Tainted formula (potentially) causes newborn death

A baby being bottled fed.
Creative Commons Photo by Smmchapman

It is being reported the Mead Johnson, the maker of Enfamil is being sued after a 10 day old baby died back in December. This may be "old" news since we've previously discussed this issue, but this lawsuit indicates that there was known bacteria and if the water is not hot enough, the bacteria can grow and cause death.

Check out this Business Week article for more information.

Remember, formula companies are businesses and may decide risk of suit/negative publicity over doing the right thing. Cronobacter sakazakii, aka Enterobacter is "naturally" in the environment and trace materials can be found in powdered formula. According to NIH, Nestle researchers helped discover the potentially deadly bacteria. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17439656 and the fact that it may thrive in powdered formula,

"The high tolerance to desiccation provides a competitive advantage for Ent. sakazakii in dry environments, as found in milk powder factories, and thereby increases the risk of post-pasteurization contamination of the finished product."

Such a sad situation for babies, especially premature infants. I know I've seen caregivers shaking powdered formula into a bottle using water from a thermos (hopefully hot enough) but also directly with tap water.

If only more women had the support to feed their babies naturally in public. There's such a public outcry and lack of support for women and reports indicate women don't make their own breastfeeding goals. If a woman wants to breastfeed, whether it is for financial, health or other benefits, or even to avoid potential issues like the above, they should have that right and be protected by law.  

Still time to help save 8400 babies in the Phillippines

For those interested, there's a petition (worldwide) to help prevent predatory and misleading advertisements to Phillipinos - right now at http://www.avaaz.org/en/petition/Protect_mothers_and_babies_in_the_Philippines_from_the_baby_food_industry/

The "babyfood" industry wants to amend the Philippines' own rules and regulations. This may cause their country to have BFing rates similar to Thailand, which stand at ~2% of babies being breastfed at 6 months and only 15% of ALL babies getting breastmilk under 6 months.  Marketing and manipulation works. Companies know this! Poverty and lack of fresh water are real concerns - breastmilk is not only perfect for babies, but formula is EXPENSIVE and requires clean water.

You can also read more about it on a previous post here 

Another article on the history of formula.

Let me preface this that YES I know that being a parent is hard and difficult and hard to maneuver. Women need SUPPORT in breastfeeding. This post is NOT about moms who either cannot breastfeed due to a medical reason or choose not to breastfeed, this is about the formula companies and how they have manipulated the lives of many... all in the name of marketing.

So please, take a look at this Business Insider article. Read through and understand how the baby food industry is tainted. Business Insider.

If you are pregnant, consider finding a La Leche League and join a mom's group that has active breastfeeding support - MOMS need support- it can't be done alone :)

Marketing through desensitizing

The reason companies have marketing departments is because marketing works. It works well. It is also known that to try something new you need either trust it will work or discounts.

Multiple studies have shown that, when we market formula to women directly, breast feeding rates decrease and the length of breastfeeding decreases. And, in spite of WHO code requesting no discounts or direct marketing to moms, companies continue to do so.

Similac, due to their lovely partnerships with most state's WIC programs, has market corner in the US. But now to help women recognize their brand early on, similac now offers prenatal vitamins.



Complete with coupon.

Brand recognition.

Brand loyalty.

"I trusted this company while pregnant, they must be good for my baby too." Especially when sales people have titles like "Nutrition officer"... we have to wonder about the information we receive.

Nestle is doing a similar thing with "nestle milk" in India complete with an idyllic upper class woman with a comforting song enjoying milk in their commercial. Formula companies see India as the future for their profits (China has fewer children on the way, and they already have a lot of formula fed babies)... But, the US still has money to be made, especially since WIC allows formula companies to make money off of non-breast feeders

Nestle taken to court in India for improper marketing of infant formula

Nestle is still at their same tactics - wanting to gain market share and make money (they are a for profit company after all!) they are doing whatever it takes to market artificial breast milk substitutes to women.


I saw this come through my news feed recently:

Nestlé is in court in India for breaking baby milk marketing rules and formula was seized by the Indian Food and Drug Administration this month (August 2012) for breaking labelling requirements.
Nestlé's response? Cause-related marketing, pushing its infant nutrition business and trying to improve its image by launching public events on the first 1000 days of life! 

 http://www.bpni.org/Nestle-Does-a-GREENWASH.html

How is Nestle Failing babies? They are failing to:

Print: "Mother's Milk is best for your baby" (they used a variation) and also they failed to have it in the Hindi script!! They also failed to write "Infant milk substitute or infant food is not the sole nourishment for an infant." They also failed to have this on print magazine advertisements. Sorry this is not a random omission - Nestle is known for horrible tactics against women and their babies and such a large company should know how to verify marketing laws!

Yes, this is an old case, that just still hasn't been settled, but slow to settle cases are common in India (unfortunately).

This Atlantic article regarding malnutrition is nice - let's solve malnutrition issues in India. Not by introducing more high cost formula but by, #1 supporting breastfeeding!

First and foremost, women should not be directly marketed to!

Support LLL India or an organization such as Breastfeeding Promotion Network of India.

Now remember, if a mom cannot afford formula, and may not have access to safe water... how does pushing formula help the baby?  In the mean time, this past week Danone is set to enter the market in India: India's infant nutrition sector is expanding rapidly and it is set to have a new entrant -

Last week, the French food group struck a deal to buy the nutrition business of local company Wockhardt Group, a move that means it will compete head on market leader Nestle.

Per the Just-Food website: "With over 25m children born each year, India is the fastest-growing infant nutrition market in the world," Danone said of the entire market beyond just infant formula, which mimics breast milk and is aimed at 0 to 12 month olds.

This must be stopped. Women of India, like women in the rest of the world, need support in breast feeding NOT more formula that they may not be able to afford.

List of Unfollowed Mom Blogs due to marketing of formula

Currently REMOVED.

I've had this post up for a month and after posting a link to a blog advising them on their FB page that I was choosing to unfollow them since I choose to not support those who are supporting Nestle especially, I made a list of blogs I had unfollowed.

It was not a call to action.

I am human - I have teetered on whether or not I should use coupon dot com on my blog and I am considering that removal since there are often formula coupons on there.

If someone uses formula that is their choice. BUT, again, Nestle and other companies tactically use bloggers to break the WHO Code.

Read through information on formula marketing tactics. We all have our "things" that makes us tick... this is mine.

Governments have found that when they've allowed direct advertising like we have in the US, breastfeeding rates decrease drastically. This is why many countries and the WHO and UNICEF ascertain that women shouldn't be given free formula or marketed to directly. Most of us posting here, reading blogs, have access to clean water to mix formula with.... We have the ability to find resources if necessary... the women who are manipulated and are told in marketing campaigns that breast milk is not as good as formula (different than the ads we currently see in most of the western world), is the issue.

Parent directed feeding versus demand feeding

When a newborn baby cries, it is their way to communicate with you, their care giver. It is not to annoy you. It is not because they want to manipulate you. It is because they are looking for your attention... for a reason. If you aren't ready to "deal" with that, you may not be ready for a baby.

There are various parenting theories out there, not one will be perfect for all families, but some can be damaging to babies and families. An over indulgent parent who cannot set boundaries is harmful, just as a parent who chooses not to be a 24 hour parent is harmful.



An over indulgent parent isn't the same as an attached parent. An attached parent is one who will consider all members in the family, not just a child's requests when making decisions.

A parent who fails to see that their life will change when they have kids will likely damage their child from the infant stage.

Here's the fact: babies are needy. They NEED you. A sleep trainer you pay $25 an hour to come and "solve" the issues isn't solving the issue. Instead, it is likely that you need someone to come in, give you a bit of a razzle wake up call and let you know that you're a parent now and your life has changed.

The changes of parenthood are only negative if you have the attitude that your life shouldn't change when baby comes. Embrace the changes and gift of this new life. There are ways to make parenting easier, and to me, that means attachment parenting. It is a lot easier to respond, be there, and relax with baby. Of course a baby's night waking will annoy you if you have to run across the house, warm a bottle and/or hear them scream. But if you follow instincts, room share (co-sleep if it works for you) and breastfeed, night waking isn't half as bad. PLUS, many of the biggest smiles are at those 3 am feeds :)

I say this in the midst of night weaning... but it is my two year old who knows the difference between night and day eats regular people food. He's not an infant whose stomach is only accepting the most basic of (high calorie) nourishment that happens to process through the body quickly.

I found this article interesting in the Journal of Perinatal Education that compared Babywise and Attachment Parenting.

These two extremely laughable but highly DANGEROUS points come from Babywise and Parent Directed Feeding:

• Your baby's routine is to serve you; you are not to serve your baby's routine (p. 132).
• You can hurt a baby by picking him or her up too much (p. 128).

Of course Babywise also doesn't recommend rocking a baby to sleep or co-sleeping. In fact those are also seen as harmful in their eyes. So, if being detached teaches your child that you won't respond to their needs... I wonder how things turn out later when their needs change into desires? Where's the trust? Also, don't forget, parent directed feeding and Babywise are specifically listed by the American Academy of Pediatrics as harmful and potentially deadly, due to the possibility of failure to thrive AND dehydration.

I don't see anything regarding that on attachment parenting. 

Enfamil just as bad as Nestle?

Taken at the 2008
World Breastfeeding Challenge
by Dash of Diva Photography

Is Enfamil as bad as Nestle for babies?

Perhaps not, but they also have their ways to market to pregnant women directly. Mead Johnson & Company have plenty of other business to do, perhaps they can try to make gains in other areas of their company instead of through their products which affect the health of infants and children negatively. 

After their negative publicity when babies died after consuming their formula late last year (to note they did indicate it was likely the water used to mix the formula, but the fact is breastmilk wouldn't have done that!), they're trying to get their name out there again and are using bloggers for giveaways. Not working here. In fact I won't go as far as be a "Mead Johnson-free home..." but I can't support bloggers who, like me, are mostly moms, being targeted by big companies to put forth their name and the mom bloggers get a few pennies for clicks perhaps, and the big companies get thousands of dollars in formula.


I think the attached photo was my first time nursing without a "full top" in public. I randomly came across this photo recently on my old Myspace page (gasp, yep, my login still worked!) and how fitting is it that this topic comes up on my blog? Okay, I guess it isn't that random at all...



As a reminder, the World Health Organization's Code for the Marketing of Breastmilk substitutes indicates:

5.2 Manufacturers and distributors should not provide, directly or indirectly, to
pregnant women, mothers or members of their families, samples of products within
the scope of this Code.

5.3 In conformity with paragraphs 1 and 2 of this Article, there should be no pointof-
sale advertising, giving of samples, or any other promotion device to induce sales
directly to the consumer at the retail level, such as special displays, discount coupons,
premiums, special sales, loss-leaders and tie-in sales, for products within the scope of
this Code. This provision should not restrict the establishment of pricing policies and
practices intended to provide products at lower prices on a long-term basis.

5.4 Manufacturers and distributors should not distribute to pregnant women or
mothers or infants and young children any gifts of articles or utensils which may
promote the use of breast-milk substitutes or bottle-feeding.

5.5 Marketing personnel, in their business capacity, should not seek direct or
indirect contact of any kind with pregnant women or with mothers of infants and
young children.

Of course most of us are bombarded with these in our OB's office (many midwives are more baby friendly) and then again at the hospital (another reason for low-risk women to consider home birth or at least a friendly birth center!) unless it is a hospital that is part of the "Baby Friendly Hospital Initiative"

So what is Enfamil up to? Giving away $250 worth of "goodies" to moms and moms-to-be.

Ya'll know I love a freebie... but not in this way.

Shame on Enfamil.

I'll be unfollowing all blogs sponsoring or posting about this giveaway and linking them to this post as to why. Here's an example. Love how this blogger writes, "WOW TALK ABOUT A HOT OFFER RIGHT NOW! ENFAMIL IS DOING IT AGAIN AND GIVING AWAY THEIR FAMOUS $250 ENFAMIL BAG FILLED WITH GOODIES! SO DO YOU KNOW SOMEONE THAT IS HAVING A BABY OR DO YOU NEED THE BABY GOODIES YOURSELF? ..."

FIRST HEAD ON OVER HERE TO SIGN UP (I removed the link, obviously)

AFTER YOU SIGN UP LOOK FOR THIS POST 

AND CHECK THE BOX 

NOW YOU DO NOT HAVE TO CHECK ON ANY OTHER BOXES IF YOU DO NOT WANT THOSE OFFERS JUST KEEP GOING :) 

SO YOU ASK WHAT DOES THIS KIT INCLUDE?

BOTTLE COOLER

FORMULA (MINE CAME WITH 4 FULL SIZE FORMULAS ALL DIFFERENT VARITIES)

A CLUTCH (TO ME IT LOOKS KIND OF LIKE A MAKE UP BAG BUT I THINK PEOPLE USE THEM FOR WIPES AND LITTLE BABY ITEMS)

THE TOTE (DIAPER BAG)

COUPONS

AND SOME OTHER LITTLE GOODIES!!

Please miss out on this offer. How are women going to make their breastfeeding goals if we continue to undermine them? How are we going to save babies from illness when we only encourage fewer women to breastfeed? Sorry fellow blogger mommies, this is something I just cannot support. 

Save money by breastfeeding - or the costs of formula

It is known that a family who has to pay for formula is more likely to breastfeed. However, programs like WIC, tend to make families who may otherwise breastfeed do not because they do not have to pay for the majority of formula. “For mothers of infants 6 months of age, WIC status was the strongest determinant of breastfeeding: mothers who were not enrolled in the WIC program were more than twice as likely to breastfeed at 6 months of age than mothers who participated in the WIC program.” Luckily many WIC programs are increasing breastfeeding support. (1)

The cost of formula per day averages around $4, for “on sale” formula and 28 ounces per day, not including wastage.

The cost of WIC programs is high. 

For low and middle income families, the government assists in ensuring basic nutrition. For non-breastfed babies up to age 4 months, 806 ounces of formula is given to the family to purchase with coupons. For ages 4 and 5 months, 884 ounces of breastmilk substitute is given. At 6 months solids are introduced as well as 624 ounces of formula. While prices are negotiated with one “vendor” by each granting authority/state, the price is still absolutely astounding. Yes, I believe nutrition is important, but WOW, billions for WIC programs each year for formula when breastmilk is free and training more peer counselors and training of medical staff can go a long way!

Cost of formula due to medical costs associated with not breastfeeding:

RESULTS: If 90% of US families could comply with medical recommendations to breastfeed exclusively for 6 months, the United States would save $13 billion per year and prevent an excess 911 deaths, nearly all of which would be in infants ($10.5 billion and 741 deaths at 80% compliance). (2)

This also doesn’t calculate the cost of lost wages and or lost productivity at work due to illnesses that are due to not breastfeeding.

Sources:

(1)    http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/117/4/1136

(2)    http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/125/5/e1048.full?sid=2f5be91e-86af-4327-b24d-60d37cd82ce7

Who Breastfeeds? Which ethnic group breastfeeds most?

Who Breastfeeds?

Many women consider breastfeeding, but not all moms do breastfeed. Breastfeeding is great for bonding, nutrition and overall health. It is however, not something as wide-spread in the US, as the Healthy "goals' of 2010 had hoped. In fact the US was no where close to hitting that goal. But, there are some statistical groups that do breastfeed more than others. Hispanics more than anyone else. But of course, non-Hispanic babies also benefit from breastmilk!

Who is getting only human milk?

Only 10.7 babies are exclusively breasted in the US at least 3 months, and only 6.1 percent make the 6 months exclusive breastfeeding that is recommended by AAP.  Is early supplementation a reason for early weaning and non-continuation of breastfeeding?

Why aren't more moms breastfeeding?

According to the Journal of Human Lactation,

“In-hospital formula supplementation of breastfed infants negatively impacts breastfeeding duration. Infants from low-income families have some of the lowest exclusive breastfeeding rates in the United States. The objectives of this study were to identify (1) reasons low-income breastfeeding mothers begin in-hospital formula supplementation and (2) risk factors for in-hospital formula supplementation. We surveyed 150 low-income mothers in a Washington, DC, clinic. Sixty percent had initiated breastfeeding, and 78% of these breastfed infants received formula supplementation in the hospital. There was no clear medical need for supplementation for 87% of the breastfed infants receiving supplementation. Infants of mothers who did not attend a prenatal breastfeeding class were almost 5 times more likely to receive in-hospital formula supplementation than those infants whose mothers had attended a class (OR, 4.7; 95% CI, 1.05-21.14). Improved knowledge about breastfeeding among nursing and medical providers is important to minimize unnecessary formula supplementation for breastfed infants.”

Again, I’m not indicating you have to breastfeed, but medical professionals who aren’t knowledgeable about breastfeeding definitely are a reason for increased cost to families and society. I know when my daughter was born a nurse (who wasn't the one lacatation consultant on staff at that hospital) basically told me right nipple was useless and it was inverted. It wasn't until I was pregnant with my second kid that I found out it wasn't inverted. I did nurse on that side, but I had assumed that whole time that my right boob had something wrong with it!!

Further, there are economic reasons TO breastfeed, thus those who are low/middle income would probably breastfeed more.. but that is not the case. In fact Ww know that families who have WIC tend to breastfeed less, but that number is slowly changing as more local WIC offices are employing breastfeeding peer counselors and securing more real food for families who choose to breastfeed, since real food costs less, perhaps the over $1,963,291,673 spent would be less if we had increased breastfeeding. Of course nutrition is important, but seeing that breast milk is a lot cheaper, increasing rates among the low and middle-income individuals would be better for health and for tax payers.

 It is also good to see breastfeeding rates increasing in the US, but this says nothing for the impact on shady marketing tactics in places such as China and Brazil by companies such as Nestle. 

For clarification purposes, how you feed your baby is up to you. For us, we recognize the benefits of breastfeeding and feel that families should choose breastfeeding as a first option, then pumped breastmilk, followed by formula. This is what AAP recommends as well as WHO.

CDC or WHO Growth Scales - Watch your baby not the scale

Watch your baby, not the scale
Watch your baby, not other babies
Watch your baby, not some blog :)

Really moms, please know that every baby is different. If you are worried about your baby's development, than likely most of this post doesn't apply to you. But for most of us, our babies are all individually developing on their own scale and to think of percentiles too much, especially when most pediatricians are using the extremely out-dated and (especially for breastfed babies) irrelevant scales created by the CDC.

My two "underweight" kids. Both thriving. Both breastfed. Both born of a short mom and a thin dad of East Asian descent. Because you know... genetics matter....

Why is this? Perhaps because even the CDC recommends using the WHO forms. They recommend this update because:

"Healthy breastfed infants typically gain weight faster than formula-fed infants in the first few months of life but then gain weight more slowly for the remainder of infancy (25,26). Therefore, in the first few months of life, WHO curves show a faster rate of weight gain than the CDC charts for boys and girls (Figures 2 and 3). Use of the WHO charts in the United States might lead to an increase in the misperception of poor growth at this age." (CDC)

So basically today's overweight (mostly) white Americans adults were the formula (fattened) babies we are comparing our (increasingly) breastfed babies, many of whom aren't white.


Simplified their reasoning includes:

• The WHO standards establish growth of the breastfed infant as the norm for growth.
  Breastfeeding is the recommended standard for infant feeding. The WHO charts reflect growth patterns among children who were predominantly breastfed for at least 4 months and still breastfeeding at 12 months.
• The WHO standards provide a better description of physiological growth in infancy.
  Clinicians often use the CDC growth charts as standards on how young children should grow. However the CDC growth charts are references; they identify how typical children in the US did grow during a specific time period. Typical growth patterns may not be ideal growth patterns. The WHO growth charts are standards; they identify how children should grow when provided optimal conditions.
• The WHO standards are based on a high-quality study designed explicitly for creating growth charts.
  The WHO standards were constructed using longitudinal length and weight data measured at frequent intervals. For the CDC growth charts, weight data were not available between birth and 3 months of age and the sample sizes were small for sex and age groups during the first 6 months of age.

From the CDC: "The curves were anchored at birth using national birth weight data obtained from U.S. birth certificates from 1968--1980 and 1985--1994 and birth length data from Wisconsin and Missouri birth certificates (the only states with these data available on birth certificates) from 1989--1995"

Further, the WHO uses more standard deviations of normal/average. Thus, they have a line for 3 percent and 97 percent... rather than just "below 5th" percentile.

Next time you visit your pediatrician, ask if they're using the CDC or WHO scale for your breastfed baby. If they're using CDC, ask them why they haven't updated to what is relevant to your baby.

And if you are breastfeeding and your baby is thriving and keeping on a decent growth path (not crossing "two lines" on the correct scale... and your pediatrician asks you to supplement (or stop breastfeeding) ask these questions:

• If my child was at the 95th (90th, basically opposite of the percentile they're indicating) would you recommend I put my infant on a diet?
• Can I weigh baby pre and post feeding to see how much baby is getting?
• (Especially in young babies) Can you check my baby for a tongue tie?
• What percent of infants are breastfed to 6 and 12 months here (American Academy of Pediatrics recommendation)? 24 months (WHO recommendation)?
• Do you mind if I breastfeed here?
• Is there a reason you don't have a breastfeeding-friendly waiting area with an area for moms to breastfeed?
• Do you enjoy causing mommy guilt and paranoia?

For the WHO and CDC growth charts directly, click here.

For free breastfeeding support, advice and possibly great friendships, find your local Le Leche League.

Women need support in breastfeeding, not criticism of what isn't working. Find that help and get to where you need to be so that you're comfortable with where you are in you and your baby/toddler/child's relationship.

Have confidence! According to a study in Sweden, 99 percent of women can successfully breastfeed. There are some medical conditions that can affect you, but reach out for support and know that you can give the wonderful gift of human milk to your baby/infant/toddler.


CDC= Centers for Disease Control
WHO= World Health Organization

 The Baby Book: 
 

Breastmilk recall - Nope its Nestle

Nestle again has to recall formula. Their Gerber brand baby formula is being recalled. Apparently having an off order and causing gastro issues in newborn babies isn't a "real" issue... For those uninterested in clicking, here's the info:

RECALL: Good Start® Gentle powdered infant formula 23.2 ounce plastic package from batch GXP1684 expiration date of March 5, 2013. Possible list of ingredients: WHEY PROTEIN CONCENTRATE (FROM COW\'S MILK, ENZYMATICALLY HYDROLYZED, REDUCED IN MINERALS), vegetable oils (, PALM OLEIN, SOY, COCONUT, AND , HIGH-OLEIC SAFFLOWER, OR , HIGH-OLEIC SUNFLOWER) , LACTOSE, CORN MALTODEXTRIN, AND LESS THAN 2% OF: , POTASSIUM CITRATE, POTASSIUM PHOSPHATE, CALCIUM CHLORIDE, CALCIUM PHOSPHATE, SODIUM CITRATE, MAGNESIUM CHLORIDE, FERROUS SULFATE, ZINC SULFATE, SODIUM CHLORIDE, COPPER SULFATE, POTASSIUM IODIDE, MANGANESE SULFATE, SODIUM SELENATE, M.ALPINA OIL, C.COHNII OIL, SODIUM ASCORBATE, INOSITOL, CHOLINE BITARTRATE, ALPHA-TOCOPHERYL ACETATE, NIACINAMIDE, CALCIUM PANTOTHENATE, RIBOFLAVIN, VITAMIN A PALMITATE, PYRIDOXINE HYDROCHLORIDE, THIAMINE MONONITRATE, FOLIC ACID, PHYLLOQUINONE, BIOTIN, VITAMIN D3, VITAMIN B12, TAURINE, NUCLEOTIDES (, CYTIDINE 5\'-MONOPHOSPHATE, DISODIUM URIDINE 5\'-MONOPHOSPHATE, ADENOSINE5\'-MONOPHOSPHATE, DISODIUM GUANOSINE 5\'-MONOPHOSPHATE) , ASCORBYL PALMITATE, MIXED TOCOPHEROLS, L-CARNITINE, B. LACTIS CULTURES, SOY LECITHIN

And you can bet... a healthy momma who may even have a glass of wine and pizza, will still make better milk than an artificial milk! Oh and I don't see any recalls! Oh and its cheaper :)

Pay no attention

to the random formula ads on my blog! I may have to remove all ads - I'd rather have none than "walmart" formula! EEK!