Abbott Nutrition has filed a complaint against Mead Johnson with the 
National Advertising Division of the Better Business Bureau regarding 
misleading claims. When Mead Johnson refused to change this after 3 
challenges, it was referred to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). NABA 
and the Cornucopia Institute www.cornucopia.org, also filed a petition 
with the FTC regarding false and misleading advertising by formula 
manufacturers. Maybe 4000 letters to the FTC would help them move 
towards doing their job of stopping this type of marketing. You can 
file a complaint with the FTC at their website at www.ftc.gov.

Marsha Walker, RN, IBCLC
NABA
Weston, MA

http://www.nadreview.org/DocView.aspx?DocumentID=7201

FOLLOWING THIRD COMPLIANCE REVIEW, NAD REFERS ADVERTISING FOR
‘ENFAMIL’ INFANT FORMULA TO FTC
New York, NY – Feb. 24, 2009 – The National Advertising Division of the 
Council of Better Business
Bureaus has referred advertising Mead Johnson Nutritionals for Enfamil 
Lipil infant formula to the
Federal Trade Commission for further review, following NAD’s third 
compliance review.
NAD, the advertising industry’s self-regulatory forum, initially 
recommended in April 2008 that Mead
Johnson modify or discontinue certain claims for the product or clarify 
the claims to assure that
consumers are provided with all pertinent information.
NAD examined advertising claims for the product following a challenge 
by Abbott Nutrition, a
0Amanufacturer of Similac brand infant products.
NAD recommended then that the advertiser make clear that Enfamil Lipil 
has not been shown to
outperform Similac Advance with respect to mental and/or visual 
development. Further, with respect
to a consumer-directed coupon that featured a chart inviting consumers 
to “compare the
differences” between Enfamil Lipil and Similac Advance, NAD recommended 
that the advertiser
either discontinue this comparative advertisement, or modify it by 
removing the comparison to
Similac Advance.
Since its initial inquiry, NAD has opened three compliance reviews 
related to the same or similar
advertising claims, including reviews in June 2008, November 2008 and 
finally in February 2009.
In the most recent compliance proceeding, NAD again found that the 
Enfamil Lipil advertising did not
comply with NAD’s decision.
NAD noted in its decision that the “self-regulatory process cannot 
function properly when advertisers
state, on the one hand, that they respect the process and will comply 
with NAD’s decision, and then
do the opposite. Accordingly, NAD has no choice but to refer this 
matter to the appropriate
government agency for possible law enforcement action pursuant to 
section 4.1(B) of the NAD/NARB
Procedures.”
NAD's inquiry was conducted under NAD/CARU/NARB Procedures for the 
Voluntary Self-Regulation of
National Advertising. Details of the initial inquiry, NAD's decision, 
and the advertiser
's response will be
included in the next NAD/CARU Case Report.
###
About Advertising Industry Self-Regulation: The National Advertising 
Review Council (NARC) was formed in 1971 by the
Association of National Advertisers, Inc. (ANA), the American 
Association of Advertising Agencies, Inc. (AAAA), the American
Advertising Federation, Inc. (AAF), and the Council of Better Business 
Bureaus, Inc. (CBBB). Its purpose is to foster truth and
accuracy in national advertising through voluntary self-regulation. 
NARC is the body that establishes the policies and
procedures for the CBBB’s National Advertising Division (NAD) and 
Children’s Advertising Review Unit (CARU), as well as for
the National Advertising Review Board (NARB) and the Electronic 
Retailing Self-Regulation Program (ERSP).
NAD and CARU are the investigative arms of the advertising industry’s 
voluntary self-regulation program. Their casework
results from competitive challenges from other advertisers, and also 
from self-monitoring traditional and new media. The
National Advertising Review Board (NARB), the appeals body, is a peer 
group from which ad-hoc panels are selected to
adjudicate those cases that are not resolved at the NAD/CARU level. 
This unique, self-regulatory system is funded entirely by
the business community; CARU is financed by the children’s advertising 
industry, while NAD/NARC/NARB’s sole source of
funding is derived from membership fees paid to the CBBB. ERSP’s 
funding is d
erived from membership in the Electronic
Retailing Association. For more information about advertising self 
regulation, please visit www.narcpartners.org

             ***********************************************

Archives: http://community.lsoft.com/archives/LACTNET.html
To reach list owners: [log in to unmask]
Mail all list management commands to: [log in to unmask]
COMMANDS:
1. To temporarily stop your subscription write in the body of an email: set lactnet nomail
2. To start it again: set lactnet mail
3. To unsubscribe: unsubscribe lactnet
4. To get a comprehensive list of rules and directions: get lactnet welcome