Formula marketing’s effect on the public purse
I just came across a fascinating recent report from the US Center on Budget and Policy Priorities detailing the effects of the formula industry on the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC) budget.
Briefly, although there is no evidence that new “functional ingredients” (ie DHA, ARA, probiotics) in infant formula are beneficial for term infants, WIC appears to be spending more than 10 percent extra (more than $90 million per year) on these ingredients, based on a recent study by the US Department of Agriculture (USDA)’s Economic Research Service.
The problem is related to the fact that, while the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is responsible for determining safety of food products, it is not responsible for assessing the accuracy of claims of efficacy. And the USDA is the agency responsible for administering WIC, but at present decisions regarding which formula to offer are left to state WIC programs.
Current WIC reauthorization legislation (unanimously approved by the Senate Agriculture Committee last month) includes a provision clarifying that USDA has the authority to disallow foods with specific ingredients, based on scientific evidence of health or developmental benefits.
Not surprisingly, the formula industry opposes this legislation, since it could significantly restrict future profits on further “advances”: WIC purchases more than half of all infant formula sold in the United States.
Kimberly Lee is a neonatologist and member of the Academy of Breastfeeding Medicine.
Posts on this blog reflect the opinions of individual ABM members, not the organization as a whole.
EBS, MD, MS
aeidelmanmd
amalactancia
annkellams
Ana Parrilla-RodrÃguez, MD
astuebe
awittbfmedneo
bfmed
caseyrosencarole
drharrel
drjanrmortomgmailcom
drjen4kids
drmarnierowan
drmilkarizona
drnand
elienrouw
galactodoc
gcalnen
helenmjohnson
julieware2
jymeek
kmarinellimd
labbok
lsinai1
mayabunik
Melissa Bartick, MD, MSc, FABM
neobfmd
newtoned
NKSriraman
rhaiderbd
ruthlawrence
sntierney
vpdn
wbrodribb
winterlb
Breastfeeding Medicine 
I am a Registered Dietitian working for a local WIC clinic. We are dismayed by the problems caused for our clients with the changes in formula provision not related to true health benefits. I recently viewed an FDA spot on their new focus related to nutritional benefits related to foods (not just food safety). Although their focus has always been food safety, it seems FDA is noting the labeling problems in many different foods related to supposed “nutritional benefit”. I have written and I hope many of my fellow clinical and nutrition professionals will write FDA as well to take action on the way formulas are being marketed as having nutritional benefits when it is not warranted.
I also hope you will write about the way the formula companies are marketing some of their products for conditions that are normal for formula fed infants. For example – fussiness and gas and changing to soy formula from cow’s milk based formula. The formula change will not likely make a significant difference for the infants who are formula fed. Their guts are not able to tolerate many of the proteins in formula. Typically, an infant will outgrow the formula intolerance; however, the parent comes to believe that the infant has a lifelong problem when none truly exists.
Barbara
June 21, 2010 at 7:55 pm