“powered infant formula” or “powdered infant formula”?

There is a passage in my English textbook. In the passage there is a phrase “powered infant formula”, but I think it should be “powdered infant formula”. The paragraph which has the phrase is copied below:



Nestlé, an international food production firm, made the decision in 1970 to market infant formula in Third-World nations. Nestlé was the first and only infant formula manufacturer to enter these markets. While there was nothing illegal about marketing infant formula in African nations, there was an issue of honesty. In these countries, even in situations where mothers are malnourished, mother's milk remains pediatricians' preferred method of nutrition for several reasons: (1) the lack of refrigeration for unused, canned formula; (2) the lack of pure water for mixing powered infant formula; (3) the lack of knowledge about the risks of diluting the richer-looking formula to the consistency of mother's milk; and (4) the lack of funds for the purchase of formula once the free samples run out and the mother's milk is no longer flowing. Nonetheless, Nestlé, without the disclosure of these drawbacks, entered Third-World nations and enjoyed great success in marketing the formula. However, the presence of the four factors caused infant mortality rates to skyrocket in those countries where the formula was marketed.



Interesting enough, I also found a webpage on the internet, which has the same phrase “powered infant formula”, and I can not figure out the meaning of this phrase.

The following is the address of the webpage:

http://www.law.duke.edu/shell/cite.pl?60+Law+&..+127+(Summer+1997 )



The following is the paragraph which has the phrase:



The FTC's experience with redress is limited almost entirely to consumer protection cases, but there are a few exceptions. The FTC first achieved consumer redress in an antitrust case in 1980, when crayon manufacturers accused of coordinating prices agreed to pay $1.2 million in restitution for expected use by public school systems.¹⁸¹ Although FTC Director of the Bureau of Competition Alfred Dougherty opined that "the agreements are significant because they reflect the importance of including consumer redress in the [FTC]'s antitrust arsenal,"¹⁸² the FTC has rarely visited that part of its arsenal. The FTC's [*pg 164] maiden use of Section 13(b) of the FTC Act to obtain antitrust restitution occurred in 1992, when two leading U.S. manufacturers of infant formula agreed to give 3.6 million pounds of powered infant formula to the U.S. Department of Agriculture for use in the Special Supplemental Food Program for Women, Infants, and Children.¹⁸³ Then-Chairwoman Janet Steiger described antitrust restitution as "a useful tool," and added that "you may see it used more."¹⁸⁴ It was not used again, however, until 1997, when the FTC and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico extracted $300,000 (for the Department of Health) from the College of Physician-Surgeons of Puerto Rico as part of a settlement with that entity and three physician groups that allegedly had engaged in a group boycott to coerce the Commonwealth into raising reimbursement rates for a Commonwealth program for providing health care to the uninsured.¹⁸⁵ William Baer, director of the FTC's Bureau of Competition, characterized the admittedly "somewhat novel" restitution as "wholly appropriate," and added that this remedy "should be considered in other cases where we can identify an appropriate recipient of restitution and the amount of harm."