Breastfeeding has become an issue of marketing, rather than motherhood, reports Jacquie Golding-Duffy
The health department is still debating whether to legislate against the advertising of infant formula milk, in its bid to encourage pregnant women to breastfeed.
While mothers remain stripped of information relating to infant formula milk, government could further smack down on the little information accessible to them through doctors.
Manufacturers of breast milk substitutes are prohibited from advertising and marketing their products directly to the public. Mothers rely heavily on doctors to inform them on the formula milk products available.
An agreement struck more than 10 years ago between formula milk manufacturers and the Health Ministry placed the onus on the medical profession who, at their discretion, have to educate mothers on the pros and cons of breast milk substitutes.
The agreement is based on the World Health Organisation’s (WHOs) International Code of Marketing of Breast Milk Substitutes which prohibits manufacturers from advertising or promoting their products.
This means manufacturers and distributors of infant formula milk and breast milk substitutes cannot provide directly or indirectly to pregnant women, mothers or family members, samples of the products and there can be no point-of-sale advertising.
The WHO code stipulates breastfeeding as an important aspect of primary health care and states that accordingly governments should “develop social support systems that protect, facilitate and encourage breastfeeding”.
Chief director of the National Health Programme Dr Glaudine Mtshali said the purpose of the international code was to combat the “aggressive marketing” of breast milk substitutes in developing countries. Mtshali said one of the code’s most important aspects “is the prohibition of all kinds of promotion of breast milk substitutes”.
The code states that in view of the vulnerability of infants in the early months of life, and the risks involved in inappropriate feeding practices, the “unnecessary and improper use of breast milk substitutes” require “special treatment”; thus marketing practices were regarded “unsuitable”.
Many in the advertising industry argue that by preventing manufacturers from advertising their products, government is condoning an infringement of commercial speech.
Mtshali said compliance with the South African Code for the Marketing of Breast Milk Substitutes (published in 1986 and proposed by the Nutrition Committee in the Health Ministry) was voluntary, which means legal action will not be taken in the case of transgression. “Rather than legal action, co- operation is aimed at,” she said.
Executive director Jeremy Hele of the Grocery Manufacturers’ Association — a body which represents manufacturers of processed food products including breast milk formulae — said the association had proposed that the issue of infant formula milk be placed under the auspices of the Business Practices Committee.
Hele said the committee was drafting a code for manufacturers based broadly on the international WHO code. “This would be more effective in controlling possible abuses.”
While the motivation for prohibiting manufacturers from advertising was laudable , advertisers feared government would legislate against formula milk products.
Young & Rubicam managing director for business development in Africa Doug Martiz said any brand that was of good quality, and formulated according to stringent conditions, should be freely advertised.
“In many instances today, where mothers have to go out and work, infant milk is not only a good option, but a necessary alternative. I think manufacturers should be allowed to advertise their products, especially if the products are readily available on supermarket shelves,” Maritz said.
Jupiter Drawing Room managing director Renee Silverstone said the formula milk issue was more than just advertising, it was a case for freedom of expression. “If you believe in freedom of expression, then you must agree that manufacturers of formula milk should be allowed to advertise.
“Breast is best, but I think people should be given a choice, and those women who are unable to breastfeed and those whose babies may suffer from milk allergies should be allowed to make a choice from a variety of brands,” Silverstone said.
Group marketing director for Hunt Lascaris Paul Bannister said he had no problem with formula milk manufacturers advertising their products, as long as consumers were educated parallel to the advertising of the products.
“As long as the safeguards are in place and people are being informed of the nutritious side of breastfeeding and then allowed to make their own decisions, I have no problem.”
Nestle corporate affairs manager David Upshon said breastfeeding should be encouraged and the company agreed to supply information to doctors. “Under the code, manufacturers are prevented from what they refer to as influencing mothers,” he said.
Upshon believed the Health Department was reassessing the situation, but did not believe there were any plans to legislate against formula milk. Nestle has not advertised directly for 20 years.
Infa Care commercial director Nico Grobbelaar said the Department of Health with all its restrictions against manufacturers was, in actual fact, forcing mothers to breastfeed. He argued that mothers had to be given a choice.
South African Chapter of the International Advertising Association (IAA) president Bryan Butler said the government’s intentions posed a threat to free commercial speech and that was of primary concern to the IAA.