Recently, store brand infant formulas won a victory when a United States Circuit Court upheld a $13.5 million false advertising claim against Enfamil maker Mead Johnson. The store brand infant formula business argued that Enfamil's advertisements claiming superiority to store brand formulas is false and misleading. When, in fact, it was found that the store brand formulas have the same nutrients at the same levels as Enfamil. For some this isn't surprising because of other comparisons between national and store brands.
The Enfamil company had been previously restrained two times because of communicating and releasing misleading advertising, but they continued to do so even after the warning. The store formula company proved that they cannot compete in the marketplace against Mead Johnson unless the negative advertising was discontinued. The court determined that both the national and store brand suppliers should have equal opportunities to compete fairly in the marketplace without tainted marketing and advertisements.
Have you ever seen the Mead Johnson advertisements that are referred to in this case? If so, did they influence your infant formula purchases? Take a moment to share your experiences in the comments.
To find out more information click on the link .