CEPR - Center for Economic and Policy Research

Multimedia

En Español

Em Português

Other Languages

Home Publications Blogs CEPR Blog Nanny State Conservatives Protect Drug Company Profits: Infant Formula Edition

Nanny State Conservatives Protect Drug Company Profits: Infant Formula Edition

Print
Written by Shawn Fremstad   
Tuesday, 16 October 2012 15:15
The New York Times has a good article on the growing movement to limit the marketing of infant formula to new mothers while they’re in hospital maternity wards. In NYC, the Health Department has launched a “Latch on NYC” initiative to support breastfeeding mothers. Maternity hospitals that join the initiative agree to not distribute promotional infant formula provided by formula manufacturers. Instead, formula is treated like medications and other supplies, and provided when necessary on an individual basis.

The policy has been harshly criticized by Rush Limbaugh and other conservatives who have described it as a “nanny state” initiative. Their hero is Mitt Romney who, according to the NYT, made decisions as governor to "pressure the state’s Public Health Council to reverse a ban on formula giveaways and replace three council members who objected." (For more on Romney's decision, see this in-depth treatment by the Massachusetts Breastfeeding Council.)

What the NYT doesn’t explain is that Limbaugh and Romney are the real nanny-state proponents. U.S. infant formula is highly concentrated with three manufacturers (Abbott, Mead Johnson, and Nestle) accounting for 98 percent of the industry’s $3.5 billion in sales. The infant formula industry is massively subsidized through the Women, Infant, Children (WIC) program. The U.S. Department of Agriculture estimates that 57-68 percent of all infant formula sold in the United States by these three manufacturers was purchased through the WIC program.

Efforts like "Latch on NYC" and the Massachusetts ban vetoed by Romney would likely increase breastfeeding and reduce reliance on formula. This would be good for taxpayers who subsidize the formula market through WIC—and babies—but not for nanny-state conservatives who want to protect the profits of the big-3 infant formula manufacturers.

Tags: breastfeeding | infant formula | nanny state | romney | WIC | women

Comments (1)Add Comment
Breast feeding
written by Jennifer, October 17, 2012 2:36
The hysteria over the New York initiative has been amazing. As clearly stated in this post, nobody is going without formula, it is available as needed. If hospitals are supposed to promote health, they should be promoting breastfeeding. The reason for the iniative is that the common practice in hospitals is to give formula--which is easy to do and easy to measure, as opposed to helping women breastfeed which may be more challenging.

Write comment

(Only one link allowed per comment)

This content has been locked. You can no longer post any comments.

busy
 

CEPR.net
Support this blog, donate
Combined Federal Campaign #79613
budget economy education employment Haiti health care housing inequality jobs labor labor market minimum wage paid family leave poverty recession retirement Social Security taxes unemployment unions wages Wall Street women workers working class

+ All tags