Pfizer, Infant Formula And High Levels Of Aluminum
12 CommentsBy Ed Silverman // September 7th, 2010 // 8:54 am
A new study finds that the aluminum content of infant formula remains unacceptably high and one of the manufacturers cited is SMA Nutrition, a company based in the UK and owned by Pfizer. The issue is significant, of course, for public health reasons, but also for Pfizer, which Wall Street projects will derive a growing proportion of revenue from its nutrition business over the next few years.
The study, which was published in BMC Pediatrics, examined 15 infant formulas, including powered and ready-made liquid formulas based on cow’s milk and a soy-based product, for babies at various ages. The researchers found that concentrations of aluminium in the milk formulas varied from 200 to 700 micrograms per liter and would cause up to 600 ug of aluminium to be ingested per day. Put another way, the aluminium content was between 10 and 40 times higher than the aluminium content of breast milk, which is usually 15 to 30 microgram per liter.
“These concentrations are all several times higher than are allowed in drinking water,” say the Keele University researchers who authored the paper, in a statement. “They are clearly too high for human consumption and certainly too high for consumption by such a vulnerable group as pre-term and term infants.”
But why are such high levels of aluminum found? The researchers say manufacturers point to contamination, which is likely due to equipment used in production, but the issue really isn’t new. “The aluminum content of infant formulas measured…are not significantly different to historical values and this lack of improvement in lowering their content suggests either that the manufacturers are not monitoring the aluminium content of their products or that the manufacturers are not concerned at these levels of contamination.”
The issue will remain a challenge for Pfizer, which last year garnered $191 million from its nutritional business (although this actually reflects only the last few months of 2009 by which time Pfizer bought the Wyeth nutrition biz). However, analysts generally see this as a growing source of needed revenue. In a recent report, JP Morgan’s Chris Schott forecast nutritionals will reach $3.1 billion by 2015 (after hitting $1.8 billion this year thanks to the Wyeth acqusition), and the growth will come as Pfizer’s core pharma business deteriorates. “We continue to see Pfizer increasingly diversifying into non-traditional pharma businesses which, by their nature, are less exposed to ‘cliff-type generic erosion, and we anticipate traditional primary care revenues will continue to decline to less than 25 percent of sales over time” from 34 percent earlier this year.
UPDATE: A Pfizer spokesman send us this: “The safety of Pfizer’s infant health products is our number one priority. We follow stringent international guidelines regarding the production of infant formula, and we adhere to regulatory limits for aluminum established in the countries in which we operate. We do not add aluminum to any of our infant health products. Pfizer is carefully reviewing the authors’ methodology, results and conclusions of the small study recently published in BMC Pediatrics.”
AnneS
Nothing to worry about - aluminum in baby food, aluminum in vaccines, it’s all good for baby’s brain
Chris Exley
I am the lead author of this research. What Pfizer and the other infant formula manufacturers are not saying is that there are no international guidelines for how much aluminium there should be in infant formulas.
What remains unusual is that despite our role in demonstrating that there is a significant problem there has not been any comment at all from any of the food regulatory bodies such as the FSA in the UK or the FDA in the US.
The levels of aluminium we found in all infant formulas and especially that of a formula for preterm infants are too high for human consumption. It is time that someone took responsibility for reducing them to more acceptable levels.
JaT
Got WIC?
Discussing this in my household this morning we quickly went from safety to cost to WIC.
As I understand it (very little quick searching), while WIC is a federal program, state governments contract with formula makers for the WIC program. Have you seen what that stuff costs? We wondered which came first - the cost or the contracts?
Searching2000
And for those of us who have never heard of WIC:
http://www.fns.usda.gov/wic/
Beth
One has to wonder what would happen if the FDA ceased to exist due to a lack of public and industry funding. Would there be any material difference in the safety of our food and drugs? Doesn’t seem too likely….
Suzanne
re: WIC - Back when I was buying formula, I stopped in a Walmart on the bad side of town and was shocked that it was $4 more per can than what I had been paying at ‘my’ Walmart. I mentioned the difference to a store employee, saying it didn’t seem fair to mark it up in an area where they could least afford it. Oh no, she said, nobody around here pays for it, they get WIC.
Well, somebody is paying for it.
Josh
Believe me…the infant formula makers are not big fans of WIC either….
pharmavet®
Formula makers aren’t known for ethics; check out the sorry sage of companies selling powdered formula to developing countries where it was mixed with contaminated water and put in unclean baby bottles:
http://www.nytimes.com/1981/05/22/business/formula-companies-confident.html?sec=health
JaT
Does it seem reasonable that a government which is providing formula would go after the makers for safety issues?
Considering Chris Exley’s comment…
Surface Analysis
It was worse than pharmavet knows - corporations sent close to expiration powders as humanitarian aid and “coincidently” a lovely charity contribution for the accounting books which caused the already malnourished mothers to cease lactation resulting in infant starvation as soon as the corporate charity lapsed.
A sad commentary indeed.
harpy
We do not add aluminum to any of our infant health products.
what an odd thing to say.
How Much Should A Newborn Eat
Amount of milk that is given per serving as follows:
First month: 70 - 90 ml
Second month: 90 - 120 ml
The third - the fourth month: 120 - 150 ml
From fourth to sixth month: 150 - 180 ml
From the sixth month: 210 - 240 ml.