising text and images on labels in breach of Article 17 of that regulation; therefore rejects the Department of Health's proposals to decriminalise certain of those requirements, such as labelling provisions in planned draft legislative proposals, related to EU Regulation 609/2015 which will replace these 2007 regulations; and stresses that any move to a system of Improvement Notices must have the purpose of speeding up compliance and be backed by prosecutions rather than giving companies who have flouted the law for many years additional time to c
infant formula by Tesco in breach of Article 23 of that regulation, the near identical labelling of infant and follow - on formula to make them cross-promotional in breach of Article 19 of that regulation, the widespread advertising of infant formula brand names and logos in breach of Article 21 of that regulation and the use of idealising text and images on labels in breach of Article 17 of that regulation; therefore rejects the Department of Health's proposals to decriminalise certain of those requirements, such as labelling provisions in planned draft legislative proposals, related to EU Regulation 609/2015 which will replace these 2007 regulations; and stresses that any move to a system of Improvement Notices must have the purpose of speeding up compliance and be backed by prosecutions rather than giving companies who have flouted the law for many years additional time to
formula by Tesco in breach of Article 23 of that regulation, the near identical
labelling of
infant and follow - on formula to make them cross-promotional in breach of Article 19 of that regulation, the widespread advertising of infant formula brand names and logos in breach of Article 21 of that regulation and the use of idealising text and images on labels in breach of Article 17 of that regulation; therefore rejects the Department of Health's proposals to decriminalise certain of those requirements, such as labelling provisions in planned draft legislative proposals, related to EU Regulation 609/2015 which will replace these 2007 regulations; and stresses that any move to a system of Improvement Notices must have the purpose of speeding up compliance and be backed by prosecutions rather than giving companies who have flouted the law for many years additional time to c
infant and follow - on
formula to make them cross-promotional in breach of Article 19 of that regulation, the widespread advertising of infant formula brand names and logos in breach of Article 21 of that regulation and the use of idealising text and images on labels in breach of Article 17 of that regulation; therefore rejects the Department of Health's proposals to decriminalise certain of those requirements, such as labelling provisions in planned draft legislative proposals, related to EU Regulation 609/2015 which will replace these 2007 regulations; and stresses that any move to a system of Improvement Notices must have the purpose of speeding up compliance and be backed by prosecutions rather than giving companies who have flouted the law for many years additional time to
formula to make them cross-promotional in breach of Article 19 of that regulation, the widespread advertising of
infant formula brand names and logos in breach of Article 21 of that regulation and the use of idealising text and images on labels in breach of Article 17 of that regulation; therefore rejects the Department of Health's proposals to decriminalise certain of those requirements, such as labelling provisions in planned draft legislative proposals, related to EU Regulation 609/2015 which will replace these 2007 regulations; and stresses that any move to a system of Improvement Notices must have the purpose of speeding up compliance and be backed by prosecutions rather than giving companies who have flouted the law for many years additional time to c
infant formula brand names and logos in breach of Article 21 of that regulation and the use of idealising text and images on labels in breach of Article 17 of that regulation; therefore rejects the Department of Health's proposals to decriminalise certain of those requirements, such as labelling provisions in planned draft legislative proposals, related to EU Regulation 609/2015 which will replace these 2007 regulations; and stresses that any move to a system of Improvement Notices must have the purpose of speeding up compliance and be backed by prosecutions rather than giving companies who have flouted the law for many years additional time to
formula brand names and logos in breach of Article 21 of that regulation and the use of idealising text and images on
labels in breach of Article 17 of that regulation; therefore rejects the Department of Health's proposals to decriminalise certain of those requirements, such as
labelling provisions in planned draft legislative proposals, related to EU Regulation 609/2015 which will replace these 2007 regulations; and stresses that any move to a system of Improvement Notices must have the purpose of speeding up compliance and be backed by prosecutions rather than giving companies who have flouted the law for many years additional time to comply.
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.
In one of them, India, Nestlé executives have been issued with a court summons this week for not
labelling infant formula as required by the law.
The International Code imposes strict guidelines that prohibit the promotion of
infant formula to the public, the promotion of
infant formula through health care systems, direct contact between
formula companies and mothers, and ensure proper
labels on all products describing the benefits of breastfeeding and the dangers of bottlefeeding (see the International Code page on this website for more information).
Be aware of the risks of intrinsic contamination of powdered
infant formulas and to ensure this information be conveyed through
label warnings;
After many years of campaigning, the Commission has agreed some welcome changes:
labelling of some specialist
infant products is improved and the composition of
formulas is revised (changes the industry want delayed for 5 years).
Nestlé's own Instructions prohibited it from advertising
formula brands such as Nan as they stated it would not promote follow - on
formulas except for those that «have brand /
label design which is distinctly different from
infant formula».
Prior to this Nestlé's policy applied to «all follow - up
formula products except in the rare instances where they have brand /
label design which is distinctly different from
infant formula.»
Infant formula satisfies the follow - on formula composition requirements and is already labelled for use from 0 to 12 months in many cases.6 For no sound health reason FUF can be widely advertised across all media and MSs will only be allowed to control the marketing of infant fo
Infant formula satisfies the follow - on
formula composition requirements and is already
labelled for use from 0 to 12 months in many cases.6 For no sound health reason FUF can be widely advertised across all media and MSs will only be allowed to control the marketing of
infant fo
infant formula.
I have read four
infant formula nutrition
labels this evening (Enfamil, Similac, Earth's Best, Up & Up).
Baby Milk Action suggests a softly - softly approach has already been shown to be ineffective, both with regards to Nestle's
labelling and Tesco's
infant formula promotions.
Does Danone provide
infant formula and other baby milks directly to Chinese importers with
labels in Dutch and / or other European languages?
Nestlé exacerbates the cross-promotional impact of its advertising as its
labels do not comply with the
labelling requirements, which state: «the specific terms «
infant formula» and «follow - on
formula» should be clearly featured on the packaging, in a font size no smaller than the brand name.»
It would be more of a public service to note on
labels that all
infant formulas are for use from 0 — 12 months and other
formulas are unnecessary.]
Did you know that many mass - producing, non-organic
infant formulas do not even
label the genetically modified ingredients, or «GMO» sources, they use in their products?
In India, Nestlé has had
formula seized for breaking
labelling laws and its attempts to sponsor health workers have been described as illegal by government authorities under the terms of the
Infant Milk Substitutes Act.
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.
Clean
Label Project ™ completed a study of 500
infant formulas and baby food products from 60 brands.
This is a laudable first step toward resolving an urgent public health issue: The current lack of oversight for
infant formula manufacturers»
labeling claims.
[Baby Milk Action comment: All
infant formulas on the market are currently
labelled for use from 0 — 12 months and have a feeding table giving number of scoops to add to a feed throughout this period.
Regulation 2016/127 (22) Regulation (EU) No 609/2013 provides that the
labelling, presentation and advertising of
infant formula and follow - on
formula is to be designed so as not to discourage breastfeeding.
Clean
Label Project had the top - selling
infant formulas and baby foods tested and reviewed by a third party analytical chemistry laboratory for industrial and environmental contaminants and nutritional superiority elements like antioxidant activity.