Cross-sectional survey shows that follow-up formula and growing-up milks are labelled similarly to infant formula in four low and middle income countries

This cross-sectional survey assessed the characteristics of labels of follow-up formula (FUF) and growing-up milk (GUM) compared with infant formula (IF), including cross-promotion practices between FUF/GUM and IF manufactured by the same company, sold in Phnom Penh, Cambodia; Kathmandu Valley, Nepal; Dakar Department, Senegal; and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. All products were imported. A wide recommended age/age range for introduction was provided by manufacturers across all sites, with products with an age recommendation of 0-6 months being most prevalent in three sites, representing over a third of all products. Various age categories (e.g. 1, 1+ and Stage 1) commonly appeared on labels. A number of descriptive names (e.g. infant formula and milk formula) per category of age of introduction were used with some appearing across more than one category. Images of feeding bottles were found on most labels across all age categories, but prevalence decreased with older age categories. The majority of FUF/GUM manufactured by IF companies across all sites displayed at least one example of cross-promotion with one or more of the company's IF: two-thirds or more contained similar colour schemes/designs and similar brand names; 20-85% had similar slogans/mascots/symbols. A wide and potentially confusing range of ages/categories of introduction and descriptive names were found, and cross-promotion with IF was common on FUF/GUM labels. Global guidance from normative bodies forms the basis of most low and middle income countries policies and should provide specific guidance to prohibit cross-promotion between FUF/GUM and IF, and all three categories should be classified as breastmilk substitutes.

Promotion and consumption of commercially produced foods among children: situation analysis in an urban setting in Senegal

This study assessed the promotion of commercially produced foods and consumption of these products by children less than 24 months of age in Dakar Department, Senegal. Interviews with 293 mothers of children attending child health clinics assessed maternal exposure to promotion and maternal recall of foods consumed by the child on the preceding day. Promotion of breastmilk substitutes and commercially produced complementary foods outside health facilities was common with 41.0% and 37.2% of mothers, respectively, reporting product promotions since the birth of their youngest child. Promotion of commercially produced snack food products was more prevalent, observed by 93.5% of mothers. While all mothers reported having breastfed their child, only 20.8% of mothers breastfed their newborn within the first hour after delivery, and 44.7% fed pre‐lacteal feeds in the first 3 days after delivery. Of children 6–23 months of age, 20.2% had consumed a breastmilk substitute; 49.1% ate a commercially produced complementary food, and 58.7% ate a commercially produced snack food product on the previous day. There is a need to stop the promotion of breastmilk substitutes, including infant formula, follow‐up formula, and growing‐up milks. More stringent regulations and enforcement could help to eliminate such promotion to the public through the media and in stores. Promotion of commercial snack foods is concerning, given the high rates of consumption of such foods by children under the age of 2 years. Efforts are needed to determine how best to reduce such promotion and encourage replacement of these products with more nutritious foods.

Assessment of corporate compliance with guidance and regulations on labels of commercially produced complementary foods sold in Cambodia, Nepal, Senegal and Tanzania

National legislation and global guidance address labelling of complementary foods to ensure that labels support optimal infant and young child feeding practices. This cross-sectional study assessed the labels of commercially produced complementary foods (CPCF) sold in Phnom Penh (n = 70), Cambodia; Kathmandu Valley (n = 22), Nepal; Dakar Department (n = 84), Senegal; and Dar es Salaam (n = 26), Tanzania. Between 3.6% and 30% of products did not provide any age recommendation and 8.6-20.2% of products, from all sites, recommended an age of introduction of <6 months. Few CPCF products provided a daily ration (0.0-8.6%) and 14.5-55.6% of those that did exceeded the daily energy recommendation for complementary foods for a breastfed child from 6 to 8.9 months of age. Only 3.6-27.3% of labels provided accurate and complete messages in the required language encouraging exclusive breastfeeding, and almost none (0.0-2.9%) provided accurate and complete messages regarding the appropriate introduction of complementary foods together with continued breastfeeding. Between 34.3% and 70.2% of CPCF manufacturers also produced breastmilk substitutes and 41.7-78.0% of relevant CPCF products cross-promoted their breastmilk substitutes products. Labelling practices of CPCF included in this study do not fully comply with international guidance on their promotion and selected aspects of national legislation, and there is a need for more detailed normative guidance on certain promotion practices in order to protect and promote optimal infant and young child feeding.