The Challenge in the UK

The last UK-wide Infant Feeding Survey (2010) found:
• Exclusive breastfeeding at six weeks: 24% in England, 17% in Wales, 13% in Northern Ireland
• Exclusive breastfeeding at six months: around 1%

Shereen Fisher, Programme Director for the Baby Friendly Initiative at UNICEF UK, explains:
“The evidence is clear: when women are supported, they are more likely to breastfeed for longer, with lifelong benefits for both mother and child. Yet too many stop before they want to, often due to a lack of support or exposure to aggressive marketing that undermines their confidence.”

Setting Standards for Infant Feeding

To improve these figures, UNICEF UK has created a set of evidence-based standards for:
• Maternity services
• Health visiting services
• Community and hospital-based children’s services
• Universities (midwifery and health visiting programmes)

Services that meet these standards through a staged accreditation process are awarded Baby Friendly accreditation.

The standards include:
• No promotion of breastmilk substitutes by staff
• Support for pregnant women to understand the benefits of breastfeeding
• Helping mothers and babies start feeding soon after birth
• Encouraging skin-to-skin contact after delivery, which supports bonding, milk production, and recovery

The BFI also provides training and personalised support for staff, plus guidance for families who bottle feed, covering safe preparation and responsive feeding.

Overcoming Breastfeeding Challenges

Many parents experience hurdles in the early days:
• Difficulty with positioning and latch
• Tongue-tie affecting feeding
• Concerns over milk supply
• Fatigue and the time demands of breastfeeding

Support is crucial. Midwives, health visitors, and breastfeeding specialists can offer practical help and reassurance, often making the difference between stopping early and continuing.

Tackling Aggressive Marketing

Some parents choose to use formula, and in those cases, unbiased, evidence-based information is essential.

A 2022 WHO/UNICEF report found that 84% of UK women had been exposed to formula milk marketing—much of it in breach of international standards. Misleading marketing can undermine confidence in breastfeeding, promote myths about breastmilk, and influence feeding decisions in ways that aren’t always in the best interest of the baby.

The Impact of Baby Friendly

Since the Baby Friendly Initiative began, any breastfeeding at six weeks has risen in the UK from 48% in 2005 to 55% today.

Scotland’s success is particularly striking:
• Breastfeeding at six months rose from 32% in 2010 to 43% in 2017
• All maternity and community services have achieved Baby Friendly accreditation

This progress highlights the value of a national infant feeding strategy.

Why Higher Breastfeeding Rates Matter

Increasing breastfeeding rates in the UK could:
• Reduce common childhood illnesses (ear, chest, gut infections)
• Save the NHS up to £50 million per year in treatment costs
• Improve long-term public health outcomes for mothers and children

This World Breastfeeding Week

From Friday 1 August to Thursday 7 August, we celebrate World Breastfeeding Week—a time to learn more about the benefits of breastfeeding and the role of initiatives like BFI.

Find out more:
• UNICEF UK’s Baby Friendly Initiative: https://www.unicef.org.uk/babyfriendly/
• WHO: Breastfeeding recommendations: https://www.who.int/health-topics/breastfeeding

Why Medela is making this change

Aligning with the WHO Code

Medela’s statement emphasizes that by discontinuing bottles and teats, they can more fully align with the WHO Code, which discourages marketing of breast‑milk substitutes—including feeding bottles and formula—to safeguard informed feeding decisions free from undue commercial influence

Focusing on breastfeeding support

By removing these products, Medela asserts it can deepen its collaboration with healthcare and lactation communities and dedicate more resources to supporting breast pumps, storage systems, breast‑care, and specialty feeding tools—the items they believe most directly enable breastfeeding success

Mixed reactions—from optimism to concern

Parents speak out

The decision triggered strong reactions on forums like Reddit, where parents questioned how it aligns with pumping routines:

“They’re discontinuing feeding bottles and not necessarily the bottles that are attached to the pumps… so what are we to put the pumped milk in?”

Other voices speculated that the move may be driven more by commercial logic than pure ethics:

“This is almost certainly an economic decision couched in feel‑good language… bottles simply don’t make them money…”

Expert perspective

Feeding specialists consulted by The Bump conveyed disappointment over the messaging. Registered dietitian Jessica Enderle described the change as “sad, confusing and disappointing,” especially for parents who relied on Medela bottles as a lifeline in their pumping journey

Danielle Facey, founder of The Breastfeeding Mentor, initially appreciated the ethical tone but added that many wondered whether profitability and brand positioning played a major role

Lactation consultant Francie Webb welcomed the discussion as a prompt to reassess what inclusive feeding support means today. “Not just support people who are breastfeeding, but those breastfeeding and bottle‑feeding or combo‑feeding,” she said

Medela responds: balancing compassion with clarity

Medela emphasized that:

• Their core support for parents’ feeding choices remains unchanged, regardless of method
• The policy shift doesn’t affect storage bottles or pump-compatible accessories, which the brand will continue to offer.
• Hospital pump kits remain unaffected—for institutional use, hospital‑chosen feeding bottles continue as before

Angela Lang, Medela’s Director of Medical Affairs & Clinical Education, acknowledged emotional responses while affirming her support as a lactation consultant and mother who pumped herself: “We at Medela are totally 100% supportive of any and all decisions parents make about how they feed their babies … it’s just about how we can best support breastfeeding.”

What this means for families and professionals

Broader context and reflections

Historical context of the WHO Code

The WHO Code’s roots go back to the early 1980s, designed to protect breastfeeding by limiting marketing of formula and feeding bottles. Over decades, organisations like SafelyFed Canada have critiqued Medela’s marketing practices—particularly around the Calma teat—citing misleading claims and sponsorships as inconsistent with the Code’s intent

Medela’s past efforts toward compliance

Since 2020, Medela has publicly introduced “marketing guidelines” stating it will no longer use language or imagery that idealises bottles or suggests parity with breastfeeding. These included no demonstrations of infants bottle feeding or claims like “as good as breastfeeding”

Is this a strategic rebrand?

Critics suggest this latest shift may also serve Medela’s positioning: doubling down on what it sees as its core business—breastfeeding tools—while distancing from lower-margin bottle products.

How parents and professionals can navigate this change

If you relied on Medela bottles:

• Look into pump-compatible alternatives from reputable brands like Lansinoh, Evenflo or Pigeon.
• Consider adaptation kits, disposable adapter rings or storage bottles that suit your existing pump.

If you’re a healthcare or lactation professional:

• Reinforce that breastfeeding and bottle feeding can coexist.
• Help families transition smoothly if they’ve used Medela bottles—especially if supply, comfort, or combo feeding is a concern.
• Stay informed about brand policy shifts and how they impact what you recommend.

In a broader sense:

• Encourage inclusive feeding discussions that support a variety of parent goals and circumstances.
• Advocate for messaging that emphasises caring support—regardless of feeding method.

Final thoughts: a complex but intentional step

Medela’s decision to discontinue standalone feeding bottles and teats is undeniably bold—and the mixed reaction shows just how central these tools are in many families’ feeding journeys. The brand frames it as a move grounded in ethical alignment, scientific focus, and commitment to breastfeeding success—but for many parents, the emotional and logistical impact feels more personal and immediate.

Where warnings of exclusivity arise, Medela counters with reassurance: “We support all feeding decisions” and remain dedicated to evolving alongside breastfeeding best practices and parental needs.

This transition—marked by intention, ambiguity and debate—now invites us all to sharpen our vision of what feeding support looks like: comprehensive, evidence-based, compassionate, and inclusive.

Most importantly, it reaffirms one universal truth: every parent deserves the tools and respect to feed their baby safely, confidently—and on their own terms.