By Akani Nkuna
Global health authorities are raising concerns over the growing influence of deceptive marketing practices by infant formula companies in South Africa.
The World Health Organisation and Unicef have jointly cautioned parents about advertising that undermines breastfeeding by promoting formula as a superior choice.
They emphasise that such tactics violate international guidelines and may negatively impact child health and nutrition, particularly in vulnerable communities.
“False, incomplete, misleading health and nutrition claims by formula companies should stop now. The WHO calls on formula milk companies to stop presenting incomplete scientific evidence and inferring unsupported health outcomes,” said WHO’s country representative in South Africa, Shenaaz El-Halabi.
They have unveiled a new manifesto titled “Babies Before Bottom Lines”, aimed at alerting South African parents to the dangers of misleading and unethical baby formula marketing.
Released online, the document exposes what the agencies describe as “predatory and widespread” industry tactics. The campaign has quickly gained traction, with influential parenting figures across the country endorsing and sharing the message.
“The pseudo-scientific health claims made by formula companies discourage mothers from breastfeeding, which should always be a first choice as breastmilk is the most complete and healthiest milk for babies,” UNICEF South Africa reported.
“In addition, widespread evidence exists that women have internalised doubts about the quality and quantity of their breastmilk, mirroring the themes and messaging of formula milk marketing campaigns.”
WHO and UNICEF are urging South African regulators to update the Regulation R991 to address modern digital marketing tactics used by infant formula companies. They warn that social media platforms now target vulnerable parents with emotionally manipulative content disguised as nutritional advice.
They further claim that the outdated regulations, based on older marketing norms, fail to cover these pervasive and often misleading advertising strategies.
“Inappropriate promotion of breastmilk substitutes negatively impacts breastfeeding practices, and the advertisers are promoting a false choice between formula feeding and breastfeeding, without offering informed choices to parents about the real differences between breastmilk and various brands of formula,” Unicef SA added.
The two agencies have exposed widespread unethical marketing tactics used by the $55 billion infant formula industry. Their findings reveal that companies deploy highly personalised and persuasive strategies to target parents during early, vulnerable stages of their child’s life.
Meanwhile, Dr Laurence Grummer-Strawn, head of WHO’s infant and young child feeding program, emphasised the need for families to receive accurate, evidence-based information to make informed feeding decisions.
He condemned the exploitation of those choices for profit, noting that unethical corporate tactics, especially through targeted digital marketing, continued to mislead caregivers globally, often preying on parents during moments of heightened vulnerability.
“They capitalise on parents’ doubts and questions. For instance, we see advertisers directing fake science at caregivers in the middle of the night, when they or their babies are struggling, to falsely convince them that bottle-fed babies sleep better than breastfed babies. This is wrong and needs to stop,” Grummer-Strawn added.
INSIDE POITICS