Violations of International Code of Breast-milk Substitutes (BMS) in commercial settings and media in Bangladesh

Commercial milk formula marketing following increased restrictions in Singapore: A qualitative study

The promotion of commercial milk formula (CMF) negatively impacts breastfeeding outcomes. In 2019, Singapore updated its 1979 Code of Ethics of the Sale of Infant Foods Ethics Committee Singapore (SIFECS) to increase marketing restrictions on CMF for infants 0-12 months. However, little is known about industry tactics to undermine these restrictions. This qualitative study explores health workers' and mothers' experiences with CMF marketing in Singapore following the 2019 restrictions. We conducted a qualitative study, using semistructured interviews with 14 mothers of infants aged less than 5 months and 20 health workers with expertise in antenatal, maternity, or paediatric care. We analysed data thematically using inductive coding. Five themes were identified. Mothers and health workers reported digital marketing, product line extensions with toddlers' milk and milk for mothers, and CMF sponsorships in the healthcare setting. Expert endorsement, competitive price, nutritional claims, and brand reputation influenced mothers' infant formula choices, yet both mothers and health workers appeared to be unaware of the impact of CMF marketing tactics on their own perceptions. The restriction of CMF marketing and infant feeding practices varied widely between hospitals, with private hospitals and practices having less strict controls on CMF marketing. Despite the updated SIFECS restrictions, CMF companies continue to target mothers and health workers in Singapore. SIFECS restrictions should be tightened to align with international guidelines, by increasing their scope to include toddlers' milk and prohibiting cross-promotion, digital marketing, and any sponsorships of events targeting health workers that may create a conflict of interest.

Law matters - assessment of country-level code implementation and sales of breastmilk substitutes in South Asia

Objectives

This study examines the status of implementation of the International Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes of eight countries in the South Asia region (Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka), and describes the sales value and volume of commercial milk formula (CMF) marketed as breastmilk substitutes (BMS) and baby food in four countries (Bangladesh, India, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka).

Design

A mix of descriptive methods is used to assess national status of Code implementation, including a desk review of the 2022 WHO/UNICEF/IBFAN Code Status Report, systematic content analysis of national Code measures, and insights generated from the participation of key government and UNICEF/WHO actors in a regional workshop that aimed to identify each country's barriers, gaps, and the status of Code implementation. Data on the sales value and volume of CMF and baby food between 2007 to 2021 and with the prediction to 2026 in Bangladesh, India, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka were obtained from Global Data.

Findings

There are major gaps in Code implementation in countries even with legal measures considered substantially aligned with the Code, such as the inadequate age range of CMF covered in the scope, insufficient safeguards against conflicts of interest in the health system, lack of warning of risks of intrinsic contamination of powdered milk formula, and an absence of effective monitoring and enforcement mechanisms. Data on CMF sales shows health facilities and pharmacies sustain the highest sales. Lower sales volume of infant formula (including special formula), compared to other CMF such as follow-up formula and growing-up milk, has been observed in three of the four countries (Bangladesh, India, and Sri Lanka). Overall, GUM, followed by baby cereals, accounted for a large portion of CMF and baby foods sales in the same three countries.

Recommended actions include

(1) Closing the gaps between national measures and the Code, (2) Ensuring effective monitoring and enforcement mechanisms, (3) Strengthening conflicts of interest safeguards in the health system, (4) Tackling digital marketing, and (5) Galvanizing political support and support from in-country public health and women's rights jurist networks.

Effect of baby food marketing exposure on infant and young child feeding regimes in Bangkok, Thailand

Background

Baby food marketing undermines breastfeeding by influencing women’s attitudes and decision-making favourably toward commercial baby food. This study aimed to explore the effects of various baby food marketing techniques on Thai mothers’ opinions about commercial milk formulas (CMF) and commercial complementary foods (CCF) and their infant and young child feeding behaviours.

Methods

This study used a cross-sectional survey employing the World Health Organization (WHO) NetCode Toolkit Protocol for Periodic Assessment, and the United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund (UNICEF) Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey to collect data on mothers’ experience with and their opinion on the various types of marketing of CMF and CCF, and their feeding behaviour. Data collection used structured interviews of mothers with children aged two years or below attending 33 health facilities in Bangkok. Univariable and multivariable regression analysis then investigated links between mothers’ reported exposure to baby food marketing and their infant and young child feeding behaviours, employing a semantic scale and considering key sociodemographic and other variables.

Results

Three hundred and thirty mothers were surveyed in Bangkok. Around 90% reported experiencing exposure to at least one type of baby food marketing during the previous six months, mostly from electronic media. More than half of the women had positive opinions of CMF. Virtually all children had been breastfed initially, but 74.6% were given CMF and 72.8% stopped breastfeeding before six months. Multivariable analysis showed that mothers who lived in a couple were significantly less likely to favour CMF, and mothers in middle-income households and those who had received advice about CMF from others were more likely to have a favourable opinion. Mothers in formal employment were over six times more likely to feed formula than those not in employment. Women who experienced baby food marketing at health facilities were four times more likely to feed CMF to their children than those not experiencing such marketing.

Conclusions

Specific types of baby food marketing were strongly linked to mothers’ opinions on and use of CMF in Bangkok, Thailand. It is recommended that breastfeeding policies in health facilities and employment are fully implemented and enforced.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13006-022-00503-7.

Regulation of baby food marketing in Thailand: a NetCode analysis

OBJECTIVE

To report on the prevalence of different types of breast-milk substitutes (BMS) marketing and the compliance of such marketing with the 'Control of Marketing of Infant and Young Child Food Act 2017' (The Act) and the 'International Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes (WHO Code)' in Thailand.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional quantitative study, guided by the WHO/UNICEF NetCode Periodic Assessment Protocol.

SETTING

Health facilities and retail outlets in Bangkok, Thai media.

PARTICIPANTS

Mothers of 0-2-year-old children, health professionals, promotions at retail outlets and health facilities, product labels, marketing on television and the internet.

RESULTS

Marketing to mothers was highly prevalent, mostly from electronic or digital media, while BMS companies provided items to health professionals to distribute to mothers. Promotional materials in health facilities displayed company brands or logos. At retail outlets, most promotions were price-related. Approximately two-fifths of labels contained nutrition or health claims. Television marketing was growing-up-milk (GUM) advertisements, while internet promotions were varied from price-related materials to product reviews. Most instances of non-compliant BMS marketing with the Act were advertisements to mothers, and most were infant formula. Most non-compliant BMS marketing with the WHO Code was mainly concerned GUM, which are not covered by the Act and appeared in the media.

CONCLUSIONS

BMS marketing does not fully comply with the Act or the WHO Code. The Thai government should conduct regular monitoring and enforcement activities, educate health professionals, and strengthen the Act's provisions on the media and GUM to fully align with the WHO Code.