ASA Adjudication on Nutricia Ltd

Ad

A TV ad, for Cow & Gate Complete Care Follow-on milk, featured a giggling baby. On-screen text stated "Do I look like I need more vitamins and iron?". A second giggling baby was shown. On-screen text stated "Do I look like my tummy's unhappy?". A third giggling baby was shown. On-screen text stated "Do I look like I am not getting what I need?". The ad showed a pack shot of the product with a baby bottle filled with milk beside it. The scene changed to show a baby being bottle-fed. The voice-over stated "Cow & Gate Complete Care Follow-on milk provides key nutrients for growth, helps promote healthy digestion, is nutritionally tailored to your baby's stage". Each of the claimed benefits were shown as on-screen text with a tick next to them. They then 'fell' into a pack of Cow & Gate Complete Care Follow-on milk. The voice-over continued "Cow & Gate Complete Care. Because healthy babies are happy babies." On-screen text stated "Because healthy babies are happy babies". Throughout most of the ad, text appeared at the bottom of the screen: "Follow-on milk should only be used as part of a mixed diet from 6 months. It is not a breast milk substitute. Talk to your healthcare professional". The ad ended with another shot of a giggling baby. The Cow & Gate website address was given.

Issue

One viewer objected that:

1. the claim "Do I look like my tummy's unhappy?" was misleading, because she believed formula-fed babies were more prone to constipation and were at greater risk of developing gastroenteritis; and

2. the claim "Do I look like I am not getting what I need?" was misleading, because she believed formula-fed babies were missing out on some of the benefits of breast milk and were therefore not as healthy as they could be.

BCAP TV Code

Response

1. Nutricia said the ad was for follow-on milk intended for babies over six months. The complainant had referred the ASA to sources of information to support her view that formula-fed babies were more prone to constipation and were at greater risk of developing gastroenteritis than breast-fed babies. However, Nutricia pointed out that the information the complainant had sent on formula fed babies related to those fed exclusively on infant formula (bottle-fed babies), whereas their ad was not for infant formula but for follow-on formula designed for a weaned baby. They were unaware of any evidence that a baby who had been breast fed, and was then given their follow-on formula as part of a mixed diet from six months, was more liable to develop constipation and gastroenteritis than a baby who was breast fed then weaned and not given follow-on formula.

2. The complainant had referred the ASA to a source of information to support her view that breast milk contained many properties that infant formula was yet to replicate. Nutricia reiterated that the ad was for follow-on formula, not infant formula, and explained that infant and follow-on milk composition was governed by the Infant Formula and Follow-on Formula Regulations 2007 (derived from the European Commission Directive 2006/141/EC). They said the composition of Cow & Gate Complete Care Follow-on milk complied with those Regulations, which clearly outlined in Annex II the minimum and maximum energy, macronutrient and micronutrient requirements for a follow-on milk. They said the legislation was based on expert European evaluation by the EU Scientific Committee on Food from a combination of sources, including current understanding and research in infant nutrition, and current nutrient level recommendations. The Regulations were designed to ensure that bottle-fed babies over six months received formula that benefitted from the safest and latest scientific knowledge. There was no intention to replicate breast milk or its benefits, but instead to provide those babies whose mothers had chosen to use formula with the best possible alternative to breast milk.

They emphasized that Cow and Gate Follow-on Formula was not a breast milk substitute and was not promoted as such. The ad clarified that with the on-screen text "Follow-on milk should only be used as part of a mixed diet from 6 months. It is not a breast milk substitute. Talk to your healthcare professional".

1. & 2. Clearcast said they had interpreted the claims "Do I look like my tummy's unhappy?" and "Do I look like I am not getting what I need?" in a very straightforward manner, as they believed was intended by Nutricia and their agency. They did not see the ad as making a comparison with other follow-on formulas and, in their view, it certainly did not suggest that giving a baby the advertised formula was equal to giving it breast milk. Clearcast believed the ad was designed to show that the product was perfectly suitable for someone who decided they did not want to breast feed after six months. They therefore wanted assurance from Nutricia that children from six months, using the follow-on product, would be able to process it without discomfort and obtain the level of nutrients needed to develop in a healthy manner. Nutricia had assured them that strict regulations, based on extensive research, on how follow-on formula products were constituted, ensured they did perform in the appropriate manner. Nutricia's supporting information had also been assessed by Clearcast's consultant, who agreed the product was designed to give six-month olds "what they needed" although it would never be of equal benefit as breast milk. Clearcast were unaware of any published information suggesting that the advertised product would cause constipation or gastroenteritis.

Assessment

1. Not upheld

The ASA considered the claim "Do I look like my tummy's unhappy?" implied that babies who were at least six months old and taking the advertised product as part of a mixed diet would not have any digestive problems. We noted the complainant had pointed us to some information on the Internet indicating that breast fed babies were less likely to suffer from constipation and gastroenteritis than bottle fed babies. However, we understood that the information on bottle fed babies related to those who were not breast fed at all and given infant formula instead, whereas the ad made clear, mainly by virtue of on-screen text, that it was for follow-on milk intended to be used as part of a mixed diet from six months. We knew of nothing to suggest that babies being fed the product in such circumstances were more prone to develop constipation and gastroenteritis than they would be otherwise. We concluded that the claim "Do I look like my tummy's unhappy?" was unlikely to mislead.

2. Not upheld

We considered that the claim "Do I look like I am not getting what I need?", in conjunction with the on-screen text, suggested the advertised product was nutritionally suitable for a baby aged at least six months as part of a mixed diet. We considered the ad did not go so far as to suggest that Cow & Gate Complete Care Follow-on milk provided exactly the same benefits as breast milk in all respects. We understood that breast milk was best nutritionally, which was what the complainant was arguing, but we also recognized that any product that complied with the legislation concerning the content of follow-on formula would be nutritionally safe and fit for the mixed diet of a baby over six months of age. Although the claim "Do I look like I am not getting what I need?" might be misleading if applied to babies who were given infant formula and were not breast fed at all, the ad did not relate to such babies but to those who had been breast fed and then given the advertised formula from six months with other foods. We knew of no information to suggest that those babies would not be 'getting what they needed'. We noted the information supplied by the complainant related to infant formula, not follow-on formula. We concluded that the claim "Do I look like I am not getting what I need?" was unlikely to mislead.

On points 1 and 2, we investigated the ad under CAP (Broadcast) TV Advertising Standards Code rules 5.1.1 (Misleading advertising), 5.2.1 (Evidence), 8.3.1a and 8.3.1b (Food and dietary supplements - Accuracy in food advertising) but did not find it in breach.

Action

No further action necessary.

Adjudication of the ASA Council (Broadcast)