Infant Feeding Action Coalition USA, Inc.

On December 24, 2024, ProPublica reported on new regulations in Thailand that will “force baby formula companies to stop advertising, giveaways and discounts for so-called toddler milk.” This advancement is seen as a huge success for Thailand, which has been attempting to regulate such advertisements and discounts since 2017.

While a wide range of products will be impacted by the new regulations, the major focus of Thailand’s work to regulate has been on toddler milks. As reported, “[Back in 2017] formula makers like Mead Johnson asked U.S. trade officials to intervene [on regulation attempts], setting off a 15-month diplomatic and political pressure campaign that resulted in an exemption for toddler milk ads.” This intervention continued forward to the 2017 World Trade Organization meeting, where the U.S. publicly shamed Thai health officials for proposing regulations on toddler milks.

Notably, in 2024, “the U.S. took a different approach. In a letter to Thai authorities, officials said the U.S. “supports Thailand’s objective to prevent deceptive marketing practices thereby protecting the health and wellbeing of both infants and young children.”

Despite this change of tune from the U.S., Thailand continues to face backlash from large trade groups, including the US-ASEAN Business Council and the Infant Nutrition Council of America.

Regardless of this push back, Thailand continues to press forward and advocate for the health and well being of infants and toddlers, with the regulations set to take effect in July.

Original ProPublica Article: https://www.propublica.org/article/thailand-bans-advertising-toddler-milk

REPOST: Baby Milk Action Network

Three new WHO resources support WHO’s recommendation (1) that, in order to promote, protect and support breastfeeding, prevent obesity and noncommunicable diseases, promote healthy diets, and ensure that caregivers receive clear and accurate information on feeding, companies that market foods for infants and young children should not “sponsor meetings of health professionals and scientific meetings.” Likewise, health workers, health systems, health professional associations and nongovernmental organizations should not “allow such companies to sponsor meetings of health professionals and scientific meetings”.

The draft sponsorship policy includes rationale, overall commitment, types of sponsorship, and review plan. It states that Associations may add to the policy in terms of scope or covered activities as appropriate.  It is important to note that the scope of the  International Code of Marketing Breastmilk Substitutes also covers feeding Bottles and Teats.(1)

World Health Organization. (‎2024)‎. Sponsorship of health professional associations by manufacturers and distributors of commercial milk formula: case studies. https://doi.org/10.2471/B09083

World Health Organization. (‎2024)‎. Sponsorship of health professional associations by manufacturers and distributors of commercial milk formula: model policy. https://doi.org/10.2471/B09120

World Health Organization. (‎2024)‎. Sponsorship of health professional associations by manufacturers and distributors of commercial milk formula: alternative funding resources for events. https://doi.org/10.2471/B09113

SOURCE: New Sponsorship resources from WHO | Baby Milk Action

This August 2024, UNICEF’s Nutrition and Child Development section published a helpful guidance document: Countering Industry Arguments Against Code Implementation: Evidence and Rights-Based Responses Guidance for Advocates of the International Code of Marketing of Breast-Milk Substitutes. This document is intended for use by policymakers and breastfeeding advocates and provides answers to commonly used arguments against the World Health Organization’s (WHO) International Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes (“The Code”).

Notably, the counterarguments and points provided as answers are evidence-based and rooted in international human rights law. It the hope of the Global Breastfeeding Collective that this resource will be useful in countering the industry’s legislative force when lobbying against policies that restrict harmful marketing practices of breast-milk substitutes.

The United States Breastfeeding Committee (USBC) is an independent, nonprofit organization made up of more than 130 organizations. Non-governmental organizations, local community organizations, and various health professional associations come together under the USBC to work collaboratively and drive efforts for policy improvements in the landscape of breastfeeding support in the U.S.

In 2011, the USBC declared August as National Breastfeeding Month as a way to bring attention to the “wins and losses” within the national lactation landscape. Throughout the month, opportunities for conversation and further learning are often offered by various organizations across the country. As years have passed, weekly observances began during the month to highlight specific populations and the work they are doing in the field.

This year, the following weekly observances are taking place:

*World Breastfeeding Week: August 1-7, 2024

*National WIC Breastfeeding Week: August 1-7, 2024

*Indigenous Milk Medicine Week: August 8-14, 2024

*Asian American Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander Breastfeeding Week: August 15-21, 2024

*Black Breastfeeding Week: August 25-31, 2024

*Semana de La Lactancia Latina: September 3-9, 2024

A statement by Catherine Russell (UNICEF Executive Director) and Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus (WHO Director-General) released on July 31, 2024 highlights the need to equal access to breastfeeding support ahead of National Breastfeeding Month. The statement highlights the various roles that families, communities and policy-makers play in increasing access to breastfeeding support for everyone.

“When breastfeeding is protected and supported, women are more than twice as likely to breastfeed their infants. This is a shared responsibility…[We] all play a central role by:

Increasing investment in programs and policies that protect and support breastfeeding through dedicated national budgets; implementing and monitoring family friendly workplace policies…; ensuring mothers who are at-risk in emergencies and under-represented communities receive protection and support in line with their unique needs…; improving monitoring of breastfeeding programs and policies…; developing and enforcing laws restricting the marketing of breast-milk substitutes, including digital marketing practices…”

IN.F.ACT. USA is proud to be working hard on potential policy developments here in the U.S. to monitor and restrict the marketing of breastmilk-substitutes, particularly with regard to predatory digital marketing practices of infant formula companies.

For more information about National Breastfeeding Month and the weekly observances, please visit: https://www.usbreastfeeding.org/national-breastfeeding-month.html

On March 21, 2024, ProPublica published a scathing story about the U.S. interference of the protection, support and promotion of breastfeeding and of the WHO Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes.

Government documents obtained by ProPublica show a stark rift between trade and health officials over international efforts to regulate toddler milk. The records provide a rare, candid glimpse into U.S. policymaking around children’s health.

The full story can be read here.

The jury found formula manufacturing giant Mead Johnson liable and awarded the plaintiffs $60 million — $35 million more than plaintiff’s attorneys were asking. 

The company was accused of not doing enough to warn parents about the increased risk of a deadly disease in premature babies given their formula called Necrotizing Enterocolotis, or NEC for short.

The trial involving a Fairview Heights mother who lost one of her twin premature babies is the first of hundreds of similar case cases that are part of multidistrict litigation. The I-Team found more than 330 lawsuits filed nationally on the topic.

Source article can be found here: https://www.ksdk.com/article/news/investigations/formula-lawsuit/baby-formula-deadly-disease-lawsuit-closing-arguments-preemies/63-c8007dc1-b8db-44b1-9d75-3d26dce01ea4#:~:text=Baby%20formula%20manufacturer%20ordered%20to,are%20fed%20in%20NICUs%20nationwide.

According to the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), toddler “formulas” that are promoted as nutritious drinks for the older infant or preschooler are generally unnecessary and nutritionally incomplete, and the marketing practices that promote them are questionable.

The AAP has published a new clinical report, “Older Infant-Young Child ‘Formulas,'” that reviews the growing array of drinks aimed at children ages 6-36 months and observes that they lack standardization or regulatory oversight.

It is not new information that marketing efforts of breastmilk substitutes are consistently predatory and create a lot of confusion for the general public, along with undermining breastfeeding efforts of parents. However, this report, coming from an organization such as the AAP, highlights a corner of the market that is not often in the limelight – that of toddler milks and ‘follow-up’ formula.

The new report from the AAP concludes by recommending the following:

• For infants younger than 12 months, the liquid portion of the diet should be provided by human milk or standard infant formula that has been reviewed by the FDA based on the Infant Formula Act.
• For toddlers (children 12 months and older), caregivers should provide a varied diet with fortified foods to optimize nutritional intake. OIYCFs can safely be used as part of a varied diet for children but do not provide a nutritional advantage in most children over a well-balanced diet that includes human milk (preferred) and/or cow milk, and these products should not be promoted as such. OIYCFs have no specific role in routine care of healthy children and are more expensive than cow milk.
• Marketing of OIYCFs should make the clear and unambiguous distinction from standard infant formula in promotional materials, logos, product names, and packaging. OIYCF product name should not be linked in any way to infant formula (numerical, steps, sequential name) and should be labeled as something other than formula—for example, follow-on or toddler “drink” or “beverage” rather than follow-on or toddler “formula.” Product placement in store shelves of OIYCFs should not be alongside standard infant formulas.
• Education of families about OIYCFs by health care teams as part of well-child visits is encouraged.
• Medical providers and care teams should complete a focused nutritional assessment, with consideration of mineral- and iron-rich solid food consumption and offer adjustment of solid food intake and/or vitamin supplementation as needed.

The full report can be found here: https://publications.aap.org/pediatrics/article/doi/10.1542/peds.2023-064050/194469/Older-Infant-Young-Child-Formulas?autologincheck=redirected

Geneva, Switzerland; June 20-22, 2023

Last month, INFACT USA joined the many other global representatives of the Infant Baby Food Action Network (IBFAN) and participated in the WHO/UNICEF first ever Code Congress.

More than 400 people came together at the WHO headquarters with a shared goal – to protect every mother and pregnant woman against predatory marketing practices of infant and young child feeding products, including infant formula. Throughout the three day congress, the same message was emphasized again and again: “The best way to support these women is to enact, monitor and enforce the International Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes.”

The World Health Assembly (WHA) in 1981 adopted the International Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes. Forty-two years later, formula milk manufacturing companies continue to violate these established principles and place commercial interests before children’s and families’ health. Subsequent WHA resolutions have repeatedly called upon national governments to enact, monitor and enforce the provisions of the Code.

“Over 70% of Member States have enacted legislation that puts in place at least some of the provisions of the Code,” said Dr Francesco Branca, Director of Nutrition and Food Safety at WHO. “But industries are still expanding to push an ever-increasing range of formula milk products on families, using insidious tactics to access their networks and influence their choices. Parents have the right to impartial information on infant feeding, which is actively undermined by exploitative industry marketing.”

WHO and UNICEF notably excluded commercial companies from participation at the Code Congress, much to the annoyance of the International Special Dietary Foods Industries (ISDI), who issued this Statement just one day after the start of the Congress in Geneva.

Here in the United States, there is an incredible amount of work to be done to advance the WHO Code and its subsequent resolutions. To date, the U.S. is one of three countries in the world that did not sign onto the Code back in 1981. While that step may never come for the U.S., there are other options and avenues to implement protections against predatory marketing practices of these commercial baby-food product companies.