The tug-of-war continues—Nestlé and the harmful marketing of breast milk substitutes
Since the 1970s Nestlé has repeatedly found itself at odds with public health advocates around the globe over it’s marketing of breast milk substitutes. Now more than 30 years on, we find that the tug-of-war with Nestlé is still ongoing. At one end of the rope is the world’s largest food company and No. 1 baby food producer, and at the other end is the promotion of commonsense public health that could save the lives of 1.4 million children per year[i].
The WHO recommends exclusive breastfeeding for the first 6-months of life. This is because breastfeeding has a wide range of health and nutrition benefits, and is crucial for a child’s physiological and intellectual development. It plays a critical role in protecting infants from infection during the early years of life, and in lowering their risk of developing chronic diseases (such as diabetes and obesity) later in life. Moreover, in poor countries, where many lack access to clean water and the optimal sterilization of bottles and teats is often not possible, babies that are not exclusively breastfed are at a much higher risk of contracting diarrhoea and acute respiratory infections – two of the top ‘killers’ of babies globally. According to UNICEF, babies that are not breastfed are 6-times more likely, than breastfed babies, to die before they reach their first birthday.
It is this grim reality that prompted the unanimous adoption of the International Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes by the members of the World Health Assembly in 1981. The Code states that labels on such products should say clearly and visibly that exclusive breastfeeding is best. It also stipulates that labels should have no “pictures or text, which may idealize the use of infant formula”.[i]
In 1984, under sustained activist pressure and organized boycotts of its products in several countries, Nestlé promised to abide by the code in its entirety. Recently, the company has been promoting Nestlé Nan Gold Pro infant formula in developing countries, as the closest possible formula to the ‘gold standard’ (i.e. breast milk). The company claims that this new ‘breakthrough’ formula fights infection, prevents diarrhoea, and will help your baby to “be the best ever”[ii][iii].
We know that this is not true. On the contrary, we know that breast milk is unrivalled in its ability to protect the health of babies, both when they are young and as they grow older. We also know that where a mother mixes any formula with unsafe drinking water, or dilutes it because it is too expensive for her to sustain use as recommended, that her baby’s life hangs in the balance. Yet again, Nestlé has violated the Code and it’s promise to us.
In May 2010, the World Health Assembly reaffirmed its commitment to the Code, citing the fact that there had been repeated reports of its violation by ‘major food companies’. They also acknowledged the critical role that widespread adoption of exclusive-breastfeeding could play in achieving Millennium Development Goal 4 – to reduce the under-five mortality rate by two-thirds by 2015[iv]. But the problem lies with implementation and enforcement. Only a few countries have chosen to adopt the Code as law. In the absence of legislation, adherence to the Code by companies like Nestlé will continue to be largely voluntary and violations of the code will persist.
Nestlé’s repeated deviance from the Code is unacceptable. Civil society pressure and boycotts have in the past been successful in forcing powerful companies into account. Don’t let this corporate giant get away with breaking the rules this time. To send Nestlé a message or to get more involved in the campaign to end the harmful marketing of breast milk substitutes, please visit: http://info.babymilkaction.org/news/campaignblog260510
Jamila A. Headley BA, MPH
[i] World Health Asssembly. International Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes. (Geneva: World Health Organization, 1981).
[ii] Nestlé Research. “NAN Nestlé Infant Formula: A new generation in a tradition of excellence and trust in infant nutrition”. Available at: http://www.research.nestle.com/innovations_publications/key_innovations/Infant_nutr.htm (Accessed on July 6, 2010).
[iii] Nestlé Research. “Can you help my baby be the best baby ever”. Brochure available at: http://www.research.nestle.com/NR/rdonlyres/40107EA5-0166-4E8D-9B74-9E92BE6B736D/0/NAN.pdf (Accessed on July 6, 2010).
[iv] “Infant and young child nutrition”. Proceedings of the Sixty-third World Health Assembly (Geneva: World Health Organization, May 10, 2010).
[i] According to the World Health Organization
Excellent article. It sums up how companies are forever looking for ways to expand the market, increase their profits. While the Code has protected babies somewhat, new marketing tactics bypass not only Code requirements but national laws based on the Code. We are collecting evidence on unethical promotion so as to shame the companies. Showing the world how irresponsible these sellers are, and affecting their image is the only way to go forward. Of course it should be the World Health Organisation collecting the evidence and slapping the offenders, but they (WHO)are shy to stand up for babies. Shame on them too.