Cargando…

(Non)Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes in South African Parenting Magazines: How Marketing Regulations May Be Working

Although exclusive breastfeeding (EBF) for the first six months is optimal for child health, it remains low globally. Breastmilk substitutes (BMS) marketing undermines breastfeeding. In 2012, South Africa introduced Regulation 991, which prohibits marketing BMS products for infants below 6 months. O...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Jewett, Sara, Pilime, Sukoluhle, Richter, Linda
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9141163/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35627584
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19106050
_version_ 1784715276881756160
author Jewett, Sara
Pilime, Sukoluhle
Richter, Linda
author_facet Jewett, Sara
Pilime, Sukoluhle
Richter, Linda
author_sort Jewett, Sara
collection PubMed
description Although exclusive breastfeeding (EBF) for the first six months is optimal for child health, it remains low globally. Breastmilk substitutes (BMS) marketing undermines breastfeeding. In 2012, South Africa introduced Regulation 991, which prohibits marketing BMS products for infants below 6 months. Our study aimed to explore if and how BMS products were presented in South African parenting magazines post-R991. We applied a mixed-methods cross-sectional content analysis design, analyzing all 2018 issues of two popular parenting magazines. We descriptively analyzed quantitative codes, derived from an a priori framework, and conducted qualitative content analysis on a subset of texts and images. We found there was no overt marketing of BMS to parents with infants below 6 months. However, BMS advertisements were placed next to articles about young infants, and vague wording and images were ways by which BMS companies may indirectly benefit. Medical experts in both magazines promoted the introduction of solids before six months. To conclude, while BMS companies in South Africa were abiding by R991 by not overtly advertising BMS in parental print media, their influence persists. Continued monitoring of print media as well as other channels is advisable. This study may be of interest to countries considering stronger regulations of BMS advertising.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9141163
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-91411632022-05-28 (Non)Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes in South African Parenting Magazines: How Marketing Regulations May Be Working Jewett, Sara Pilime, Sukoluhle Richter, Linda Int J Environ Res Public Health Article Although exclusive breastfeeding (EBF) for the first six months is optimal for child health, it remains low globally. Breastmilk substitutes (BMS) marketing undermines breastfeeding. In 2012, South Africa introduced Regulation 991, which prohibits marketing BMS products for infants below 6 months. Our study aimed to explore if and how BMS products were presented in South African parenting magazines post-R991. We applied a mixed-methods cross-sectional content analysis design, analyzing all 2018 issues of two popular parenting magazines. We descriptively analyzed quantitative codes, derived from an a priori framework, and conducted qualitative content analysis on a subset of texts and images. We found there was no overt marketing of BMS to parents with infants below 6 months. However, BMS advertisements were placed next to articles about young infants, and vague wording and images were ways by which BMS companies may indirectly benefit. Medical experts in both magazines promoted the introduction of solids before six months. To conclude, while BMS companies in South Africa were abiding by R991 by not overtly advertising BMS in parental print media, their influence persists. Continued monitoring of print media as well as other channels is advisable. This study may be of interest to countries considering stronger regulations of BMS advertising. MDPI 2022-05-16 /pmc/articles/PMC9141163/ /pubmed/35627584 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19106050 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Jewett, Sara
Pilime, Sukoluhle
Richter, Linda
(Non)Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes in South African Parenting Magazines: How Marketing Regulations May Be Working
title (Non)Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes in South African Parenting Magazines: How Marketing Regulations May Be Working
title_full (Non)Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes in South African Parenting Magazines: How Marketing Regulations May Be Working
title_fullStr (Non)Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes in South African Parenting Magazines: How Marketing Regulations May Be Working
title_full_unstemmed (Non)Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes in South African Parenting Magazines: How Marketing Regulations May Be Working
title_short (Non)Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes in South African Parenting Magazines: How Marketing Regulations May Be Working
title_sort (non)marketing of breastmilk substitutes in south african parenting magazines: how marketing regulations may be working
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9141163/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35627584
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19106050
work_keys_str_mv AT jewettsara nonmarketingofbreastmilksubstitutesinsouthafricanparentingmagazineshowmarketingregulationsmaybeworking
AT pilimesukoluhle nonmarketingofbreastmilksubstitutesinsouthafricanparentingmagazineshowmarketingregulationsmaybeworking
AT richterlinda nonmarketingofbreastmilksubstitutesinsouthafricanparentingmagazineshowmarketingregulationsmaybeworking