NAD Recommends Changes to Some Kendamil Infant Formula Marketing Claims

BBB National Programs' National Advertising Division (NAD) issued a decision addressing a challenge brought by Abbott Laboratories against Kendal Nutricare Limited's marketing of its Kendamil infant formula.¹ The self-regulatory body's review found mixed results: Kendal's core assertions about using whole milk as an ingredient held up under scrutiny, but a broader set of claims touching on comparative nutrition, breast milk similarity, human milk oligosaccharides (HMO) function, and brand history did not clear NAD's bar for substantiation. NAD’s decision was announced in an August 31, 2026, news release.

Which Claims Did NAD Find Substantiated?

On the central ingredient question, NAD found that Kendal substantiated its claims regarding the assertion that whole milk functions as a primary ingredient of the formula and is the source of the milk fat it naturally contains.

Which Claims Did NAD Recommend Be Modified or Discontinued?

NAD reached different conclusions on several other claim categories. On comparative nutrition, NAD found that statements suggesting competing formulas lose "natural milk fats and important nutrients" reasonably conveyed that those formulas were nutritionally inferior, a conclusion the evidentiary record did not support, leading NAD to recommend discontinuation of the claim, “Creamy whole milk from European grass-fed cows, sourced from family farms. No skimming, no shortcuts, and no unnecessary ingredients.”

On breast milk comparisons, NAD determined that while statements about compositional similarity between whole milk fat and breast milk were supported, the record did not establish that this similarity translated into comparative nutritional benefits, and recommended discontinuation of claims and graphics implying such benefits.

Regarding HMO function, NAD determined that Kendal's advertising conveyed that its specific HMO blend supports immune health and is unique, but found the evidence submitted was not a good fit for these product-specific claims, recommending discontinuation.

On brand heritage, NAD found that claims like "Est. 1962" and "60 years of experience" were reasonably likely to be understood by consumers as describing the continuous existence of the brand or formula itself, and recommended these be modified to clarify they refer to manufacturing facility rather than the age of the formula or the brand.

Kendal stated in its advertiser statement that it would comply with NAD's recommendations.

What Other Decisions Has NAD Issued Recently?

In a separate case this summer, NAD reviewed "#1" sales claims by Force Factor Brands LLC for its Total Beets supplements, challenged by Humann.² NAD found the claims substantiated by unit sales data, but recommended Force Factor disclose that basis for the "#1 Beets Brand in America" claim. Force Factor agreed to comply.

How Does This Decision Fit Into Broader Formula Safety Oversight?

The NAD decision arrives alongside continued federal attention to infant formula quality. Earlier this year, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) reported mostly low or undetectable contaminants in infant formula following what it described as its largest testing effort to date, while signaling continued oversight and future action.³ The agency analyzed more than 300 samples across 16 brands, generating over 120,000 data points across powdered, ready-to-feed, and concentrated liquid products, evaluating lead, mercury, cadmium, arsenic, pesticides, per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), and phthalates.

The FDA framed the survey as a broad market review rather than a product-specific enforcement action, and indicated it will continue follow-up testing, engage manufacturers on reducing contaminant levels, and work toward formal action levels. This testing effort is tied to the agency's Operation Stork Speed and Closer to Zero initiatives, both aimed at expanding safe formula options and reducing childhood contaminant exposure.

For manufacturers, the combination of active NAD scrutiny of marketing claims and ongoing FDA contaminant surveillance underscores that both advertising substantiation and product safety documentation remain under continued review in the infant nutrition category.

References

1. BBB National Programs. National Advertising Division Finds Certain Kendamil Infant Formula Claims Supported; Recommends Others Be Modified or Discontinued. GlobeNewswire. August 31, 2026. Accessed August 31, 2026. https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2026/08/31/3353413/0/en/national-advertising-division-finds-certain-kendamil-infant-formula-claims-supported-recommends-others-be-modified-or-discontinued.html
2. BBB National Programs. National Advertising Division Finds Force Factor's "#1" Beets Claims Supported, Recommends Disclosure Modification. July 21, 2026. Accessed August 31, 2026. https://bbbprograms.org/media/newsroom/decisions/force-factor
3. McEvoy E. FDA Infant Formula Testing Signals Ongoing Contaminant Oversight. Nutritional Outlook. May 7, 2026. Accessed August 31, 2026. https://www.nutritionaloutlook.com/view/fda-infant-formula-testing-signals-ongoing-contaminant-oversight