Latest news with #AllPartyParliamentaryGroup
ITV News
3 hours ago
- Health
- ITV News
Sussex MP urges Government to crack down on ‘exploitative' baby formula marketing
The Government has been urged to crack down on the 'exploitative' marketing practices of baby formula companies. Liberal Democrat MP Jess Brown-Fuller, chairwoman of the All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on Infant Feeding, has said new parents face inflated prices and unfounded health claims on packaging. Firms are also 'exploiting a legal loophole' to circumvent rules about the advertising of formula, she added, and offering their product to hospitals at discounted rates, giving parents the impression of an NHS recommendation. The Chichester MP is raising concerns after the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) published a formula market study report earlier this year highlighting a number of issues, including misleading marketing, information gaps and cost impacts on low-income families. Formula manufacturers increased prices by an average of 25% in the two years up to November 2023 and they remain at near record highs. Parents often believe that a higher price tag means a more nutritious formula for their baby, despite regulations requiring all formula on the market to be nutritionally equivalent. Ms Brown-Fuller told the PA news agency: 'There are parents who believe that by buying the more expensive formula, they are supporting their child's feeding or growth or potential more when actually all of those milks are nutritionally equivalent.' There are even reports of parents buying more expensive formula but using fewer scoops per bottle to try and make it last longer, which Ms Brown-Fuller branded 'dangerous'. These parents are doing what they think is best for their children, she said, when in reality there is 'no difference' between the £14 tub and £7 tub of formula. The Liberal Democrat noted that companies will use their packaging to 'imply a nutritional superiority', with phrases like 'nutritionally complete' or 'supports a healthy immune system'. She asked: 'Where is the evidence that suggests that that formula is in any way a boost to an infant's immune system above any others?' Meanwhile, other formulas will write 'with added…' and name ingredients like Omega 3, certain vitamins, or iron. Ms Brown-Fuller said: 'It has to have a certain number of nutrients in it anyway. And anything that is additional potentially shouldn't be in there because they are working around a very strict compliance code.' She explained: 'They wouldn't be able to make these bold claims if they were a medication but, because it's a food, it's a source of nutrition, they're not held to the same standards.' Meanwhile, it is illegal to advertise newborn formula in the UK but firms are allowed to advertise follow-on milk for babies that are six months and older. This is because World Health Organisation (WHO) guidance is that breast milk should be the main source of nutrition for all infants until they are six months old, and a lack of advertising regulation is linked to lower breastfeeding rates. Ms Brown-Fuller said: 'There is a direct correlation between countries that have no regulation around formula marketing and drastic reductions in breastfeeding. 'So that is why the Government did introduce regulation around advertising of formula milk because the numbers of breastfeeding mothers was dramatically reducing.' The UK scores just 48 out of 100 overall on a range of infant-feeding metrics, according to the World Breastfeeding Trends Initiative. However, to get around these regulations, formula companies advertise for their follow-on milk and 'make all their packaging look exactly the same to anybody that was just perusing the shelves'. The Chichester MP said: 'They're exploiting a legal loophole, because it is a legal loophole, but they've totally blurred the lines through similar branding.' Another form of 'exploitative' marketing, she argued, is that formula companies will sell their formula into healthcare professional environments like maternity units or neonatal units for a hugely reduced price. Purchase habits show strong brand loyalty when it comes to formula, with parents rarely switching brands once they have introduced a particular one to their baby. It is also argued that brand presence in a healthcare setting gives the 'fake impression of an NHS endorsement'. Ms Brown-Fuller told PA: 'They know that if they get the parents to use that in a hospital setting, the likelihood is that that is the formula they will then use when they go home.' The CMA has put forward 11 recommendations to address these issues, aiming to strengthen labelling and advertising rules, better inform parents to make choices in retail environments and to eliminate brand influence in healthcare settings with standardised packaging. A Department of Health and Social Care spokesperson said: 'As part of our Plan for Change, we're determined to ensure every child has the best start to life. 'There are many benefits of breastfeeding but for those mothers that cannot or choose not to breastfeed, it is vital parents can access infant formula that is affordable and high quality. Families should not be paying over the odds to feed their babies.
Leader Live
7 hours ago
- Health
- Leader Live
Government urged to crack down on ‘exploitative' baby formula marketing
Liberal Democrat MP Jess Brown-Fuller, chairwoman of the All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on Infant Feeding, has said new parents face inflated prices and unfounded health claims on packaging. Firms are also 'exploiting a legal loophole' to circumvent rules about the advertising of formula, she added, and offering their product to hospitals at discounted rates, giving parents the impression of an NHS recommendation. The Chichester MP is raising concerns after the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) published a formula market study report earlier this year highlighting a number of issues, including misleading marketing, information gaps and cost impacts on low-income families. Formula manufacturers increased prices by an average of 25% in the two years up to November 2023 and they remain at near record highs. Parents often believe that a higher price tag means a more nutritious formula for their baby, despite regulations requiring all formula on the market to be nutritionally equivalent. Ms Brown-Fuller told the PA news agency: 'There are parents who believe that by buying the more expensive formula, they are supporting their child's feeding or growth or potential more when actually all of those milks are nutritionally equivalent.' There are even reports of parents buying more expensive formula but using fewer scoops per bottle to try and make it last longer, which Ms Brown-Fuller branded 'dangerous'. These parents are doing what they think is best for their children, she said, when in reality there is 'no difference' between the £14 tub and £7 tub of formula. The Liberal Democrat noted that companies will use their packaging to 'imply a nutritional superiority', with phrases like 'nutritionally complete' or 'supports a healthy immune system'. She asked: 'Where is the evidence that suggests that that formula is in any way a boost to an infant's immune system above any others?' Meanwhile, other formulas will write 'with added…' and name ingredients like Omega 3, certain vitamins, or iron. Ms Brown-Fuller said: 'It has to have a certain number of nutrients in it anyway. And anything that is additional potentially shouldn't be in there because they are working around a very strict compliance code.' She explained: 'They wouldn't be able to make these bold claims if they were a medication but, because it's a food, it's a source of nutrition, they're not held to the same standards.' Meanwhile, it is illegal to advertise newborn formula in the UK but firms are allowed to advertise follow-on milk for babies that are six months and older. This is because World Health Organisation (WHO) guidance is that breast milk should be the main source of nutrition for all infants until they are six months old, and a lack of advertising regulation is linked to lower breastfeeding rates. Ms Brown-Fuller said: 'There is a direct correlation between countries that have no regulation around formula marketing and drastic reductions in breastfeeding. 'So that is why the Government did introduce regulation around advertising of formula milk because the numbers of breastfeeding mothers was dramatically reducing.' The UK scores just 48 out of 100 overall on a range of infant-feeding metrics, according to the World Breastfeeding Trends Initiative. However, to get around these regulations, formula companies advertise for their follow-on milk and 'make all their packaging look exactly the same to anybody that was just perusing the shelves'. The Chichester MP said: 'They're exploiting a legal loophole, because it is a legal loophole, but they've totally blurred the lines through similar branding.' Another form of 'exploitative' marketing, she argued, is that formula companies will sell their formula into healthcare professional environments like maternity units or neonatal units for a hugely reduced price. Purchase habits show strong brand loyalty when it comes to formula, with parents rarely switching brands once they have introduced a particular one to their baby. It is also argued that brand presence in a healthcare setting gives the 'fake impression of an NHS endorsement'. Ms Brown-Fuller told PA: 'They know that if they get the parents to use that in a hospital setting, the likelihood is that that is the formula they will then use when they go home.' The CMA has put forward 11 recommendations to address these issues, aiming to strengthen labelling and advertising rules, better inform parents to make choices in retail environments and to eliminate brand influence in healthcare settings with standardised packaging. A Department of Health and Social Care spokesperson said: 'As part of our Plan for Change, we're determined to ensure every child has the best start to life. 'There are many benefits of breastfeeding but for those mothers that cannot or choose not to breastfeed, it is vital parents can access infant formula that is affordable and high quality. Families should not be paying over the odds to feed their babies. 'We are working closely with the devolved governments to carefully consider the CMA's recommendations and will respond fully in due course.'
North Wales Chronicle
8 hours ago
- Health
- North Wales Chronicle
Government urged to crack down on ‘exploitative' baby formula marketing
Liberal Democrat MP Jess Brown-Fuller, chairwoman of the All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on Infant Feeding, has said new parents face inflated prices and unfounded health claims on packaging. Firms are also 'exploiting a legal loophole' to circumvent rules about the advertising of formula, she added, and offering their product to hospitals at discounted rates, giving parents the impression of an NHS recommendation. The Chichester MP is raising concerns after the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) published a formula market study report earlier this year highlighting a number of issues, including misleading marketing, information gaps and cost impacts on low-income families. Formula manufacturers increased prices by an average of 25% in the two years up to November 2023 and they remain at near record highs. Parents often believe that a higher price tag means a more nutritious formula for their baby, despite regulations requiring all formula on the market to be nutritionally equivalent. Ms Brown-Fuller told the PA news agency: 'There are parents who believe that by buying the more expensive formula, they are supporting their child's feeding or growth or potential more when actually all of those milks are nutritionally equivalent.' There are even reports of parents buying more expensive formula but using fewer scoops per bottle to try and make it last longer, which Ms Brown-Fuller branded 'dangerous'. These parents are doing what they think is best for their children, she said, when in reality there is 'no difference' between the £14 tub and £7 tub of formula. The Liberal Democrat noted that companies will use their packaging to 'imply a nutritional superiority', with phrases like 'nutritionally complete' or 'supports a healthy immune system'. She asked: 'Where is the evidence that suggests that that formula is in any way a boost to an infant's immune system above any others?' Meanwhile, other formulas will write 'with added…' and name ingredients like Omega 3, certain vitamins, or iron. Ms Brown-Fuller said: 'It has to have a certain number of nutrients in it anyway. And anything that is additional potentially shouldn't be in there because they are working around a very strict compliance code.' She explained: 'They wouldn't be able to make these bold claims if they were a medication but, because it's a food, it's a source of nutrition, they're not held to the same standards.' Meanwhile, it is illegal to advertise newborn formula in the UK but firms are allowed to advertise follow-on milk for babies that are six months and older. This is because World Health Organisation (WHO) guidance is that breast milk should be the main source of nutrition for all infants until they are six months old, and a lack of advertising regulation is linked to lower breastfeeding rates. Ms Brown-Fuller said: 'There is a direct correlation between countries that have no regulation around formula marketing and drastic reductions in breastfeeding. 'So that is why the Government did introduce regulation around advertising of formula milk because the numbers of breastfeeding mothers was dramatically reducing.' The UK scores just 48 out of 100 overall on a range of infant-feeding metrics, according to the World Breastfeeding Trends Initiative. However, to get around these regulations, formula companies advertise for their follow-on milk and 'make all their packaging look exactly the same to anybody that was just perusing the shelves'. The Chichester MP said: 'They're exploiting a legal loophole, because it is a legal loophole, but they've totally blurred the lines through similar branding.' Another form of 'exploitative' marketing, she argued, is that formula companies will sell their formula into healthcare professional environments like maternity units or neonatal units for a hugely reduced price. Purchase habits show strong brand loyalty when it comes to formula, with parents rarely switching brands once they have introduced a particular one to their baby. It is also argued that brand presence in a healthcare setting gives the 'fake impression of an NHS endorsement'. Ms Brown-Fuller told PA: 'They know that if they get the parents to use that in a hospital setting, the likelihood is that that is the formula they will then use when they go home.' The CMA has put forward 11 recommendations to address these issues, aiming to strengthen labelling and advertising rules, better inform parents to make choices in retail environments and to eliminate brand influence in healthcare settings with standardised packaging. A Department of Health and Social Care spokesperson said: 'As part of our Plan for Change, we're determined to ensure every child has the best start to life. 'There are many benefits of breastfeeding but for those mothers that cannot or choose not to breastfeed, it is vital parents can access infant formula that is affordable and high quality. Families should not be paying over the odds to feed their babies. 'We are working closely with the devolved governments to carefully consider the CMA's recommendations and will respond fully in due course.'
South Wales Guardian
8 hours ago
- Health
- South Wales Guardian
Government urged to crack down on ‘exploitative' baby formula marketing
Liberal Democrat MP Jess Brown-Fuller, chairwoman of the All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on Infant Feeding, has said new parents face inflated prices and unfounded health claims on packaging. Firms are also 'exploiting a legal loophole' to circumvent rules about the advertising of formula, she added, and offering their product to hospitals at discounted rates, giving parents the impression of an NHS recommendation. The Chichester MP is raising concerns after the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) published a formula market study report earlier this year highlighting a number of issues, including misleading marketing, information gaps and cost impacts on low-income families. Formula manufacturers increased prices by an average of 25% in the two years up to November 2023 and they remain at near record highs. Parents often believe that a higher price tag means a more nutritious formula for their baby, despite regulations requiring all formula on the market to be nutritionally equivalent. Ms Brown-Fuller told the PA news agency: 'There are parents who believe that by buying the more expensive formula, they are supporting their child's feeding or growth or potential more when actually all of those milks are nutritionally equivalent.' There are even reports of parents buying more expensive formula but using fewer scoops per bottle to try and make it last longer, which Ms Brown-Fuller branded 'dangerous'. These parents are doing what they think is best for their children, she said, when in reality there is 'no difference' between the £14 tub and £7 tub of formula. The Liberal Democrat noted that companies will use their packaging to 'imply a nutritional superiority', with phrases like 'nutritionally complete' or 'supports a healthy immune system'. She asked: 'Where is the evidence that suggests that that formula is in any way a boost to an infant's immune system above any others?' Meanwhile, other formulas will write 'with added…' and name ingredients like Omega 3, certain vitamins, or iron. Ms Brown-Fuller said: 'It has to have a certain number of nutrients in it anyway. And anything that is additional potentially shouldn't be in there because they are working around a very strict compliance code.' She explained: 'They wouldn't be able to make these bold claims if they were a medication but, because it's a food, it's a source of nutrition, they're not held to the same standards.' Meanwhile, it is illegal to advertise newborn formula in the UK but firms are allowed to advertise follow-on milk for babies that are six months and older. This is because World Health Organisation (WHO) guidance is that breast milk should be the main source of nutrition for all infants until they are six months old, and a lack of advertising regulation is linked to lower breastfeeding rates. Ms Brown-Fuller said: 'There is a direct correlation between countries that have no regulation around formula marketing and drastic reductions in breastfeeding. 'So that is why the Government did introduce regulation around advertising of formula milk because the numbers of breastfeeding mothers was dramatically reducing.' The UK scores just 48 out of 100 overall on a range of infant-feeding metrics, according to the World Breastfeeding Trends Initiative. However, to get around these regulations, formula companies advertise for their follow-on milk and 'make all their packaging look exactly the same to anybody that was just perusing the shelves'. The Chichester MP said: 'They're exploiting a legal loophole, because it is a legal loophole, but they've totally blurred the lines through similar branding.' Another form of 'exploitative' marketing, she argued, is that formula companies will sell their formula into healthcare professional environments like maternity units or neonatal units for a hugely reduced price. Purchase habits show strong brand loyalty when it comes to formula, with parents rarely switching brands once they have introduced a particular one to their baby. It is also argued that brand presence in a healthcare setting gives the 'fake impression of an NHS endorsement'. Ms Brown-Fuller told PA: 'They know that if they get the parents to use that in a hospital setting, the likelihood is that that is the formula they will then use when they go home.' The CMA has put forward 11 recommendations to address these issues, aiming to strengthen labelling and advertising rules, better inform parents to make choices in retail environments and to eliminate brand influence in healthcare settings with standardised packaging. A Department of Health and Social Care spokesperson said: 'As part of our Plan for Change, we're determined to ensure every child has the best start to life. 'There are many benefits of breastfeeding but for those mothers that cannot or choose not to breastfeed, it is vital parents can access infant formula that is affordable and high quality. Families should not be paying over the odds to feed their babies. 'We are working closely with the devolved governments to carefully consider the CMA's recommendations and will respond fully in due course.'
Glasgow Times
8 hours ago
- Health
- Glasgow Times
Government urged to crack down on ‘exploitative' baby formula marketing
Liberal Democrat MP Jess Brown-Fuller, chairwoman of the All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on Infant Feeding, has said new parents face inflated prices and unfounded health claims on packaging. Firms are also 'exploiting a legal loophole' to circumvent rules about the advertising of formula, she added, and offering their product to hospitals at discounted rates, giving parents the impression of an NHS recommendation. The Chichester MP is raising concerns after the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) published a formula market study report earlier this year highlighting a number of issues, including misleading marketing, information gaps and cost impacts on low-income families. Formula manufacturers increased prices by an average of 25% in the two years up to November 2023 and they remain at near record highs. Parents often believe that a higher price tag means a more nutritious formula for their baby, despite regulations requiring all formula on the market to be nutritionally equivalent. Ms Brown-Fuller told the PA news agency: 'There are parents who believe that by buying the more expensive formula, they are supporting their child's feeding or growth or potential more when actually all of those milks are nutritionally equivalent.' There are even reports of parents buying more expensive formula but using fewer scoops per bottle to try and make it last longer, which Ms Brown-Fuller branded 'dangerous'. These parents are doing what they think is best for their children, she said, when in reality there is 'no difference' between the £14 tub and £7 tub of formula. The Liberal Democrat noted that companies will use their packaging to 'imply a nutritional superiority', with phrases like 'nutritionally complete' or 'supports a healthy immune system'. She asked: 'Where is the evidence that suggests that that formula is in any way a boost to an infant's immune system above any others?' Meanwhile, other formulas will write 'with added…' and name ingredients like Omega 3, certain vitamins, or iron. Ms Brown-Fuller said: 'It has to have a certain number of nutrients in it anyway. And anything that is additional potentially shouldn't be in there because they are working around a very strict compliance code.' She explained: 'They wouldn't be able to make these bold claims if they were a medication but, because it's a food, it's a source of nutrition, they're not held to the same standards.' Meanwhile, it is illegal to advertise newborn formula in the UK but firms are allowed to advertise follow-on milk for babies that are six months and older. This is because World Health Organisation (WHO) guidance is that breast milk should be the main source of nutrition for all infants until they are six months old, and a lack of advertising regulation is linked to lower breastfeeding rates. Ms Brown-Fuller said: 'There is a direct correlation between countries that have no regulation around formula marketing and drastic reductions in breastfeeding. 'So that is why the Government did introduce regulation around advertising of formula milk because the numbers of breastfeeding mothers was dramatically reducing.' The UK scores just 48 out of 100 overall on a range of infant-feeding metrics, according to the World Breastfeeding Trends Initiative. However, to get around these regulations, formula companies advertise for their follow-on milk and 'make all their packaging look exactly the same to anybody that was just perusing the shelves'. The Chichester MP said: 'They're exploiting a legal loophole, because it is a legal loophole, but they've totally blurred the lines through similar branding.' Another form of 'exploitative' marketing, she argued, is that formula companies will sell their formula into healthcare professional environments like maternity units or neonatal units for a hugely reduced price. Ms Brown-Fuller is chairwoman of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Infant Feeding (Andrew Matthews/PA) Purchase habits show strong brand loyalty when it comes to formula, with parents rarely switching brands once they have introduced a particular one to their baby. It is also argued that brand presence in a healthcare setting gives the 'fake impression of an NHS endorsement'. Ms Brown-Fuller told PA: 'They know that if they get the parents to use that in a hospital setting, the likelihood is that that is the formula they will then use when they go home.' The CMA has put forward 11 recommendations to address these issues, aiming to strengthen labelling and advertising rules, better inform parents to make choices in retail environments and to eliminate brand influence in healthcare settings with standardised packaging. A Department of Health and Social Care spokesperson said: 'As part of our Plan for Change, we're determined to ensure every child has the best start to life. 'There are many benefits of breastfeeding but for those mothers that cannot or choose not to breastfeed, it is vital parents can access infant formula that is affordable and high quality. Families should not be paying over the odds to feed their babies. 'We are working closely with the devolved governments to carefully consider the CMA's recommendations and will respond fully in due course.'
