Welcome to the August edition of our newsletter – contents below.
Can you support us with a donation?
As you know, First Steps Nutrition Trust is a registered charity, funded by a small number of generous individuals and grants. We don’t receive government funding and only accept funds from conflict-of-interest free sources. If you are consistently finding value in this newsletter, please consider making a donation towards our work. You can do this here on our PayPal page and don’t need a PayPal account.
Today (7 August) is the last day of World Breastfeeding Week. This year’s global theme was Prioritise Breastfeeding: Create sustainable support systems. This theme focused on environment and climate change, by highlighting the roles of all stakeholders, especially trained healthcare professionals, in supporting breastfeeding to create a sustainable environment while simultaneously reducing the climate-related impacts of formula feeding. The consistent, evidence-based support that breastfeeding mothers need should start during the antenatal period, with health workers providing clear, reassuring and skilled guidance. Continued breastfeeding support is needed at the time of delivery, during hospital stays and especially after discharge. Mothers need support to manage any breastfeeding challenges and then continued policy and practical support to balance breastfeeding with return to work, especially in the current context of widespread unethical marketing by the commercial formula industry.
Two of our practical guides could be useful to new mums and can be downloaded for free here.
"Eating well for new mums," offers easy, nutritious, cost-effective snack ideas and provides information about diet and breastfeeding to inform and support breastfeeding mothers. It also answers FAQs that new breastfeeding mums might have about eating and drinking well and provides information to dispel common myths and misconceptions.
Our resource ‘Breastmilk and breastfeeding: A simple guide’ contains information about breastmilk and why breastfeeding matters for babies, mums and the world we live in.
Here, at First Steps Nutrition Trust, we have been advocating for breastfeeding support - as the normal way to feed babies and young children - since our inception 14 years ago, and long may we continue to do so!
Here are our reflections on the plans and their relevance to early years nutrition, in their order of release.
The 10-year Health Plan for England from the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC), aims to transform the NHS into a more efficient and responsive health service. It is the plan to deliver on the Government’s Health Mission. It emphasises three major shifts:
shifting care to the community (e.g. Community/Neighbourhood Health Centres will provide 24/7 access to healthcare services),
moving from analogue to digital services (e.g. Digital single patient records will be created),
and focusing on prevention rather than just treatment (Giving people “power to make the healthy choice”).
Image credit: NHS
Unfortunately, the plan includes little explicit content on babies, young children and nutrition and feeding, although it is light on detail generally, given its vast scope. Here are our reflections in relation to what we fed in to the consultation in December 2024:
There is one mention of breastfeeding in a personal quote, which is unfortunately negative. The Breastfeeding Network write about the conspicuous absence of breastfeeding in this blog. However, breastfeeding support via health visitors is mentioned in the Best Start in Life strategy (see below), so we assume it is implicit. That said, the details will be vital, and we would like to see a clear commitment to peer support services as well as support through health professionals.
Health visiting gets a mention in Chapter 2 “From Hospital to Community”, where the need to “get prevention right… in the critical 1,001 days” is acknowledged. The focus here is on vaccinations and holistic support for children’s broader development. The Institute of Health Visiting present a ‘glass half full’ (hopeful) interpretation of the implications for health visiting, including plugging gaps in the workforce here (a separate workforce plan is pending).
Image credit: NHS
Chapter 4 on “Sickness to Prevention” has a section on ‘ending the obesity epidemic’. It states “Food choices are partly an individual choice, but they are also influenced by our environment. This is particularly true for children, who have little choice in the foodthey eat and are less able than adults to resist food advertising or product placement”. However, it mostly focuses on interventions at school age. There’s a mention of the potential to extend the soft drinks industry levy to milk-based drinks, but we’ve been told by the DHSC that unnecessary growing up and toddler milks are not considered in scope. One positive is a promised increase in the Healthy Start allowance from 2026 “to support the poorest families and tackle child poverty”, though this is meagre at 10 percent (“pregnant women and children aged one or older but under 4 will each receive £4.65 per week (up from £4.25). Children under one year old will receive £9.30 every week (up from £8.50)”). There is no mention of efforts to increase coverage of the scheme.
There are also no mentions of any planned actions on formula marketing, baby foods composition and marketing, or early years settings food provision, although the latter is more relevant to the Department for Education (DFE)-led Best Start in Life strategy (see below).
Sadly, without meaningful and holistic attention to diets in the early years (i.e. preconception, pregnancy, infancy and early childhood) there will be no sustainable reduction in obesity.
In terms of how the plan will be delivered, partnerships are embraced: “Instead of going it alone, the Plan sets out how the NHS will create new collaborations with commercial partners, universities, councils and mayors…”. Of concern is a big emphasis on partnerships with industry, including multinationals with a track record undermining heathy early years diets. E.g., page 58 shares that “Danone has committed to never introducing a high fat, salt or sugar product targeted at children… It will be by working with these partners that we will make all our efforts more than the sum of their parts”.
To sum up, from an early years nutrition perspective there is little detail in this NHS 10-year plan to indicate that the Government understand the extent and scope of actions required to improve early years diets, and the necessary safeguards against conflicts of interest. However, the Best Start in Life Strategy and the Food Strategy also include early years content, and taking a holistic view of evolving Government policy provides optimism.
The Best Start in Life strategy is a policy paper from the Department for Education (DfE), and its scope covers ‘family services’ and early education and care. It is situated as supporting the Government’s Opportunity Mission.
Published four days after the NHS 10-year plan, it references and builds on elements within that plan making them relevant to the early years and cites the importance of the pending Child Poverty Strategy:
“The reforms set out in this strategy go hand in hand with the move to a Neighbourhood Health Service set out in the Government’s 10 Year Health Plan, and the three radical shifts – hospital to community, analogue to digital and sickness to prevention. Supporting families with young children to thrive will also be integral to the Child Poverty Strategy due to be published late this year…We have also launched a review of the parental leave and pay system…”.
The strategy seeks to holistically address the needs of babies and young children regarding their learning, health and development, acknowledging the need to support families and provide high-quality early education and childcare.
Early years feeding and food provision should be implicit within, and there are a few explicit mentions: breastfeeding support from health visitors in ‘Best Start in Life Family Hubs’, reference to the Government commitment to increase the Healthy Start allowance, and the recent welcome commitment to provide free early years meals to families on universal credit where their child attends a state-funded school nursery.
The headline goal of the strategy is for 75 percent of 5-year-olds in England to have a good level of development by 2028, through:
Expanding and strengthening family services, providing high quality support to parents and children from pregnancy to age 5
More accessible and affordable education and childcare
Improving the quality of education and care that children receive in early years settings, from childminders and in reception classes
This work will be supported by the appointment of a new Best Start in Life Champion to help drive delivery across government.
Focusing on 1 - improving family services (as this is directly relevant to early years nutrition). This will involve:
Creating a new ‘Best Start Family Service’, based on ‘Best Start Family Hubs’ in every local authority. These will provide a ‘new evidenced-informed core offer for parents’ and a new national Best Start digital service ‘bringing together the trusted advice and guidance all parents need in one place and linking families to their local services’ and providing a digital alternative to the red book. They will host professionals working across all local teams, including health and education, and will work with nurseries, childminders, schools, health services, libraries and local voluntary and community groups.
Strengthening health services: improving maternity care (focusing on safety and preventable deaths), strengthening health visiting services (focusing on health and development reviews), increasing access to vaccinations, and reducing tooth decay in children (including supervised tooth brushing for pre-school children in deprived areas).
Backed by local Best Start Plans, coproduced by local authorities and communities.
The strategy outlines how the elements under point 1. support the 10-year health plan shift from hospital to community and highlight the commitment in that plan to support healthy eating in the early years among the poorest families by increasing the Healthy Start allowance and increasing access to free early years meals.
There is a lot of scope in the above to meaningfully support healthy eating in the early years (including breastfeeding and complementary feeding), and we hope that due attention to nutrition will be given alongside other aspects of childcare and development.
2 - increasing the accessibility and affordability of early education and childcare - is relevant to early years nutrition as it will mean more babies in childcare from the age of 9 months. This makes application of the new DFE nutrition guidance for early years settings even more important, as well as considering how best to address the challenges working families express in finding time for home preparation of meals and eating together.
3 - improving the quality of early education and childcare - appears to be focused on the quality of education. We hope that consideration is given to the quality of the food and feeding practices under this agenda, to support healthy early years diets.
First Steps Nutrition Trust is a part of the Early Years Food Coalition, led by Bremner and Co with funding and support from Impact on Urban Health. We will be working with them to push for our shared calls on food provision in early years settings, including extension of free early years meals to private, voluntary and independent settings and sufficient funding for application of the DFE nutrition guidance
To sum up, from an early years nutrition perspective, building on the 10-year health plan, the Best Start in Life Strategy shows potential to improve infant and young child feeding support for families, and to improve food provision in early years settings, but details need to be worked up to be sure.
The UK government food strategy for England is a policy paper from the Department of Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (DEFRA), published on 15 July after the 10-year health plan and the Best Start in Life Strategy. Its subtitle is encouraging “Towards a Good Food Cycle: a UK government food strategy for England, considering the wider UK food system”. The ‘good food cycle’ (the alternative to the junk food cycle) connects production, access, health, resilience and growth. The ministerial foreword even mentions children:
“…this government is bringing together the entire food system to build a future where good food is accessible to everyone, not just a privileged few. A future where every child, every family, and every community can access healthy, affordable, and proudly British food”.
It acknowledges that rising obesity, food insecurity, and environmental degradation are not inevitable, and that working families in particular are struggling to eat well.
It sets out how the Government aims to create a healthier, more affordable, sustainable, resilient food system, while growing the economy, protecting the environment, and celebrating the best of British food and culture. There is welcome emphasis in the vision on children. The strategy supports delivery of the Plan for Change and the national missions.
It includes the following content:
The context and key challenges facing the food system
The Government’s high-level vision for the UK food system
The 10 priority outcomes that will make the vision a reality
Next steps on how the outcomes will be delivered
10 Priority Outcomes for the National Food Strategy
An improved food environment that supports healthier and more environmentally sustainable food sales.
Access for all to safe, affordable, healthy, convenient and appealing food options
Conditions for the food sector to thrive and grow sustainably, including investment in innovation, and productivity, and fairer, more transparent supply chains
Food sector attracts talent and develops skilled workforce in every region
Food supply is environmentally sustainable, with high animal welfare standards, and waste is reduced
Trade supports environmentally sustainable growth, upholds British standards and expands export opportunities
Resilient domestic production for a secure supply of healthy food
Greater preparedness for supply chain shocks, disruption and impacts of chronic risks
Celebrated and valued UK, regional and local food cultures
People are more connected to their local food systems and have the confidence knowledge and skills to cook and eat healthily
Annex A to the strategy maps existing policies on to outcomes and lists several that are directly relevant to early years nutrition, such as Healthy Start and the Nursery Milk Scheme which are linked to outcome 2. Annex B to the strategy provides a brief description and rationale for each outcome and describes interactions with other outcomes.
There are lots of opportunities under the outcomes to better support healthy early years diets e.g. under outcome 1, it is acknowledged that our food environment is dominated by unhealthy foods that are actively marketed, and how ‘interventions to restrict advertising’ could help. Government action to strengthen (and independently enforce) regulations on the marketing of commercial milk formulas (CMF) and baby and toddler foods, and improve the composition of baby and toddler foods, would be directly relevant to this outcome. Under outcome 2, policies to enable breastfeeding ought to get a mention here if this is a food strategy for all, with the potential to reference breastfeeding support provided via health visitors (and hopefully peer supporters too) and in Best Start in Life Family Hubs. Government action to strengthen regulations on CMF marketing would also be relevant to this outcome. The high cost of infant formula is also relevant here, and our opinion at First Steps Nutrition Trust is that this requires Government regulation in the form of price controls.
The ministerial foreword states that: “The transformation ahead will be led by the people who know the system best - our world-class farmers, fishers, producers, and workers. We will continue to listen, learn and act through the Citizen Advisory Council, the Food Strategy Advisory Board, and our work with UK Hospitality, National Farmers Union, British Retail Consortium, and Food and Drink Federation, reflecting our deep engagement across the sector”. We, like others, remain concerned about the extent of industry involvement and the potential negative implications of the inherent conflict of interest for public health.
We are encouraged by recognition within the strategy of the need to tackle marketing, and support Sustain’s view that “[the food strategy] ambitions can only be met if embedded by law and regulation” (read this blog).
Within the strategy we are told that “the next key milestone will be development of metrics, indicators and implementation plans for the food strategy outcomes. As we do this, we will continue to listen to and engage stakeholders across the food system”.
To sum up, from an early years nutrition perspective it is encouraging to see a focus on children and pre-existing policies relevant to the early years are considered in this evolving food strategy. However, there is a need to systematically consider how to address the nutrition needs and vulnerabilities of pregnant women, infants and young children. We welcome the commitment to listen to stakeholders and will continue to engage.
This Venn diagram illustrates linkages between the three plans in terms of the priorities and policies mentioned within. It also outlines where, in our view, policies need clarifying and strengthening and what is conspicuously absent. Lastly, it lists some of the significant forthcoming policy opportunities which will hopefully unlock more commitments to support babies, young children and their families to eat well.
On 16 July, the Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition (SACN) published “SACN and COT [Committee on Toxicity] assessment of the health benefits and risks of consuming plant-based drinks”. This follows consultation between July and September last year, which we fed in to (seehere). We are pleased to see much of our feedback was taken on board, especially that there are specific recommendations for 1 to <5 year olds, and that plant-based drinks marketed specifically for young children (labelled for use from 12-36 months+) are separated out.
Key points from the report are as follows:
Background
Around 10% of people in the National Diet and Nutrition Survey 2019 to 2023 reported that they consumed plant-based drinks [for 1.5-3 year olds, this was 9%, but among 1.5-10 year olds 92% ate meat and fish and did not have any dietary restrictions and only 2% ate mainly vegetarian or vegan diets; i.e. a small proportion of young children consume plant-based drinks, and most of these eat animal source foods]
Oat drinks are the most popular plant-based drink, followed by soya and almond drinks.
Cows’ milk is an important contributor to intakes of calcium and other micronutrients and for 1-5s, is a major contributor to energy, protein and saturated fat intakes. Cows’ milk is not essential for young children but if it is not part of their diet, other foods and drinks are needed to replace the nutrients that it provides.
The nutrient content of plant-based drinks varies considerably, and they tend to contain free sugars (sugars added as an ingredient or present as a result of the manufacturing process) and vary in the type and amount of micronutrient fortification. Organic plant-based drinks are not fortified at all.
Conclusions
No almond, oat or soya drink currently available in the UK is nutritionally equivalent to cows’ milk.
Risks of consuming plant-based drinks over cows’ milk are: higher intakes of free sugars, inadequate intakes of certain micronutrients and lower intakes of protein (for almond and oat drinks) (the latter more of a concern for children following vegan diets).
The only clear, potential toxicological concern relates to isoflavones among children aged 1-to-5 years who are high consumers of soya (e.g. because they are vegan). This is because children are more highly exposed on a body weight basis than adults because of their smaller body size.
Recommendations
For 1-<5-year-olds:
Whole or semi-skimmed cows’ milk are preferable to plant-based drinks for children aged 1 to 5 years who consume animal products
Fortified and unsweetened (without free sugars or non-sugar sweeteners*) almond, oat and soya drinks are an acceptable alternative to cows’ milk [where cows’ milk is not an option]
Unfortified or sweetened (with free sugars or non-sugar sweeteners) plant-based drinks are not an acceptable alternative to cows’ milk [this includes any organic plant drink]
There is no need for drinks specifically marketed for children aged 1 to 3 years, including plant-based ‘growing up’ and other ‘toddler’ drinks
Young children should ideally be breastfed into the second year of life or beyond
For 1-<5-year-olds following a vegan diet:
Fortified and unsweetened (without free sugars or non-sugar sweeteners*) almond, oat and soya drinks are preferable to water in meals and snacks where other children would usually consume cows’ milk; soya drinks are preferable because of higher protein levels
Offer a variety of suitable alternatives to animal-based food and drinks, rather than mainly consuming soya products, to avoid high intakes of isoflavones
*Nb. how SACN and COT define ‘unsweetened’ – no added sugars, no free sugars and no non-sugar sweeteners. This is important as most oat drinks contain free sugars.
Recommendations are also made for government and industry, including that government considers options to help consumers make informed choices about the suitability of plant-based drinks compared with cows’ milk and industry improves the nutritional content of plant-based drinks (addressing sugar content and fortification: Plant-based drinks should be fortified with vitamin A, riboflavin, vitamin B12, calcium and iodine at levels comparable with those found in semi-skimmed cows’ milk, and also vitamin D, which is already common practice).
The recommendations broadly align with our existing position on plant-based drinks (see this 2021 briefing) and the advice in our Eating Well guide for vegan infants and under 5s, in that we recommend unsweetened, calcium-fortified soya drinks in place of cows’ milk, taking care to provide alternative protein sources in the diet as a whole. We also caution against the use of oat drinks that contain free sugars. We remain concerned that nut-based drinks are low in energy and protein compared to other options but note that most children consume excess calories and protein. Lastly, we recommend unsweetened, calcium-fortified pea drinks as an alternative to soya drinks, and these are a category that SACN and COT did not investigate. We will revisit our evaluation of nut and pea-based products in due course.
Which? is naming and shaming companies behind the year’s biggest consumer letdowns in their third annualShoddy Awards. Kiddylicious has been called out for their ‘Suspect Snacks’, due to misleading marketing claims on those aimed at children from 6 months to five years. Their claims create a health halo effect and lead parents and carers into believing they are making good choices. Many products carry ‘allergen-free’ and ‘no-added sugar’ messages, despite being high in sugar. Which? says that “many are more akin to sweets which are damaging teeth, with several classified as confectionery under World Health Organization guidelines”. These issues are not unique to Kiddylicious, as demonstrated by research carried out by the University of Leeds earlier this year, where 55% of snacks were found to contain sugars. Our summary of this research can be found in our May newsletter.
There has been a lot of research in this area. Our 2018 report on fruit-based baby snacks can be found here as well as our 2023 report examining the extent to which baby foods including snacks are ultra-processed which can be foundhere.
Which? highlights that offering snacks to babies under 1 risks displacing breast or formula milk. The NHS states that babies under 12 months do not need snacks, and that breast milk or infant formula should be given when they are hungry between meals. The NHS states that home prepared snacks are preferred, and if you’re using shop-bought baby foods, use them only occasionally, not every day. Avoid biscuits, rusks, biscotti and melty snacks, and choose ones with the least sugar and avoid the ones with sweet fruit or sweet vegetables.
Worryingly, recent research by Alexandra Rhodes from UCL and colleagues explored the drivers of using (ultra) processed baby snack foods (see here). The authors found that families were using snacks not only for hunger, but also for distraction, entertainment, as treats and out of habit, confirming earlier research by Anna Isaaca and colleagues (see here). They also highlighted that parents were swayed to purchase snacks by on-pack health and nutrition claims (like ‘no additives’, ‘contains fruit/vegetables’, ‘natural ingredients’ and ‘no added sugar’). A fuller summary of this research can be found in our June newsletter.
For nutritious, cost effective and simple alternatives to shop-bought baby and toddler snacks, our FREE, ‘Eating well: snacks for 1-to-under-5-year olds’ resource has plenty of ideas. Download it here.
New advertising policy: Knowsley bans ads for formula milks
We are pleased to hear that Knowsley Council in Merseyside is the second council to sign off a comprehensive healthier food and advertising policy, as covered by the BBC here. This includes stronger restrictions on formula milk advertisements and advertisements of pre-packaged meals and snacks for babies and children up to three years old. Knowsley Council highlights that “formula milk is often marketed in such a way that it suggests its benefits outweigh breastfeeding or using cows’ milk after the age of one”. All first infant formulas can support a baby’s growth and development, but they do not have the same health benefits as breastfeeding. As a breastfeeding friendly council, Knowsley has acknowledged that misleading marketing messages from infant formula companies undermine public health messages related to breastfeeding, as well as safe and appropriate formula feeding. Our recent report on current formula marketing practices in the UK highlights many of these issues (see more on this in BFLG-UK news below).
Hounslow Council was the first council to sign off a policy like this in November 2024, acting on the World Health Organization’s (WHO) calls to restrict the inappropriate marketing of commercial baby food, through use of the WHO Nutrient Profile and Promotion Model and the WHO Code.
The first years of life are the most critical time for establishing healthy food preferences, dietary patterns and growth trajectories. Strengthening local food advertising policy can help to protect babies and young children’s health. This is especially true in the context of an absence of meaningful regulations for baby food nutrition composition and marketing, alongside formula marketing that undermines informed decision-making by parents on what and how they feed their babies and young children.
New papers: A Future Healthcare Journal special issue on Commercial Determinants and Conflicts of Interest in Public Health and Policy
The June 2025, Volume 12, Issue 2 of the Royal College of Physicians’ Future Healthcare Journalspecial issue on Commercial Determinants and Conflicts of Interest in Public Health and Policy highlights the major and increasing influence of the tobacco, alcohol, food (including baby food) and gambling industries on the NHS and public health in the UK. The two Editorials and 12 Discussion pieces (including two articles from the perspective of young people) provide a clear, evidence-based and up-to-date warning that preventable illness and widening health inequalities in the UK are being driven by profit-driven actions of global corporations which focus on selling products that are harmful to health. The articles highlight how industries such as tobacco, alcohol, food, pharmaceuticals, and gambling foster conflicts of interest with key stakeholders—including scientists, clinicians, academics, regulators, and charities. The special issue urges decision-makers to acknowledge and address the systemic harm these profit-driven industries inflict on public health.
Of particular interest are two articles relating to infant and young child feeding:
Helfer B, Henke-Ciążyńska K, Boyle RJ: Commercial influences on infant and young child feeding summarised in this which describes the three key domains of commercial milk formula industry influence and their negative consequences
This article describes how the Health Advocates for Sponsorship-Free Feeding (HASFF) working group, convened by the World Health Organization, developed a range of tools and resources to support and encourage other HCPAs to end sponsorship from the CMF industry as a practical solution to address some of the challenges.
Two articles relate to (ultra processed and / or junk) food in general:
Lord Bethell explains how the “junk food industry” plays an intrinsic role in creating the personal identity of people in the UK, contributing to the cultures of the country and relationship-building. He further describes how the industry works hard to promote this connection, using established techniques drawn from the political playbook (e.g., resistance to foreign competition, nostalgia marketing, product placement in national media, sponsorship of national events, etc.)
Prof van Tulleken describes that, despite the global pandemic of diet-related disease being increasingly recognised as commerciogenic (i.e., driven by financial incentives in the food system which drive the marketing and consumption of harmful food, including UPF), the UK policy response remains compromised by widespread conflicts of interest.
Authors of all articles in the issue provide many and varied evidence-based solutions to the challenge of commercial influence of public health policy. There is a clear common thread: all solutions involve ending the conflicts of interest between those who create policy and those with a financial interest in the subject of the policy, which is a matter that we actively advocate for at First Steps Nutrition Trust.
We have compiled a comprehensive list of suggestions for what healthcare professionals can do if they identify conflicts of interest, especially relating to challenging the inappropriate marketing of breastmilk substitutes or commercial milk formula targeting health professionals. See the suggestions provided on the First Steps Nutrition Trust website here. Please feel free to reach out to us if you have any questions or concerns:vicky@firststepsnutrition.org or katie@firststepsnutrition.org
The Food Standards Agency (FSA) has updated its guidance for the consumption of slush ice drinks (‘slushies’). Previous guidance recommended that “slush ice drinks containing glycerol should not be sold to children aged 4 or below”. The guidance on slush ice drinks containing glycerol(updated on 16 July 2025) has increased the age limit, stating “slush ice drinks that contain glycerol shouldn’t be consumed by children under 7, and no refills for under 10” (i.e., children between 7-10 should have a maximum of one 350ml slushie per day).
This is updated guidance is because ‘slushies’ can contain the ingredient glycerol (E422) as a substitute for sugar, and this additive is used at a level required to create the ‘slush’ effect. Glycerol can cause adverse effects like headaches and sickness in young children and in high quantities or severe cases, even more serious side effects. More information is available here and here.
Nanny Care has changed its branding and recipe as of May 2025.
The nutritional composition changes include the following:
The addition of 2’-FL, a permissible but not mandatory or necessary ingredient
Switching its fish oil-based DHA for a plant-based DHA
A small increase in calcium
A small decrease in vitamin C
For detailed nutritional composition information designed for use by healthcare professionals, you can visit our Infant Milk Info site here. This has information for both the old and new tins.
It is vital to note that the old and new products both comply with the nutrition composition requirements for infant formula, and that all infant formula are nutritionally sufficient for non-breastfed and partially breastfed babies. Infant formula can support adequate growth and development but does not impart the health benefits of breastfeeding.
The new tins are smaller, at 800g rather than 900g, and Nannycare has confirmed that the prices will remain the same. Therefore, the cost per feed will increase slightly. For conversations with families about the cost of infant formula, our infographic on the ‘Lowest Cost Infant Formula’ may be of use.
As we have highlighted in our recent report on Current formula marketing in the UK (covered in BFLG-UK news below), we are disappointed to see that Nannycare’s new labelling is less compliant with the law than its previous branding. The labels of the first infant milk and the follow-on milk remain similar. Additionally, the labels include more claims (and also intangible and non-verifiable messages). This indicates that current enforcement mechanisms do not work and that stronger, enforced regulations are needed to level the playing field for businesses and protect infant health.
Our research paper published earlier this year highlights how infant formula and follow-on formula labels from many companies routinely fail to comply with existing labelling regulations: only half of the 57 labels sampled complied with UK Law and even less with the Code.
New report: Current formula marketing practices in the UK: Why stronger rules are needed
On 17 July 2025, First Steps Nutrition Trust published a comprehensive report documenting the pervasive and evolving marketing practices by commercial milk formula manufacturers and retailers in the UK to show why stronger, enforced regulations are needed to protect all babies and families in the UK. We summarised the report in a 3 page brief, pictured above.
While we are waiting on the government response to the Competition and Markets Authority’s recommendations on the formula market, we are observing in real-time how the CMF manufacturers, with well-resourced marketing teams can be agile and responsive to any messaging that may criticise their products and their marketing practices, adapting their marketing strategies as a way of reassuring consumers. This approach is unhelpful to parents and caregivers, and clearly not aligned with the recommendations from the CMA's market study. The marketing examples are presented according to the various CMA recommendations (acknowledging that some examples of inappropriate marketing are relevant to more than one of the CMA's recommendations) and include a range of manufacturers, brands and practices, all of which are current (from June and July 2025).
Some extracts: "Politicians and campaign groups are urging the Government to take action to restrict the marketing practices of baby formula companies, accusing them of “doubling down” on advertising that “hinders parents making informed choices”.
"Patti Rundall, who has been campaigning for safe infant feeding since 1980 and is the policy director of Baby Milk Action told The i Paper that no matter how subtle, marketing messages “really matter. We think it’s small, but it penetrates. If parents don’t have all the other information that tells them why this is nonsense, then they’re going to believe it".
“Too many families are currently being let down by the infant formula industry while the Government stands by and watches,” Jess Brown-Fuller MP said. “It’s immoral... Now it’s time for Wes Streeting to act. Accept the CMA’s recommendations. Implement them fully. And show that building the ‘healthiest generation ever’ starts with making sure every child, regardless of background, has a fair start in life.”
This year’s annual Unicef UK BFI conference is in person at the Telford International conference centre. From confronting corporate power, the latest research on the microbiome, and updates on the Infant Feeding Survey, the programme features a diverse range of talks by renowned professionals and researchers. Information on the programme and speakers can be found here and you can book your tickets here. See you there!
