The commodification of human milk: Analysing corporate practices and policy implications using the UCSF Industry Documents Library
Commercialising human milk-based products (HMBPs) poses complex public health, ethical, and regulatory challenges for governments around the world. This study investigates the corporate strategies of the HMBP industry through a qualitative analysis of industry documents obtained from the University of California, San Francisco's Industry Documents Library. The analysis identifies how HMBP companies construct markets by positioning their products as essential to neonatal care and leveraging scientific narratives and professional networks to expand market dominance. These practices include embedding corporate interests in public health messaging and knowingly competing with non-profit milk donation systems. The findings reveal tensions between profit-driven innovation and equitable access to healthcare. The study highlights parallels with other health-related industries, where intellectual property (IP) and market control can deepen inequity. To address these issues, the study emphasises the need for stronger regulatory oversight, enhanced transparency in corporate practices, and support for public milk banking systems. By situating HMBPs within the Commercial Determinants of Health framework, this research provides policymakers and public health advocates with critical insights to safeguard equity in maternal-infant healthcare.
Authors
- Sarah Louise Steele (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1794-7394)
- David Stückler (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1288-8401)
- Adam Kamradt‐Scott (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4901-4898)
- Noah C.A. Cooke
Institutions
- University of Essex (GB)
- Tufts University (US)
- University of Cambridge (GB)
- MRC Epidemiology Unit (GB)
- Bocconi University (IT)
Publication Details
- Journal
- Social Science & Medicine
- Published
- 2025-12-13
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2025.118875
- Citations
- 1
- Primary Topic
- Breastfeeding Practices and Influences
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 1.35