Why does the Code exist?

Since the development of the ‘first artificial infant food’ in 1867, the breastmilk substitute industry has sought to mislead parents and undermine breastfeeding using unscrupulous marketing tactics. Between 1860s and the introduction of the Code in 1981, breastfeeding rates fell from an estimated 70% to 14% globally. Since the introduction of the Code, breastfeeding rates have increased and the latest Global Breastfeeding Scorecard 2023 reports that “Globally rates of exclusive breastfeeding in the first six months of life have increased by 10 percentage points over the past decade and are at 48% for 2023, close to the World Health Assembly target of 50% by 2025”.

It is thought that up to 600,000 children die annually, globally, due to inadequate breastfeeding, amounting to $340billion in economic losses. Lack of newborn and infant acquired immunity obtained through mothers breastmilk can lead to sickness, and improper preparation of powdered breastmilk substitutes – at temperatures less than 70˚C - allows potentially lethal bacteria to thrive and cause serious illness or death.

The Code was created to tackle inappropriate and dangerous marketing of breastmilk substitutes and to protect breastfeeding. The Code also sets standards for the labelling and quality of products and for how the law should be implemented and monitored within countries. It calls on governments "to ensure that monitoring the application of the International Code and subsequent relevant resolutions is carried out in a transparent, independent manner, free from commercial influence”. 

As of March 2024, 146 countries have adopted some aspects of the Code, and in countries with an effective legal framework underpinning Code implementation, breastmilk substitute sales have been shown to stagnate, and consequentially breastfeeding rates increase.

Restricting marketing of breastmilk substitutes does not mean that the products cannot be sold, or that scientific and factual information about them cannot be made available. Neither does it restrict parent’s choice. It simply aims to make sure that their decisions are based on full, impartial information, rather than misleading, inaccurate or biased marketing claims.

The underlying rationale for the Code is that the health of babies is so important that the usual rules governing market competition and advertising should not apply to products intended for feeding babies. Therefore, all Governments should legislate to prevent commercial interests from disrupting breastfeeding and thereby harming the health of their populations.

How does UK law compare to the Code?

Only some of the provisions in the Code are written into regulation in the UK. This makes these regulations significantly weaker than the Code, particularly as they only cover the marketing of infant formula and follow on formula intended for babies 0-12 months old (and places very few restrictions on the promotion of follow on formula). They do not cover any foods which may be inappropriately marketed for use under six months of age given that the recommended age for the introduction of solids is six months of age, or the numerous commercially produced foods and drinks marketed for babies older than six months. The law therefore permits widespread advertising of breastmilk substitutes with the exception infant formula.

The 2022 Status Report on the Code from WHO, UNICEF, and IBFAN assesses UK legislation against the Code and can be read here: Marketing of breast-milk substitutes: National implementation of the international code. The UK scores only 40/100.

To protect breastfeeding and safeguard infant, young child and maternal health, the Baby Feeding Law Group UK advocates for a strengthening of the UK law to align with the Code, as well as effective, independent monitoring and enforcement of compliance.

 How do companies’ practices compare to the Code?

 Monitoring and reporting violations