According to a comment on Jameel’s post by an Agel representative, a month’s supply of one type of supplement costs NIS 1000, or about $250.

In related news, Haaretz reports that an Israeli woman who used and marketed Herbalife products is suing the company over  damage to her liver.

An Israeli woman filed a NIS 2.5 million lawsuit yesterday against Herbalife Israel, claiming that the companies’ products had caused her chronic liver disease, with the risk of future liver failure necessitating a transplant.

In her suit, submitted to district court, Mali Nir, 54, alleged that products marketed by the California-based nutritional-supplements and weight-control company and its Israel affiliate as natural and promoting “health for life” destroyed her health.

The suit claims that she “was never advised that consuming the companies’ products could cause irreversible liver damage, and that they could even be poisonous to the body.”

Nir said she began taking Herbalife supplements in 1998 and even signed on as an Herbalife distributor. She says that the first sign of a problem surfaced in 2001, when she began to experience fatigue and weakness. She then discovered that she had serious liver damage.

When she stopped taking the supplements, her liver function reportedly returned to normal, but with indications of cirrhosis of the liver, along with problems that included pain, chronic fatigue, weakness and insomnia.

Attached to the suit was a medical opinion from Hadassah Hospital internist Dr. Mayer Brezis. In it Brezis stated that research literature from as far back as the 1990s reported the risk of liver damage from herbal products, and that there was a high probability that the Herbalife products caused Nir’s liver problems.

The suit also alleges that Israeli researchers documented 12 cases of severe liver damage similar to Nir’s in patients who used Herbalife products like the ones she took.

Not everything advertised as natural is truly natural.  And not everything natural is good for you. No matter how convincing the pitch, companies and stores that market “health” products are usually more interested in selling than in protecting your health.

Tweet This Post

Why Baby’s First Gift Shouldn’t Be Formula from the Hospital
By Hannah Katsman

Soft drinks. Fast foods. Cigarettes.

Companies that market these products are well-known for targeting children and teens in order to develop “brand loyalty.”

But the campaign to capture the taste buds of future consumers begins even earlier–in the hospital nursery, where formula companies use aggressive methods to ensure that babies’ first taste of artificial milk comes early and bears the name of their company.

They know that parents are most likely to continue feeding the brand served to babies in the hospital.

What’s the problem with formula, and why is this a “green” issue?

Ironically, early introduction of formula and a diet of “junk” food are both implicated in increasing the incidence of diseases such as diabetes and obesity.

Formula companies insist that they do not want to undermine breastfeeding–they merely want to compete for their share of the formula market for women who cannot or choose not to breastfeed. Sound familiar?

Cigarette companies have long claimed that they do not encourage smoking and only want current smokers to switch brands. Most governments reject this claim and severely restrict the way tobacco companies market their products.

Breastfeeding is an easy target. It’s free, already under attack, earns little profit for anyone and therefore has virtually no corporate funds backing it. But just one bottle of formula compromises a baby’s immune system and increases the risk of illness in the short and long term.

A bottle of formula implies that formula is endorsed by the hospital, and worse, sends the not-so-subtle message that the mother’s own milk is not good or plentiful enough. And just like it only takes a few cigarettes to become addicted, early introduction of formula can lower milk supply and is associated with early weaning.

Israel and the WHO Code

The World Health Organization (WHO) recognized the deleterious effects of formula marketing on the health of babies and mothers and developed the WHO Code of Marketing Breastmilk Substitutes in 1974. The aim of the Code is to

. . . contribute to the provision of safe and adequate nutrition for infants, by the protection and promotion of breast-feeding, and by ensuring the proper use of breast-milk substitutes, when these are necessary, on the basis of adequate information and through appropriate marketing and distribution.

The Code prohibits companies from targeting pregnant women, parents and health-care workers with free samples and promotional and “educational” materials.

As a signatory, Israel is obligated to enforce these prohibitions. There has been some progress: Gift bags of formula samples are no longer given out to mothers as they leave the hospital, and formula advertising and samples have largely disappeared from Tipat Halav, the government-sponsored well-baby clinics. Yet serious infractions occur with the tacit approval of the health ministry.

Formula Companies Target Public Israeli Hospitals

In January 2008, Ynet investigated the relationship between Israeli maternity wards and the two large formula importers, Materna and Similac. (The third company, Remedia, withdrew from the market after a lack of vitamin B-1 in a batch of soy formula led to the deaths of three babies.)

Despite the fact that the hospitals are publicly owned, the hospitals and the health ministry refused to release data regarding their agreements.

Ynet reported that every three years hospitals submit a tender for their supply of infant formula. Usually, an institution tries to buy a product at the lowest possible price. But in the case of formula the companies actually pay hospitals for stocking their products exclusively. Reportedly these contracts earn hundreds of thousands of dollars of shekalim for the public hospitals, and at least one hospital received valuable state-of-the-art equipment.

Others received outings for its staff, linens, and funds to hire additional “lactation consultants,” creating a serious conflict of interest. In return companies earned the right to provide a constant supply of pre-mixed bottles of formula with the company’s name and logo in large letters.

Ninety percent want to nurse, only 70% do

According to health ministry statistics, 90% of pregnant women intend to nurse, but a full 70% of babies receive their first bottle in the hospital. It’s easy for a nurse to offer a bottle to a mother who has even a mild concern about her baby’s feeding patterns. Worse, babies often receive formula against parents’ wishes. Hospitals allow a situation where overworked staff suggest formula instead of ensuring that trained staff sit with the mother, answer her questions and help her breastfeed. But Israel’s health-care system may be acting against its own interests by accepting formula money–one study showed that the it costs huge sums to treat health problems of formula-fed babies in the first year alone.

Big business must be kept out of the public health system through legislation, and Israel should not permit infant-formula companies to influence health-care decisions relating to newborns. Parents deserve accurate, unbiased information about the risks of formula. The health ministry must ensure that all mothers have easy access to instruction, information, and their babies–without input from self-interested parties.

Often there are questions about whether a newborn is getting enough to eat. The appropriate medical response is to evaluate the situation, and, if necessary, encourage the mother to express colostrum–her own antibody-rich milk. Formula should be reserved for cases when it is truly needed. Stopping formula gifts to hospitals is a critical step in ensuring that our babies get the healthy start they deserve.

Reprinted with permission from Green Prophet.

Related:
Babies and Breastfeeding: What Did You Not Know but Wish You Had? Thanks to the readers who shared moving stories in the comments.
Breastfeeding and Judaism
Guest Post on Crunchy Domestic Goddess: Diane Wiessinger in Israel on Breastfeeding Language

Tweet This Post

But the advertisement appeared on the front page of Haaretz‘s Gallery section.

The copy is over the top, but it seems that religious women aren’t the only ones having a hard time finding clothes. Anyway that outfit sure beats these.

Tweet This Post

Still, I am materialistic enough to appreciate a new toy now and then. A few weeks ago I agreed to write a product review for Mom Central (they are the ones who sent me Crawling–if you like freebies go over there and sign up). The toy manufacturer, Cranium (pretentious I know), makes educational games and puzzles for the preschool set. I had just about given up on our package (it sat in Israeli customs office for two weeks) when we got the notice from the post office. My little girl was so excited she carried the 3lb box most of the way home. And we weren’t even charged customs tax.

“Let’s Go to the Zoo: Seek and Find Puzzle” turned out to meet my criteria for a good game.

1. No obnoxious pictures. The animals and people pictured were pleasant and colorful, and dressed in standards appropriate for your average Jewish family.
2. No characters (i.e. Disney) that are actually marketing ploys. At least I didn’t recognize any.
3. Excellent quality. The 24 cardboard pieces are thick and fit easily together. The box is also sturdy–important if you want a game to last a long time–and the pieces fit easily inside.
4. It works on different levels. Kids can make the puzzle, find objects, color, or practice letters and numbers.
5. More than one child can play at a time.
6. It completely engrossed my children, aged nearly 4 and 6.5, for well over an hour. Occasionally they needed help finding some of the objects.
7. Once they are familiar with the puzzle, the seek-and-find aspect will no longer challenge them, but they can still do the puzzle. Afterward we will pass it on to another family; it should last years.

The instructions come with two spiral pads.The easy level asks the child to find colors and animals, while the advanced level incorporates letters and numbers (find something starting with Z, find 5 penguins). The child circles the objects with the erasable marker, included. The instructions suggest other ideas like finding shapes, drawing on the puzzle, making animal sounds, or bringing the spiral pad to the real-life zoo.

We don’t own many puzzles because most don’t meet the first three criteria above, and they take up too much space in proportion to frequency of use. I imagine this toy is expensive and while I wouldn’t have bought it for ourselves, I would consider it if I needed a special gift.

We received another Cranium toy called, “Let’s Play Count and Cook Game.” To my daughter’s great disappointment, we are saving it for her fourth birthday next week.

Tweet This Post

In recent years the alonim have become an industry. Publishers recognize this successful, inexpensive way of marketing to a relatively affluent community. There are alonim geared toward children, women, Daf Hayomi students, and others. Most have have some kind of political or social agenda.

They all discuss the weekly Torah portion, usually in light of whatever agenda they are pushing, and contain columns on the topics of the day.

The onslaught of the alonim has caused several problems. First, people tend to read them in the middle of prayers or speeches. Second, most are chock full of ads, and reading the ads may not be permissible on the Sabbath. This issue, of course, is not new, as it applies to all newspapers.

The third, most serious, concern is that they cause headaches for the religious councils operating genizot. According to Jewish law, holy books and papers may not simply be thrown away; they are collected and buried in what is known as a genizah. The massive Cairo Genizah, discovered in an Egyptian synagogue, was the source of several centuries worth of historical documents which contributed greatly to our understanding of medieval Jewish life in Egypt.

A genizah was manageable in the days when books were scarce. Since we now print and photocopy freely, collecting the material and finding space in cemeteries for the genizot has become more challenging. The tens of thousands of copies of alonim, all of which have kedusha (holy status) and cannot be thrown away, have simply overrun the genizot. I read that up to 90% of the genizot now contain alonim. In our town, funding for genizot was cancelled and a sign requests a donation for depositing the material at a box near the local synagogue.

I confess that we contribute to the problem; my children come home each week with as many as a dozen alonim.

One of the biggest, running about 12 pages, is called Maayanei Hayeshua. Maayanei Hayeshua is an outreach organization based in Jerusalem. In it Rabbi Shlomo Aviner writes engagingly about many different topics including dating, serving in the army, and Torah study. The alon contains a section for women, often including an interview of a female personality from the community. One subject was a young and successful shadchanit, an expert at making matches. Others were the founder of Binyan Shalem, an organization devoted to strengthening the family in the religious Zionist community and Shoshana Hayman, founder of the Life Center promoting attachment parenting in Israel.

A relative newcomer, Argaman (royal purple), was obviously founded in order to target female consumers. Occasionally we also find Kolech (your feminine voice), produced by the forum for religious women, with its feminist agenda. Argaman is more mainstream. Besides Shoshana Hayman’s regular column, my favorite is called “Mother-in-Law’s Corner.” Initially it consisted of overheard diatribes by daughters-in-law about how their husband’s mothers favored their daughters over their daughters-in-law. For example: “When I was sick and needed a babysitter she was too busy, but when my sister-in-law wanted to go overseas my mother-in-law ran over with ready-made meals. When we visit, she gets the bigger room and we have to sleep in a hole.” It took a few weeks before I was certain that the author didn’t approve of this kind of carping.

I always wanted to ask whether these daughters-in-law noticed the same kind of treatment by their own mothers. Did it bother them if their mothers babysat more for their children than for their brothers’? I now like tease my kids about the unequal treatment my sons and daughters should expect a few years down the road, when God willing they will visit with their own families.

I also enjoy Olam Katan (small world), geared toward teenagers through young adults. I don’t think it’s published by any particular organization, but it has a clear right-wing ideological bent. It annoyed us a few weeks ago by publishing several articles extolling the virtues of religious zionist yeshivot ketanot, high schools with very limited secular studies (i.e. no bagrut/matriculation certificate). My husband thinks that some people in our community hope that the graduates of these institutions will be more likely to become gedolei hador, great rabbis of the next generation. He doesn’t think it will work. To be fair, that issue also contained an opinion stressing the importance of secular education for rabbis.

I thought that being a religious Zionist is more than just teaching our children to respect Zionism and the State of Israel. I thought it means raising them to be able to be part of both the secular world and the world of Torah, not to limit cross off many options at the age of 12 or 14 when they are too young to know where their interests and talents lie. I want my children to be able to contribute to Israel’s society and culture, and support their own families.

This post was inspired by an alon that collected several rabbinic opinions about the going on three weeks long high school teachers’ strike, but as you can see I got sidetracked. Let’s hope the strike ends before I get to post about it.

Tweet This Post

Direct marketing to first graders is assur (prohibited) in my book. I don’t care how good the magazine is (at only NIS 395/year). What chutzpah to distract my child from school with this kind of stuff.

Tweet This Post

Who can complain about a company that will give needy mothers free formula, in exchange for stuff that would go in the garbage anyway?

Well, I can.

The campaign is a blatant violation of the International WHO Code of Marketing Breastmilk Substitutes, which Israel signed and is supposedly committed to upholding.

Let me start by saying that I support the right of every family to feed their babies as they choose. Babies should not starve, chas ve-shalom, because a mother chooses not to breastfeed. If a poor family needs formula for their baby, they should get it. Even affluent mothers have a hard time getting the information and support they need to breastfeed their babies; disadvantaged families have it worse, and their babies shouldn’t suffer.

But the manufacturer’s motives are far from pure here. What invest so much in a campaign that includes full-page ads in charedi newspapers, email blitzes, flyers passed out in schools (including my daughter’s junior high) and who knows where else? I don’t want to give them ideas but I bet they have youth groups collecting the scoops too. Here’s why they do it:

1. Public relations. Everyone who hears about this campaign gets a warm, fuzzy feeling about M*. When they have a baby, they remember that M* does mitzvot (nice alliteration too).
2. It’s a great way to advertise among young women, their future customers.
3. I can guarantee you that the chesed organization does not check to see if a family is breastfeeding before donating the formula. In fact, M* is happier to donate to families with nursing babies, because the family will be tempted to use the “free” formula and thus undermine breastfeeding by lowering her milk supply. Maybe the organization will kick in at that point with more formula, maybe not. One thing is certain–no one will ask the baby.
4. Current customers will buy more M* than they would have otherwise, in order to collect scoops. That’s how public relations works.
5. If M* really wanted to help poor families, they would donate the formula without collecting the scoops and making a big campaign. At the very least, they would accept scoops from other brands.
6. If M* really wanted to help babies, they wouldn’t pay hundreds of thousands of shekels to distribute their products freely in every hospital and pediatric clinic, a practice detrimental to breastfeeding success.

Breastfeeding is free. It helps mothers develop a loving relationship with their babies. It helps mothers and babies stay healthy, and working mothers who pump miss fewer days because of illness. Every mother, no matter her circumstances, has the right to correct information and support. No conglomerate is looking out for breastfeeding; the Code‘s purpose is to even the playing field so that breastfeeding has a chance. The paternalistic assumption that poor mothers can’t or won’t breastfeed harms families. I have a friend who was in bad financial straits. Despite the fact that she was nursing, everyone kept trying to buy her formula.

Just for the record: Nursing mothers do need to consume more calories. However, an extra bowl of oatmeal is a lot cheaper than a day’s worth of formula.

A neighbor once approached me to help buy formula for a family with newborn twins. The hospital staff had convinced the mother to take dry-up pills in the hospital. I mean, everyone knows that no one has enough milk for twins, right? When the mother came got home and found she couldn’t afford the formula, the neighbor approached various organizations (including the one above) but nothing materialized. I offered to help the mother start breastfeeding again as this is possible even after those pills, but she never contacted me. (In case you’re wondering, I did give a donation.)

It’s time to wake up and acknowledge the detrimental effect of this kind of promotion on babies and families in Israel.

Baby-friendly hospitals.

Tweet This Post

Marketing activities in preschools have now become regulated. Tadamm Focused Marketing recently received a concession to manage marketing and advertising campaigns in private preschools and day-care centers.

Here’s what will be happening:

“One of the restrictions we adopted is not to allow marketing activity that involves personal contact with the children,” Eilam explains. “Whereas previously a commercial company could send a marketing representative to a preschool, now the teachers will hand out any marketing materials. Any company interested in operating in the preschools will have to present a genuine educational agenda. In the case of Eden Springs, for example, there is a discussion of the importance of sufficient water intake.”

The most recent marketing campaign that annoyed parents of toddlers was one by Hogla-Kimberly [a diaper/toilet paper manufacturer], which sent representatives dressed as Labrador puppies (the mascot of the Lily brand) into the preschools to talk to the children about personal hygiene.

Tadamm is going to be making a lot of money. Supposedly the marketing material will only be on the bulletin boards at the entrance to gan and not inside the gan itself, where the children play. Allow me to be the slightest bit skeptical that this will be enforced; every Tipat Chalav and pediatrician’s clinic is full of stickers, charts and posters with formula company logos, despite the Health Ministry’s restrictions on this practice. Advertising representatives dressed up as puppies might have caused a backlash (and I suspect the main issue was that the toddlers were frightened of them) but subtle and not-so-subtle marketing techniques are not of concern to most preschool teachers and parents.

In the gan of one of my older children, the teachers would pass out fancy workbooks with a note asking parents to return them if they didn’t want to buy them. Naturally once the children saw them they wanted them, and often wrote in them (not that I would feel responsible for ruining something that someone gave my child without my permission). The next time I noticed that my child had gotten such a workbook I tripped over myself to give it back to the ganenet right away. It should be interesting to see what “educational materials” these companies will come up with in order to get their foot in the door of this lucrative market.

Tweet This Post