Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Marketing Breastfeeding—Reversing Corporate Influence on Infant Feeding Practices

  • Published:
Journal of Urban Health Aims and scope Submit manuscript

An Erratum to this article was published on 21 June 2008

Abstract

Breast milk is the gold standard for infant nutrition and the only necessary food for the first 6 months of an infant’s life. Infant formula is deficient and inferior to breast milk in meeting infants’ nutritional needs. The infant formula industry has contributed to low rates of breastfeeding through various methods of marketing and advertising infant formula. Today, in New York City, although the majority of mothers initiate breastfeeding (~85%), a minority of infants is breastfed exclusively at 8 weeks postpartum (~25%). The article reviews the practices of the formula industry and the impact of these practices. It then presents the strategic approach taken by the NYC Department of Health and Mental Hygiene and its partners to change hospital practices and educate health care providers and the public on the benefits of breast milk, and provides lessons learned from these efforts to make breastfeeding the normative and usual method of infant feeding in New York City.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Wiessinger D. Watch Your Language! Journal of Human Lactation. 1996;12(1):1–4.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Gartner LM, Morton J, Lawrence RA, et al. Section on Breastfeeding: Breastfeeding and the Use of Human Milk. Pediatrics. 2005;115(2):496–506.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. United States Department of Health and Human Services. 2005 National Immunization Survey. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/breastfeeding/data/NIS_data/2005/age.htm. Accessed July 16, 2007.

  4. Karpati A, Kerker B, Mostashari F, et al. Health Disparities in New York City. New York: New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene; 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bureau of Maternal, Infant and Reproductive Health. Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS). New York, NY: NYC Department of Health and Mental Hygiene; 2004, 2005.

  6. Apple RD. Advertised by our loving friends: the infant formula industry and the creation of new pharmaceutical markets, 1870–1910. J Hist Med Allied Sci. 1986;41(1):3–23.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Greer FR, Apple RD. Physicians, formula companies, and advertising. A historical perspective. Am J Dis Child. 1991;145(3):282–6.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Gartner LM, Moser RH. The “fourth part” of Pediatrics: fifty years of display advertising. Pediatrics. 1998;102(1):177–185.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Jelliffe DB, Jelliffe EF. The infant food industry and international child health. Int J Health Serv. 1977;7(2):249–54.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Parashar UD, Bresee JS, Glass RI. The global burden of diarrhoeal disease in children. Bul WHO. 2003;81(4):236.

    Google Scholar 

  11. León-Cava N, Lutter C, Ross J, Martin L. Quantifying the Benefits of Breastfeeding: A Summary of the Evidence. Washington, DC: Pan American Health Organization (PAHO); 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Victora CG, Smith PG, Vaughan JP, et al. Infant feeding and deaths due to diarrhea: a case-control study. Am J Epidemiol. 1989;129(5):1032–41.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. The International Baby Food Action Network (IBFAN). What Is the International Code? Available at: http://www.ibfan.org/english/issue/code01.html. Accessed March 30, 2007.

  14. International Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes. World Health Organization, Geneva; 1981.

  15. Wise J. Companies still breaking milk marketing code. BMJ. 1998;316:1111 Available at: http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/316/7138/1111/k. Accessed July 10, 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Mayor S. Report warns of continuing violations of code on breast milk substitute marketing. BMJ. 2004;328:1218 Available at: http://bmj.com/cgi/content/full/328/7450/1218-b. Accessed July 10, 2007.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. The International Baby Food Action Network (IBFAN). The State of the Code by Country 2006. Available at: http://www.ibfan.org/site2005/abm/paginas/articles/arch_art/298–11.pdf. Accessed January 4, 2008.

  18. Oski FA. Heating up the bottle battle. The Nation. 1989;249(19):665–7.

    Google Scholar 

  19. United States Government Accountability Office (GAO). Breastfeeding: Some Strategies Used to Market Infant Formula May Discourage Breastfeeding; State Contracts Should Better Protect Against Misuse of WIC Name. Report to Congressional Addresses. GAO-06–282, February 2006. Available at: http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d06282.pdf. Accessed July 16, 2007.

  20. Howard CR, Howard FM, Lawrence R, Andresen E, DeBlieck E, Weitzman M. Office prenatal formula advertising and its effect on breast-feeding patterns. Obstet Gynecol. 2000;95(2):296–303.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Howard CR, Howard FM, Weitzman ML. Infant formula distribution and advertising in pregnancy: A hospital survey. Birth. 1994;21(1):14–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Howard CR, Schaffer SJ, Lawrence RA. Attitudes, practices and recommendations by obstetricians about infant feeding. Birth. 1997;24(4):240–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Oliveira V, Prell M, Smallwood D, Frazao E. Infant Formula Prices and Availability: Final Report to Congress. Washington, D.C.: Economic Research Service, United States Department of Agriculture; 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Kent G. WIC’s promotion of infant formula in the United States. Int Breastfeed J. 2006;1(1):8 April, Available at: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/picrender.fcgi?artid=1481608&blobtype=pdf. Accessed July 13, 2007.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Tuttle CR. An open letter to the WIC program: the time has come to commit to breastfeeding. J Hum Lact. 2000;16(2):99–103.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Winikoff B, Baer EC. The obstetrician’s opportunity: translating “breast is best” from theory to practice. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1980;138(1):105–17.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Valaitis RK, Shea E. An evaluation of breastfeeding promotion literature: does it really promote breastfeeding? Revue Canadienne de santé publique. 1992;84(1):24–7.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Howard F. Clinical commentary, The physician as advertiser: the unintentional discouragement of breast-feeding. Obstet Gynecol. 1993;81(6):1048–51.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Rosenberg KD, Eastham C, Kasenhagen L, Sandoval AP. Infant Formula Marketing Through Hospitals: the Impact of Commercial Hospital Discharge Packs on Breastfeeding. Am J Public Health. 2008;98(2):290–295.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Frank DA, Wirtz SJ, Sorenson JR, Heeren T. Commercial discharge packs and breastfeeding counseling: effects on infant-feeding practices in a randomized trail. Pediatrics. 1987;80(6):845–54.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Casado J. A cultural perspective on breastfeeding: results from community focus groups in the Bronx. Presented at: Annual NYC Breastfeeding Conference; May 26, 2007; New York, NY.

  32. Lipkind HS, Boyd LC. Encouraging and Supporting Breastfeeding. City Health Information. 2008;27(3):17–24.

  33. Nurse-Family Partnership. Summary Tables for New York – New York City. Data through December 31, 2007. Prepared by National Center for Children, Families and Communities. UCDHS.

  34. Feinstein JM, Berkelhamer JE, Gruszka ME, Wong CA, Carey AE. Factors Related to Early Termination of Breast-Feeding in an Urban Population. Pediatrics. 1986;78(2):210–215.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Bliss MC, et al. The Effect of Discharge Pack Formula and Breast Pumps on Breastfeeding Duration and Choice of Infant Feeding Method. Birth. 1997;24(2):90–97.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Caulfield LE, Gross SM, Bentley ME, et al. WIC-Based Interventions to Promote Breastfeeding Among African-American women in Baltimore: Effects on Breastfeeding Initiation and Continuation. J Hum Lact. 1998;14(1):15–22.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Snell BJ, Krantz M, Keeton R, Delgado K, Peckham C. The Association of Formula Samples Given at Hospital Discharge With the Early Duration of Breastfeeding. J Hum Lact. 1992;8(2):67–72.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Wright A, Rice S, Wells S. Changing Hospital Practices to Increase the Duration of Breastfeeding. Pediatrics. 1996;97(5):660–75.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Romero-Gwynn E. Breastfeeding Pattern Among Indochinese Immigrants in Northern California. AJDC. 1989;143:804–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Dungy CL. Hospital Infant Formula Discharge Packages: Do they Affect the Duration of Breastfeeding? Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 1997;151:724–9.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Neifert M, Gray J, Gary N, Camp B. Effect of two types of hospital feeding gift packs on duration of breast-feeding among adolescent mothers. J Adolesc Health Care. 1988;9(5):411–3.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Ryan AS, Wysong JL, Martinez GA, Simon SD. Duration of breast-feeding patterns established in the hospital: influencing factors. Clinical Pediatrics. 1990;29(2):99–107.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Evans CJ, Lyons NB, Killien MG. The Effect of Infant Formula Samples on Breastfeeding Practice. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 1986;15(5):401–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to acknowledge the following reviewers for their invaluable input: Yvonne Sinclair, MPH, MS; Candace Mulready-Ward, MPH; Anne Merewood, MPH, IBCLC; Lorraine C. Boyd, MD, MPH; Judith Sackoff, PhD; Adriana Andaluz, MPH; Mary T. Bassett, MD, MPH.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, Bureau of Maternal, Infant and Reproductive Health, New York, NY, USA

    Deborah L. Kaplan

  2. Center for Health and Wellbeing, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ, USA

    Kristina M. Graff

Authors
  1. Deborah L. Kaplan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kristina M. Graff
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Deborah L. Kaplan.

Additional information

Kristina Graff was employed at the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene at the time the article was written.

An erratum to this article can be found at http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11524-008-9298-3

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kaplan, D.L., Graff, K.M. Marketing Breastfeeding—Reversing Corporate Influence on Infant Feeding Practices. J Urban Health 85, 486–504 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11524-008-9279-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11524-008-9279-6

Keywords

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy