Editing Infant formula (section)

===By country===

====Philippines====
Infant formula is one of the top three consumer commodities in the Philippines, and among the most imported products.<ref name="milkwars">[https://globalvoicesonline.org/2007/07/11/milk-wars-in-the-philippines-breastmilk-versus-infant-formula/ Milk wars in the Philippines: Breastmilk versus Infant Formula], ''Global Voices'', posted July 11, 2007.</ref> Annual sales amount to some US$469 million annually. US$88 million is spent on advertising the product.<ref name=ATrirr>Cher S Jimenez, [https://web.archive.org/web/20071011113818/http://atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/IG25Ae01.html Spilled corporate milk in the Philippines], ''Asia Times Online'', July 25, 2007, Retrieved 22 December 2008.</ref>

Infant formula marketing has been regulated since the 1987 Executive Order 51 or "Milk Code",<ref name="milkcode" /> which regulated, but did not ban, practices such as advertising and providing free samples. Shortly after it was enacted, [[Wyeth]] introduced "follow-on formula", which was not in the purview of the Milk Code which predated its market entry.

In 2006, the [[Department of Health (Philippines)|Department of Health]] banned the advertising of infant formula and the practice of providing free samples, regardless of intended age group (in the ''Revised Implementing Rules and Regulations'' of Executive Order 51, or RIRR).<ref name="UNICEF-P">UNICEF Philippines. [http://www.unicef.org/philippines/news/061101.html Breastfeeding advocates form consolidated action against formula companies.] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100710002946/http://www.unicef.org/philippines/news/061101.html |date=July 10, 2010 }} Makati City, November 13, 2006. Retrieved August 9, 2011.</ref> The new regulation was challenged by the infant formula industry in the Supreme Court. Initially the challenge was dismissed, but this decision was reversed following industry pressure and a controversial letter by American business leader Thomas Donahue,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://pcij.org/blog/wp-docs/US_Chamber_of_Commerce_Letter.pdf|title=Letter by Thomas Donahue, August 11, 2006|website=pcij.org|access-date=April 3, 2018|archive-date=November 8, 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161108053124/http://pcij.org/blog/wp-docs/US_Chamber_of_Commerce_Letter.pdf|url-status=dead}}</ref> then President and CEO of the [[United States Chamber of Commerce|US Chamber of Commerce]], resulting in the regulation being suspended and advertising continuing.<ref name="milkwars"/><ref name="milkcode">{{cite web|url=http://www.pcij.org/blog/?p=1789|title=The Philippine Milk Code: A timeline|date=June 20, 2007|website=pcij.org|access-date=April 3, 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100825211915/http://www.pcij.org/blog/?p=1789|archive-date=August 25, 2010|url-status=dead}}</ref><ref name="UNICEF-P"/><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.pcij.org/blog/?p=1788|title=Breast or bottle: The final showdown|date=June 20, 2007|website=pcij.org|access-date=April 3, 2018|archive-date=July 29, 2010|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100729035119/http://www.pcij.org/blog/?p=1788|url-status=dead}}</ref>
 
''[[The Guardian]]'' newspaper reports widespread illegal advertising and marketing of formula milk contrary to [[World Health Organization]] guidelines. Doctors and midwives are encouraged to promote feeding babies formula milk, advertising also targets mothers directly. Babies get sick and sometimes die because poor mothers cannot sterilize bottles.<ref>[https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2018/feb/27/formula-milk-companies-target-poor-mothers-breastfeeding How formula milk firms target mothers who can least afford it] ''[[The Guardian]]''</ref>

==== South Africa ====
In South Africa, there is a move towards plain packaging of infant formula<ref>[https://blogs.sun.ac.za/iplaw/2013/12/03/formula-for-plain-bland-packaging/ Formula for Plain (Bland) Packaging] ''The Anton Mostert Chair of Intellectual Property'', December 3, 2013. Retrieved 24 July, 2014</ref> under R 991 of the Foodstuffs, Cosmetics and Disinfectants Act; as of 6 December 2013, Regulation 7 (Sale and Promotion) is force, whereas Regulations 2-6 (primarily with respect to labelling) are scheduled to come into force on 6 December 2014.
One of the key requirements as per Regulation 3.1.A.iii is a conspicuous message stating “[t]his product shall only be used on the advice of a health professional”.

==== Thailand ====
In 2017, Thailand banned advertising for infant formula. Initially a ban on advertising for toddler formula was also proposed, but was dropped after the intervention of United States trade officials.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Tri-yasakda |first=Heather Vogell,June Watsamon |date=2024-03-21 |title=The U.S. Government Defended the Overseas Business Interests of Baby Formula Makers. Kids Paid the Price. |url=https://www.propublica.org/article/how-america-waged-global-campaign-against-baby-formula-regulation-thailand |access-date=2024-04-07 |website=ProPublica |language=en}}</ref>

==== United Kingdom ====
In the United Kingdom, infant formula advertising has been allowed since 1995;<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si1995/Uksi_19950077_en_1.htm|title=The Infant Formula and Follow–on Formula Regulations 1995|website=www.opsi.gov.uk|access-date=April 3, 2018}}</ref> advertising for "follow-on formula" is legal, which has been cited as a loophole allowing advertising of similarly packaged formula.<ref name="loophole">{{cite web|url=http://www.babyfriendly.org.uk/items/item_detail.asp?item=47|title=The Unicef UK Baby Friendly Initiative|website=Baby Friendly Initiative|access-date=April 3, 2018}}</ref>

==== United States ====

In the United States, infant formula is both heavily marketed—the country has not adopted [[International Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes|the Code]], nor is it being systematically implemented by manufacturers for domestic marketing<ref>[http://www.breastfeedingbasics.org/cgi-bin/deliver.cgi/content/International/his_code.html Breastfeeding Around the World: The International Code of Marketing of Breast Milk Substitutes.] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110503210250/http://breastfeedingbasics.org/cgi-bin/deliver.cgi/content/International/his_code.html |date=May 3, 2011 }} Retrieved August 9, 2011.</ref>—and even heavily [[subsidy|subsidized]] by the government: at least one third of the American market is supported by the government,<ref name="kaminis"/> with over half of infant formula sold in the country provided through the [[Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children]] (known as [[WIC program|WIC]]).<ref name="whopays">[http://www.ers.usda.gov/AmberWaves/September04/Features/infantformula.htm Sharing the Economic Burden: Who Pays for WIC’s Infant Formula?] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090511224550/http://ers.usda.gov/AmberWaves/September04/Features/infantformula.htm |date=May 11, 2009 }}, ''AmberWaves'', September 2004.</ref>

According to surveys, over 70% of large U.S. hospitals dispense infant formula to all infants, a practice opposed by the [[American Academy of Pediatrics]] and in violation of the Code.<ref name="AAPad">[http://www.aap.org/research/periodicsurvey/ps13.htm Periodic Survey of Fellows: Survey shows most AAP members support formula advertising policy] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110321185321/http://www.aap.org/research/periodicsurvey/ps13.htm |date=March 21, 2011 }}, American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP).</ref> The [[Gerber Products Company]] began marketing its brand of infant formula directly to the public in October 1989, while the [[Carnation Company]] began marketing ''Good Start'' infant formula directly to the public in January 1991.<ref name="AAPad" />

Infant formula costs are a significant fraction of the WIC program costs: 21% post-rebate and 46% pre-rebate.<ref name="whopays"/> Formula manufacturers are granted a WIC monopoly in individual states.<ref name="whopays"/> Meanwhile, breastfeeding rates are substantially lower for WIC recipients;<ref name="gao">[http://www.gao.gov/htext/d06282.html Breastfeeding: Some Strategies Used to Market Infant Formula May Discourage Breastfeeding; State Contracts Should Better Protect against Misuse of WIC Name] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160303183249/http://www.gao.gov/htext/d06282.html |date=March 3, 2016 }}, U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO)</ref> this is partly attributed to formula being free of charge to mothers in the WIC program, who are of lower socio-economic status.<ref name="whopays"/> Violations of federal policy have also been found in terms of infant formula company advertising using the WIC trademark, to reach both WIC and non-WIC participants.<ref name="gao"/> In recent years WIC has been expanding its [[breastfeeding promotion]] strategies, including providing subsidies for clients who use [[milk bank]]s.<ref>[http://www.breastfeeding.com/all_about/all_about_milk_banks.html Banking on Breastmilk] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090531022711/http://www.breastfeeding.com/all_about/all_about_milk_banks.html |date=May 31, 2009 }}</ref>