IMO: The Good, The Bad, and The Booby

The Good, The Bad, and The Booby

Have I got your attention? This month’s IMO- the marketing of baby formula. I received my monthly copy of Parents Magazine the other day, and finally managed a few minutes to peek inside its covers.

[An editorial note here, I actually like this magazine. I have found many useful nuggets in it over the last 6 years or so. I even realized my son had plagiocephaly (flat-head syndrome) after reading an article. So please understand- I have great respect for this magazine. That said, I understand how advertising influences what goes between a magazine’s covers and in this instance, it was my proverbial camel’s last straw.]

In this month’s copy, I found this:

(Parents Magazine/Your Child/Health, page 46/November 2010)
Boost in a Bottle
Considering a formula with omega-3 fatty acids? New research in the Journal of Pediatrics found that babies who drank formula with iron and omega-3s DHA and ARA for the first year of life had a lower incidence of allergies, upper-respiratory infections, wheezing, and asthma, compared with those who’d been fed a formula that was only fortified with iron. Infants in the study were given Enfamil Lipil, which has since been reformulated as Enfamil Premium; the new version also contains prebiotics, which may benefit immunity.

Now, if you were a pregnant mother-to-be, weighing your choices, would this sway you towards bottle-feeding over breast-feeding? Giving the author the benefit of the doubt, I’m sure this was not meant to say bottle-feed over breast-feed. But. If I were teetering on that edge, uneducated about what breast-milk contains—it might sway me.

The woman in the photo to the right of the sidebar/mini-article (I’m not sure what they call these, blurbs perhaps?) is holding a contented baby on her lap, feeding the baby a bottle. The photo caption says, “A formula with omega-3s may prevent asthma.” Now what good parent doesn’t want to prevent asthma?

My problem with this type of blurb is that there is no asterisk with fine print, or any way that notes that breast-milk has omega-3 fatty acids and is chemically far superior to anything manufactured. There is nothing stating, “by the way, breast-feeding is still the best option.”

This magazine had one two-page spread for Similac, three pictures of babies with bottles or in close proximity to a bottle, a bottle advertisement via a Babies R Us ad, and a full page Enfamil ad. There were no articles on breastfeeding, nor were there any advertisements for it. (Logistics at work here- boobs don’t pay Parents Magazine to run ads.)

Ironically, there is a Toyota ad across from this bottle blurb that says, “everyone deserves to be safe.” Safe in our vehicles, perhaps, but never mind that the container of formula is lined with BPA’s.

Three different articles mention breasts/nipples or feeding a baby- but none mention breastfeeding as the preferred method of feeding babies. (The article, “Why do boys have nipples?” by Karen Springen (page 62) comes the closest when it states, “Later, in response to estrogen, teenage girls develop breasts- so they can eventually breastfeed…”)

I genuinely don’t believe that the writers & editors at Parents Magazine are anti-breastfeeding. I’ve read enough of their magazine to know that many times they do have articles on breastfeeding and ways to help new mothers breastfeed successfully. But, I do take issue with the fact that it is so clearly left out of this issue.

From the time a mother gives birth, even prior to that, they are bombarded with coupons, freebies, and advertising on formula. And quite frankly, as amazing as the new formulas are (in comparison to what formula was like when I was a baby, back in 1975) they are still sub-par to breast-milk.

My confession: I formula-fed my twin daughters (about 50% breast/50% formula until they were 5 months old, then exclusively formula) but I did it knowing full well what I was doing. It was a decision I made with full disclosure of the possible risks of formula feeding, and believe me, we have not escaped without side effects.

I won’t deny any woman her right to bottle-feed over breast-feed but I think to blatantly advertise formula as any kind of equal (or a superior) to breast-milk, is a kind of nutritional blasphemy.

Breast will always be best. Always. And as mothers, mothers of daughters, sisters, aunts- as women—as fathers, as fathers of daughters, as uncles, as men—we have to make sure that those who will grow babies in their bellies in the days to come, will have accurate information and not just glossy advertisements.

If you’re feeling inspired by this, I invite you to do as I did. Write to Parents Magazine (e-mail here) and let them know how you feel.

That’s my opinion. Take it or leave it.