You are here: monitoring / monreportmilupa.html

Marketing strategies used to promote Milupa formulas

Last updated: 22 January 2008

Results from BFLG's monitoring system shows that violations involving Milupa formula (a brand of NUMICO) are widespread and systematic.

Milupa formulas are advertised and promoted in breach of Article 5.1 of the International Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes. There is a good case to be made that some, indeed most, of these promotions also breach the narrower UK Infant Formula and Follow-on Formula Regulations 1995, though the enforcement authorities are yet to bring a case. Indeed, the Advertising Standards Authority has refused to follow its usual procedure of investigating and publishing a ruling on the complaints submitted to it by BFLG member, Baby Milk Action, and others.

Examples of violations are given below. This report has been prepared by Baby Milk Action, which is coordinating the BFLG monitoring project.

BFLG monitoring results were included in the report Breaking the Rules, Stretching the Rules 2007. Violations by Wyeth are found in many other countries submitting evidence for inclusion in this report. The detail (right) from the report shows how Wyeth's new SMA branding in the UK comes in for special mention.

Milupa Aptamil labels

The law explicitely states that labels can only have claims specified in a schedule attached to the law (there are just 6, such as iron enriched). The Food Standards Agency reminded the companies of the provisions at the end of 2006. New Aptamil labels have been launched since then with claims that are not on the permitted list and include idealizing text and images, which are also prohibited by the law.

Claims not on permitted list : "Immunofortis" (a made up word, implying it strengthens the immune system). "Inspired by breastmilk." Idealizing text: "Milupa Aptamil First contains Immunofortis, a patented mix of prebiotics inspired by those found in breastmilk. Breastmilk strengthens a baby's natural immune system helping to prevent infections and allergies." "Best infant milk". Idealizing image: Polar bear

Advertisements for Milupa formula

The Independent - May/June 2005

Advertisements for Milupa formula have been running in The Independent newspaper since National Breastfeeding Week in May 2005. Reports were still being received in June 2005.

The full page advertisements appear in the health section of the newspaper and suggest equivalence between breastfeeding and feeding with Milupa formula. For example, the advertisement right from the 10 May 2005 issue of The Independent, during breastfeeding week is headlined: "Why breast milk is the best start for you baby. Why our milk is the very best alternative to breast milk." According to the advertisement the Long Chain Polyunsaturated fatty acids (LCPs) in the formula: "are important for healthy development of the brain, eyes and nervous system. That's why at Milupa Aptamil we've helped you find a way to provide them for your baby." (Click here for a larger version of the image).

The advertisment does not mention that the Cochrane Library has reviewed all research on the addition of LCPs to formula and has found that claims they benefit the development of brain, eyes and nervous system are not substantiated.

Milupa Aptamil is the name of a range of formulas, including infant formula, making this advertisement illegal under Article 17 of the Infant Formula and Follow on Formula Regulations 1995.

Although the advertisement has been reported to the Advertising Standards Authority and Trading Standards no action has been taken against NUMICO for placing the advertisement.

Apparently, following complaints and advice from Trading Standards, The Independent required the advertisement to be changed (suggesting tacit acknowledgement that it was illegal). The revised advertisement refers to Milupa Aptamil Forward, rather than Milupa Aptamil. The addition of this one word is intended to change the advertisement into one for follow-on milk, rather than infant formula.

However, the advertisement still promotes the full range as all bear the Aptamil name and are similarly packaged, as shown below. The case of Birmingham Trading Standards v Wyeth/SMA in 2003 established that it is not necessary to explicitely refer to the infant formula to be in breach of the law. In any case, follow-on milks are breastmilk substitutes and their promotion is prohibited by the International Code.

Milupa packaging has been designed to be cross-promoting since the introduction of advertising restrictions

Equivalence with breastfeeding

This advertisement which has been run in various parenting magazines claims: "Research has also shown that breastmilk contains LCPs to continue a rich supply to baby after birth.So it is no surprise that when baby is breastfed Healthcare Professionals advise Mums to choose an infant milk that contains LCPs." Readers are invited to contact Milupa for further information. The claims about LCPs are not substantiated according to a review conducted by the Cochrane Library. As the advertisement is promoting Milupa infant milk, it is illegal under the UK Law, even if the specific brand name is not mentioned (ref: Birmingham Trading Standards v. Wyeth/SMA case). No action has been taken by the authorities against this advertisement.

Internet advertising

Milupa is promoted heavily on the internet, often in misleading ways.

The screenshot shown right is from the website http://www.mumsnet.com/ It invites mothers to join Milupa Aptamil's Mums' Network (note, once again, the name of the range including the infant formula is used). The image has the text 'Discover the facts about breast milk' and links directly to the Milupa Aptamil site and an article on the benefits of breastfeeding. The same page, however, promotes the Milupa Aptamil range.

The article closes with an invitation to sign up to the site or to call Milupa's careline, with the slogan: "Milupa Aptamil. Because you expect the best."

So clicking on a link for information purporting to be about breastfeeding brings a browser to idealizing and unsubstantiated claims promoting Aptamil formulas, including promotion of infant formula.

Sponsored Google links have been reported by members of the public which link to the Milupa Aptamil site with the text:

Milupa aptamil
Breast feeding advice and products
for you and your baby
www.milupa-aptamil.co.uk

Note how the infant formula page shown right mirrors that of the Milupa-branded advertisements shown above.

Article 17 of the Infant Formula and Follow-on Formula Regulations 1995 prohibits the advertising of infant formulas and the definition of advertising contained in the Food Safety Act 1990 implicitly includes placing information on the internet (click here for details).

However, the authorities have taken no action over these promotions.

Contact with mothers

The advertisements above encourage mothers to contact the Milupa 'careline', enter into the internet, where there are forms to sign up for information on Milupa products.

Milupa also places leaflets in health facilities and direct-mails mothers encouraging them to sign up to receive information or contact the careline. The example shown right, directed at pregnant women, says: "Join us and pocket over £50 worth of savings." (click here for a larger version). Seeking direct or indirect contact is prohibited under Article 5.5 of the International Code.

Infant milks are referred to on the leaflet, as shown on the sign up form right (click here for a larger version).. As this makes the leaflet a promotion of Milupa infant milks it is illegal under Article 17 of the UK Law. No action has been taken by the authorities over this promotion.

Events between April and November 2005 are publicised on the Milupa Aptamil website, taking place at locations such as Pizza Express and covering a variety of pregnancy and baby care topics including "Baby and Toddler Nutrition". Click here to download the schedule of events.

The Code restricts companies to providing scientific and factual information to parents. It is for health workers to advise parents, not companies with a vested interest in increasing sales of their products.

A typical email sent to people signing up to the information service is given below. It is advertising Milupa infant milks and contains no information required in information materials about infant feeding:

Promotion in shops

Follow-on milks are routinely promoted in supermarkets and pharmacies, in violation of the International Code.

At the time of packaging relaunch publicised in the email above several retailers (e.g. Boots, Morrisons, Tescos) reduced Aptamil infant formula from £5.99 to £2.99 to clear old stocks and/or promoted the new packaging with shelf-talkers under the infant and follow-on formula. Although these illegal practices were reported to the authorities no prosecutions have been brought.

See the monitoring report on shops for further information.

Promotion to health workers

Promotion to health workers is often echoes that of promotion to the public, with idealizing and unsubstantiated claims being made.

Reference

Simmer K. Longchain polyunsaturated fatty acid supplementation in infants born at term. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2001, Issue 4. Art. No.: CD000376. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000376.

"Authors' conclusions: At present there is little evidence from randomised trials of LCPUFA supplementation to support the hypothesis that LCPUFA supplementation confers a benefit for visual or general development of term infants. Minor effects on VEP acuity have been suggested but appear unlikely when all studies are reviewed. A beneficial effect on information processing is possible but larger studies over longer periods are required to conclude that LCPUFA supplementation provides a benefit when compared with standard formula. Data from randomised trials do not suggest that LCPUFA supplements influence the growth of term infants."

See http://www.cochrane.org/cochrane/revabstr/AB000376.htm

Definition of 'Advertising'.

The Food Safety Act 1990 Article 53 includes the following definition:

""advertisement" includes any notice, circular, label, wrapper, invoice or other document, and any public announcement made orally or by any means of producing or transmitting light or sound, and "advertise" shall be construed accordingly"

The Infant Formula and Follow-on Formula Regulations 1995 modify this definition to exclude labels.

Placing product information on an internet website fits within the definition. Advertising of infant formula to the public is prohibited by Article 17 of the Infant and Follow-on Formula Regulations 1995.

The advertising industry's self-regulating body, the Advertising Standards Authority, does not include a company's own website in its advertising code, meaning that claims on websites are not required to be 'legal, decent, honest and truthful.'

The ASA justifies this by defining a company website as 'editorial' material and states: "This stance by the ASA also recognises a distinction between media that consumers have chosen to access and material that they have not purposefully sought out to view."

The case for making this distinction is weak if the company has drawn the consumer to the website under false pretences, for example by publicising the website address in materials that purport to be about follow-on milks, breastfeeding or childcare as in examples shown in this monitoring.

However the ASA dismisses all complaints about websites and the ways they are promoted without even investigating and publishing a ruling.