or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Breastfeeding › Lactivism › Nestle's "Comfort Proteins"
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Nestle's "Comfort Proteins"

post #1 of 27
Thread Starter 
I hope this link works:

http://www.verybestbaby.com/GoodStar...8-79D2C7E451EA

If not, google "Comfort Proteins"

Anyone hear the commercial talking about Nestle's new "Comfort Proteins" in their formula? :Puke

It bothers me on so many levels.

It is very condescending to mothers (pseudo-scientific garbage aimed at what they feel is the level of understanding of the average mother -- disgusting!). They also have a (MALE) expert who discusses the benefits of these "comfort proteins" versus traditional formula.

On the website, at the bottom of the page it reads

Quote:
Breastmilk is the ideal food for babies. Talk with your doctor about your feeding choices.
Feeding choices. This, too, angers me because it makes it seem like infant feeding is like choosing a dress or hairstyle, like it's a women's liberation thing to be "able" to choose to use formula. (at the end of my post, see the fun "conversation" one woman had with her doctor about her feeding "choices"

Then if you click on the video/slideshow, it shows how their formula is easier to digest than other formulas. Here's what got me: on the link that reads "Emptying from Baby's Tummy," it shows a bar graph comparing Breastmilk, Nestle's Good Start Formula, and two other formulas. The breastmilk and the Good Start have the same percentage (63%) of volume left after 30 minutes past digestion. It also, of course, shows the BONUS benefits (with added, tacky hearts) of Good Start's "Comfort Proteins". I mean, if you weren't very educated about these things, and saw this graph, it would suggest that breastmilk and this formula digest similarly, if not the same.

The penultimate paragraph on the page reads

Quote:
But it's the diaper that tells the story best. The stools of babies on formulas with higher whey content tend to be softer, like those of breastfed infants. Babies fed GOOD START formulas may be more likely to have stool patterns similar to those of breastfed babies.
:

I don't even know where to begin with all this... the sad thing is, this is very legal. They are very good at twisting words and manipulating studies and findings to further their own commercial gain.


Then I find these websites

http://www.nutraingredients-usa.com/...ches-fortified

Quote:
A study published in the June 2003 Journal of Pediatrics conducted by The Retina Foundation of the Southwest in Dallas, Texas, showed that infants breastfed for four to six months, then weaned to a DHA and ARA supplemented formula experienced significantly better visual acuity at one year of age than those infants fed the non-supplemented formula.
http://www99.epinions.com/content_120427155076

Quote:
tried to breastfeed my son, but I just wasn't producing enough milk. [...]

As a paranoid new 1st time mother, I called my pediatrician once again. She recommended trying Nestle Good Start Supreme DHA & ARA [...] So, I rushed out to the supermarket and bought Nestle Good Start Supreme DHA & ARA.
:
post #2 of 27
It is sickening. Nestle is disgusting. They have consistently violated the International Code for years and basically laughs in its face. I can't even watch the commercial, I turn it off, it truly makes me feel sick.
post #3 of 27
What's really sick is that they have "breastmilkified" their commercials for formula so that as the young, beautiful mom holds the baby and bottle very near her breasts in a classic BFing position, she looks like she's breastfeeding while happening to hold a bottle. The message is clear, "bottle is exactly the same as breast." It's subtle and evil!
post #4 of 27

Well, Nestle may not be perfect

but when I had to occasionally supplement older ds due to medical issues, this was the only formula that didn't constipate him, give him gas, make him spit up, whatever. Luckily, I only had to supplement for a few months till he outgrow the feeding problem.

moms222
post #5 of 27
I hate them. My brother and his girlfriend have a new baby, and she claimed she "tried" to BF him in the hospital but he was crying and crying, and so the helpful nurses said they should supplement and whaddya know, the baby stopped crying...he "must have been starving" and the formula filled him up. So she never tried to BF again, just stuck with formula. ANd the sad thing is my brother just told me on the phone that the Nestle Good Start they are using "is the same as breast milk because it has the breast milk DHA and ARA." :
post #6 of 27
Honestly, most formula companies make me sick. But nestle is disgusting. I can't stand to even look and their commercials. Is it them that also has the "natural cultures"? That makes me ill.
post #7 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathansmama View Post
Honestly, most formula companies make me sick. But nestle is disgusting. I can't stand to even look and their commercials. Is it them that also has the "natural cultures"? That makes me ill.
And to prepare it properly for young infants or for ALL children in some countries, you must mix the powder form by boiling water, which might destroy the cultures.:
post #8 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by Momtwice View Post
And to prepare it properly for young infants or for ALL children in some countries, you must mix the powder form by boiling water, which might destroy the cultures.:
Never thought of that. Ridiculous.
post #9 of 27
I got this:
Quote:
Thank you for visiting verybestbaby.com. It appears that you do not live in the U.S. The content of this site is intended for U.S. residents only. If you believe you have reached this page in error, please contact our customer service center at 1-800-284-9488 or enter your U.S. address here:
and after the blanks for the address information, there's this interesting tidbit of information:
Quote:
To visit our international Baby Foods websites, please click here.
Nestlé S.A. endorses and complies with both the letter and spirit of the World Health Organization (WHO) International Code of Marketing of Breast-Milk Substitutes in developing countries, including standards for integrity, labeling, distribution and promotion.
Um....not really from what I'm reading just in this thread.
post #10 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by meowee View Post
What's really sick is that they have "breastmilkified" their commercials for formula so that as the young, beautiful mom holds the baby and bottle very near her breasts in a classic BFing position, she looks like she's breastfeeding while happening to hold a bottle. The message is clear, "bottle is exactly the same as breast." It's subtle and evil!
I'm not disagreeing that Nestle is evil, but...

When I bottle feed my son (which I occasionally do for a number of reasons), I hold him as though we were breastfeeding, but I'm just happening to hold a bottle. It's how he's used to eating. It's how I'm used to feeding him. How else would I hold him while bottle feeding? I've heard plenty of women on these boards complain when they see people bottle feed infants without holding them - "that poor baby! Why doesn't she hold the baby?" I've also heard plenty of bottle feeding mothers comment that they use feeding time as an opportunity (one of many such opportunities) to snuggle and bond with their babies. Why should Nestle have to come up with some weird special position for the models in their ad to use?

If you have to use formula, I don't see why you wouldn't want the best available. What bothers me about the ads isn't that they claim that Nestle's formula is better than other formulas, but that they make those claims in ways that suggest that Nestle's formulas are better than any other way to feed a baby. The visual acuity ad, for example, doesn't mention that the study was done only on formula-fed infants, and that breastfed babies still have advantages. And the comfort proteins thing bugs the heck out of me. That ad has been airing for years, and it sucks.
post #11 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by MeepyCat View Post
What bothers me about the ads isn't that they claim that Nestle's formula is better than other formulas, but that they make those claims in ways that suggest that Nestle's formulas are better than any other way to feed a baby.
I'm so glad you wrote this. This is EXACTLY what bugs me SO much about Nestle's marketing (and pretty much ALL formula marketing). Breastfeeding, if it's mentioned at all, is mentioned grudgingly, and made to sound like it's way too much trouble for "real" moms, like no one in their right mind would ever do such a thing (and certainly not longer than a couple of days or weeks, tops) 'cause bottle-feeding formula is the only "reasonable" way to feed a baby, don't ya know... They even have tables on some formula cans that "teach" you how to "properly" wean your baby off the breast and onto Good Start. Grrr.... :

Anyone here seen the movie Idiocracy? The catchphrase "Good Start contains 'comfort proteins,'" sounds eerily like, "It's got electrolytes!" It would be funny, except that it's TRUE. Bah! :
post #12 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by moms222 View Post
but when I had to occasionally supplement older ds due to medical issues, this was the only formula that didn't constipate him, give him gas, make him spit up, whatever. Luckily, I only had to supplement for a few months till he outgrow the feeding problem.

moms222
I think it's important to make the distinction between the actual formula and the companies that market/produce it. No one is saying that if you have to use formula, Nestle's formulas are evil and avoided at all costs. What most are expressing is that Nestle's marketing practices stink. They're assholes who care only about money and their bottom line. They're going to sell you their formula any way they can whether it's ethical or not. In their case, more often it's not.

That said, BabyMilkAction recognizes that some babies will only tolerate the formula that Nestle produces and therefore their formulas were not part of the original boycott. I'm not sure if that's true now, but I suspect it is.
post #13 of 27
I can't view the video because I'm not in the US. Buggers.

Ha, I was able to get in by telling them I lived in Beverly Hills at 90210 . Disgusting.
post #14 of 27
I just typed in hhhhhhhhhhhhhhh aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa and 45678 and it let me in.
I hate nestle...
post #15 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by pumpkinhead View Post
I think it's important to make the distinction between the actual formula and the companies that market/produce it. No one is saying that if you have to use formula, Nestle's formulas are evil and avoided at all costs. What most are expressing is that Nestle's marketing practices stink. They're assholes who care only about money and their bottom line. They're going to sell you their formula any way they can whether it's ethical or not. In their case, more often it's not.

That said, BabyMilkAction recognizes that some babies will only tolerate the formula that Nestle produces and therefore their formulas were not part of the original boycott. I'm not sure if that's true now, but I suspect it is.
Pumpkinhead,

You're right about this. The formula marketing is the insidious part. There isn't anything inherently evil about formula, but advertising for it like it's "what babies crave" (another Idiocracy reference for the fans out there) is what really makes my hackles go up.
post #16 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by moms222 View Post
but when I had to occasionally supplement older ds due to medical issues, this was the only formula that didn't constipate him, give him gas, make him spit up, whatever. Luckily, I only had to supplement for a few months till he outgrow the feeding problem.

moms222
None of us have any problems with this particular formula being available for babies. What we're objecting to is the way it's being marketed.

Maybe this formula is better tolerated than other infant formulas- but it's nowhere near as good as breastmilk and it never will be! It should be sold to mothers who have legitimate reasons to supplement, or are unable to provide breastmilk at all. It shouldn't be marketed to pg and new mothers for whom breastfeeding is a very real option.
post #17 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by MeepyCat View Post
I'm not disagreeing that Nestle is evil, but...

When I bottle feed my son (which I occasionally do for a number of reasons), I hold him as though we were breastfeeding, but I'm just happening to hold a bottle. It's how he's used to eating. It's how I'm used to feeding him. How else would I hold him while bottle feeding? I've heard plenty of women on these boards complain when they see people bottle feed infants without holding them - "that poor baby! Why doesn't she hold the baby?" I've also heard plenty of bottle feeding mothers comment that they use feeding time as an opportunity (one of many such opportunities) to snuggle and bond with their babies. Why should Nestle have to come up with some weird special position for the models in their ad to use?

If you have to use formula, I don't see why you wouldn't want the best available. What bothers me about the ads isn't that they claim that Nestle's formula is better than other formulas, but that they make those claims in ways that suggest that Nestle's formulas are better than any other way to feed a baby. The visual acuity ad, for example, doesn't mention that the study was done only on formula-fed infants, and that breastfed babies still have advantages. And the comfort proteins thing bugs the heck out of me. That ad has been airing for years, and it sucks.
I think bottle nursing is great if you have to FF. I had to bottle nurse one of mine after weaning prematurely for medical reasons.

But... that ad is not promoting bottle nursing. It's subtly trying to say that their formula is just like breastmilk. It's subtle and pernicious.
post #18 of 27
They have been advertising "comfort proteins" for years.
post #19 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by MommytoTwo View Post
They have been advertising "comfort proteins" for years.
this
post #20 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by meowee View Post
I think bottle nursing is great if you have to FF. I had to bottle nurse one of mine after weaning prematurely for medical reasons.

But... that ad is not promoting bottle nursing. It's subtly trying to say that their formula is just like breastmilk. It's subtle and pernicious.
Meowee, I agree that Nestle tries to claim that formula is just like breast milk. I don't agree that they're subtle about it. They're not. They would have neon signs above Times Square if they could: "Nestle: Just As Good."

Nonetheless, I can't get exercised about the depiction of bottle nursing in their ads. Tell me, how *is* that woman supposed to hold the baby? What should depictions of formula feeding look like, if not what actual women look like when formula feeding?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Lactivism
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Breastfeeding › Lactivism › Nestle's "Comfort Proteins"