Campaign group CMF criticises Nestlé over infant formula claims

Nestlé has allegedly been giving contradictory nutritional advice on infant formula products in China and Hong Kong despite making a commitment to end this practice last year, according to a report by campaign group Changing Markets Foundation (CMF).

The report also stated that although the Swiss company continues to promote some of its products as healthier in Hong Kong and China as they are free from vanilla flavourings, it has not removed the ingredient from other products in the same markets.

In March 2018, the company pledged to remove the ingredient from its products and nutritional advice. According to the report, there is “no evidence to suggest that it is not possible for the Swiss conglomerate to have done so.”

The foundation, which has worked with SumOfUs for the report, stated that Nestlé has implemented one of its commitments by removing sucrose from its products for babies between the ages of 0 to 12 months.

CMF spokeswoman Nusa Urbancic said: “If mothers cannot or choose not to breastfeed, companies like Nestlé have a huge responsibility to provide products that are safe, nutritionally complete and informed by the best available science.

“Our report confirms that Nestlé continues to use science as merely a marketing tool, valuing higher profit margins over its scientific credibility.”

According to emails, as seen by the Guardian, the Swiss firm committed to end the use of sucrose and vanillin in products for consumption by babies up to 12 months following a separate CMF report released last year.

The report further stated that parents in Hong Kong pay up to 4.5 times more than UK parents for comparable Nestlé infant formula and that the firm “continues to use science merely as a marketing tool”.

Nestlé has reportedly been found to market its products as being close to breastmilk or inspired by human milk, thereby violating the WHO Marketing Code and subsequent resolutions.

CMF stated: “This puts Nestlé’s scientific credibility into question, as there is a clear scientific consensus that formula can never be close to breastmilk.”

In a statement to Just-Food, Nestlé spokesperson said: “We apply the WHO code of marketing of breastmilk substitutes and subsequent WHA (World Health Assembly) resolutions as implemented by member states.

“We have put in place a number of compliance measures and mechanisms to ensure compliance. We encourage anyone with concerns regarding our practices to share them with us. We are determined to respond systematically.”

The spokesperson also added that “even though vanillin flavourings in follow-on formula (for infants from 6 to 12 months) are allowed by CODEX and local regulations, we have voluntarily decided to remove them from the few recipes that still contain. We are in the process of finding alternatives. We are also removing vanillin claims in new labels”.

Further, the firm refuted the CMF report’s allegations of making misleading marketing claims.

The spokesperson added: “We do not use any statements that idealise our products or imply that they are superior to or equivalent to breastmilk on our infant formula labels or communications materials.

“Infant formulas have evolved and are compositionally closer to human milk than unmodified cow’s milk. As such, we communicate that products are ‘inspired by breastmilk’. For infants who cannot be fed on breastmilk as recommended, infant formula is recognised by WHO as the only suitable breastmilk substitute.”