The International Code of Marketing of Breast-Milk Substitutes is an important instrument for minimising conflicts of interest and protecting breastfeeding. However, it is not always easy to put the rules of the International Code into practice.
The scope of the Code covers breast milk substitutes (all milk formulas intended for use in the first 36 months), complementary foods and beverages intended for use in the first 6 months (180 days) of life, as well as bottles and teats. All companies that manufacture and/or sell such products are considered producers and/or distributors. Any collaboration with such companies as advertising partners is considered a violation of the Code.
Medela has now announced that it will discontinue the manufacture and distribution of bottles and teats in order to regain its status as a Code-compliant company.
This development is welcome and should be strongly encouraged.
Like any other professional journal, Lactation & Breastfeeding is also looking for advertising partners. This raises the question: Can we suddenly invite a company that, for years, has been considered an unsuitable advertising partner to advertise in our professional journal again? This is not an easy question — after all, the products in question are still available through intermediaries. Moreover, the relationship of trust has been heavily strained over many years.
The situation is new to us, so we are looking for suitable solutions based on how other major breastfeeding organisations are handling it.
ABM
In light of recent events, the Academy of Breastfeeding Medicine (ABM) issued a statement on this topic at the end of August, after advertisements from Medela appeared in its official journal, Breastfeeding Medicine, in July 2025.
“We acknowledge that Medela has publicly stated that it will comply with the WHO Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes. This step is encouraging; however, ABM maintains the widely adopted practice by leading breastfeeding organisations of observing a four-year transition period before organisations that previously did not comply with the Code are considered for sponsorship, partnerships or advertising opportunities. This transition period allows time to ensure consistent and sustainable compliance with the Code, build trust within the breastfeeding community and protect families from potential conflicts of interest.” (ABM Statement: Medela Advertising in Breastfeeding Medicine and Our Commitment to the WHO Code)
It is also noted that ABM does not normally influence the content or advertising in Breastfeeding Medicine, but steps are being taken to ensure that ABM’s values are reflected in the journal in the future.
IBLCE
IBLCE requires CERPs providers to ensure that continuing education is free of conflicts of interest in accordance with the International Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes and subsequent World Health Assembly (WHA) resolutions. Since CERPs can be earned by reading Lactation & Breastfeeding and completing a subsequent test, we believe it is particularly important to seek the opinion of IBLCE.
In response to an inquiry to the European office of IBLCE in early October 2025, we were informed that IBLCE is currently monitoring the situation. At present, events sponsored by this company are still not eligible to award CERPs.
Conclusion
We welcome all measures that support breastfeeding and strengthen the Code, including when companies commit themselves to upholding it. However, it takes time to rebuild lost trust. It is therefore understandable that organisations such as ABM and IBLCE are still cautious when a company returns to Code compliance. For us as a CERPs provider, it is clear that Medela is currently not an eligible advertising partner.