This is an electronic text version of Baby Milk Action's magazine, UPDATE.
UPDATE 14 was written by Andrew Radford, Patti Rundall, David Meiklejohn,
Sonali Kumarakulasinghe and Lisa Woodburn.
Baby Milk Action is a non-profit organisation which aims to halt the
commercial promotion of bottle feeding and to protect and promote good
infant nutrition. It is a member of the International Baby Food Action
Network (IBFAN) which is made up of more than 140 groups in 70 countries.
Our address is:
Baby Milk Action
23 St. Andrew's Street
Cambridge CB2 3AX
United Kingdom
Phone: (+44) 1223 464420
Fax: (+44) 1223 464417
E-mail: [log in to unmask]
BOYCOTT NEWS
Demonstration
Nestle boycotters presented more than 50,000 signatures of protest from
around the world at the company's annual general meeting in Lausanne on 26
May. On 21 May, the anniversary of the International Code, over 80 Baby
Milk Action supporters demonstrated outside Nestle's UK head office in
Croydon. The events were linked by a tandem ride of over 400 miles by Baby
Milk Action's Andrew Radford and David Meiklejohn.
On the way, the cyclists were welcomed at a civic reception in Newhaven and
by UNICEF in Luxembourg. They also visited IBFAN groups in Strasbourg and
Berne and received press and TV coverage.
Baby Milk Action, IBFAN supporters and the Grim Reaper 'welcomed' Nestle
shareholders as they arrived at the AGM. Inside the meeting, Nestle Chief
Executive Helmut Maucher was asked questions about Nestle's marketing
tactics, including the dumping of radioactive formula in Sri Lanka. Mr
Maucher said there would be no change in Nestle's strategy and implied that
Sri Lanka should conform to lower European Union standards. The
demonstration was also attended by over 400 French Perrier workers
protesting against the loss of jobs following Nestle's hostile takeover of
the company last year.
Thank you to everyone who attended the Croydon demonstration and the
following people along the way - Kathryn Dally, Sarah Hale, Maryse Lehners,
Annie Cheney and Pascale Walter, Philippe Ammann, Edith & John Radford,
Rachel O'Leary, Patti Rundall, Gill Wright, Jackie and Peter Leevers, as
well as the support crew of Lisa and Cessi Woodburn.
More boycott endorsers
New Nestle boycott endorsers include Victoria Wood, Christopher Timothy,
Tony Robinson, Glenda Jackson MP, Charles Kennedy MP, Green and Black's
Organic Chocolate, Longden Green General Store (Shrewsbury), trade union
IPMS (Museum of London Branch) and Bourne-mouth Town Council. Thank you to
everyone who helped to get those endorsers. Why not ask your union, church,
MP, shops and local council to join the boycott?
Nestle links up
Companies are often unaware of Nestle's record when entering into joint
ventures. Letters of complaint have been effective in ending such
connections and making a company think twice before linking with Nestle in
the future.
Mount Pleasant Farm Dairy in Oxfordshire received complaints from boycott
supporters after samples of Nesquik and Nestle breakfast cereals were
delivered with their morning milk. The company has now said it will not
enter into such a promotion with Nestle again.
Other companies criticised for associating with Nestle include the Early
Learning Centre, the Post Office and Disney. Please keep your eyes peeled
for any others.
Nescaf ad spend rises again
Nestle has spent a record amount on advertising to boost sales of Nescaf.
The company spent #6 million in the three summer months, on top of a 15%
hike in advertising spending for 1994.
Nestle misleads Synod in disinvestment debate
Following a large-scale PR exercise by Nestle, the Church of England
General Synod has narrowly voted to suspend its support of the Nescaf
boycott in order to review the latest evidence. A motion calling on the
Church to sell its #1.4m shareholding in Nestle was defeated by 180 votes
to 168 in favour of the motion to suspend the boycott.
Nestle must have spent thousands of pounds lobbying to reverse the Synod's
previous boycott endorsement: as well as writing to all Synod members, the
company hired, carpeted and furnished a room at the debate, gave out food
and drink and brought in top executives from the USA, Switzerland and
London. Full colour displays were produced and glossy brochures were given
to delegates. During the debate, Nestle misled delegates by incorrectly
claiming that many churches had dropped their boycott support.
The displays and brochures are of particular concern - they not only negate
the dangers of bottle feeding and minimise the value of breastfeeding, they
also contain defamatory and misleading remarks about Baby Milk Action,
IBFAN, UNICEF and the Catholic Institute for International Relations.
However, the fact that Nestle was prepared to go to such lengths
demonstrates its worry about the strength of boycott - sadly, many Synod
members assumed that Nestle would show the same level of concern in its
baby milk marketing all around the world.
The Synod declared that it will reconsider the boycott "if Nestle does not
comply with the World Health Assembly Resolution of May 1994." This is the
first time that the Synod has called on Nestle to abide by the entire Code.
The company has not acknowledged the WHA Resolution: in order to comply, it
will have to make substantial changes to its marketing policy.
Following the vote, many Synod members have expressed their anger and
dismay at Nestle's misinformation. We expect the boycott to be raised again
at a future meeting. It still has the support of several dioceses as well
as the Baptist, Methodist and United Reformed churches.
Rowntree factory occupied
Earth First! demonstrators, protesting against Nestle's infant formula
marketing tactics, hung banners down the side of the Rowntree factory in
Norwich on 17 August and gave leaflets to the workers. The action received
extensive local media coverage.
Farmer rejects Nestle
With the break-up of the Milk Marketing Board, Nestle is trying to buy milk
directly from dairy farmers. However, not all farmers are rushing to take
up Nestle's offer. Dumfries farmer Tom Lochhead decided not to sell his
milk to Nestle after reading about the baby milk issue.
BREAKING THE RULES
New report shows blatant aggression by baby milk pushers
Hundreds of examples of aggressive baby milk marketing are recorded in
Breaking the Rules 1994, a report on company compliance with the WHO/UNICEF
International Code published in August. The activities of 74 baby food and
bottle manufacturers in 62 countries show that no company complies fully
with the Code and that Nestle again tops the list as worst violator (with
twice as many complaints as any other company).
The report, compiled from surveys carried out between August 1993 and July
1994, shows that free supplies of baby milk are still given to hospitals
in at least 41 countries, 28 of which have government bans against the
practice. Nestle free supplies were found in 22 countries with bans,
including China, Zimbabwe and Bangladesh.
Many of the violations have already been reported to governments and
companies by the monitors in the countries concerned. Baby Milk Action has
sent a copy of Breaking the Rules 1994 to each company and, along with our
sister organisations around the world, is sending more detailed information
to encourage changes.
Mixed response from companies
Six weeks after receiving the reports, most companies have not replied.
Letters from the 3 companies which have responded in any detail show major
differences in attitude towards their responsibilities.
Milupa is the only major manufacturer to respond to the complaints and has
commented in detail on the report. However, while Breaking the Rules
compares company activities with the International Code, Milupa has
responded only from a point of view of national Codes. It claims to have
made some changes and to have withdrawn from the market in Bangladesh,
Cameroon, Cote d'Ivoire and Pakistan.
Bimbosan, a small Swiss company, rather misses the point: "We'd like to ask
whether you have ever heard of a free market economy? We have read of
planned economics and discover that this was so good that it doesn't exist
any more."
Glaxo has responded much more positively: criticised for selling a cereal
in Ghana for use from 4 months (and without marking the age clearly on the
label), without the label text in the local language, and advertising the
product on television, the company has replied "in the light of your
report, we are considering changing the recommended age from 4-6 months
onwards to 6 months onwards."
Acknowledgments have also been received from Boots, Galactina and Nestle.
Breaking the Rules 1994 is illustrated throughout and includes company
addresses to encourage letters from readers. It is available from Baby Milk
Action, price #3.50 including postage.
COMPANY NEWS
Boots sells Farley's
Farley's baby milks and cereals have been sold by Boots to US food company
Heinz for #94m. 70% of Farley's sales are in the UK. Other important
markets are Ireland, Pakistan, New Zealand and east Asia. Boots still holds
its own brand follow-up milks, baby foods, bottles and teats.
Unreliable Views
A Nestle publication sent free to thousands of health workers worldwide has
illustrated the baby milk industry's penchant for misusing research
material to deflect criticism of its marketing practices. The June edition
of Nestle Worldview highlights unpublished research on malnourished
mothers' ability to breastfeed: A Nestle-sponsored study alleges that the
breastmilk of severely malnourished mothers in Zaire is very low in volume
and fat content. The article proposes a Nestle supplement for the mother as
a solution. The research may prove to be sound, but Nestle's reasons for
publishing it in this way are highly questionable.
A misconception common amongst health workers is that mothers need a good
balanced diet to breastfeed successfully. Indeed, many of the baby milk
industry's publications reinforce this view. Worldview will increase the
likelihood of health workers recommending bottle feeding.
Professor Andrew Tomkins, Director of London's Centre for International
Child Health, said, "It is in my view unfortunate and unacceptable that
conclusions are published in journals such as this without being subjected
to peer review." It is widely accepted that feeding the mother is a safer,
cheaper and more sensible option than bottle feeding.
A second article in Worldview - on allergies - has also been criticised. It
claims that sensitive babies can suffer allergic reactions if their
breastfeeding mothers consume dairy products, and that it is very difficult
for breastfeeding mothers to get enough calcium without drinking cow's
milk. Dr. Andrew Porter, a Consultant Paediatrician, has complained:
"Although breastmilk can certainly contain trace elements of cow's milk
protein, it obviously does not contain nearly as much as the pure product
or even the modified versions present in baby milk formulas... It is
perfectly possible on a dairy product-free diet for mothers to consume
enough calcium. There is plenty of calcium in meat, fish, eggs, vegetables,
etc."
Neither of the Nestle articles has references to other studies.
Three health workers cancelled their subscriptions to Professional Care of
Mother and Child after the journal distributed Worldview to its
subscribers.
Paddington sells out to Mead Johnson
US baby milk company Mead Johnson has launched its Prosobee and Nutramigen
formulas in the UK. It is providing unrequested free samples to doctors'
surgeries and to hospitals and is promoting the milks with inserts in
health journals. The labels carry a picture of Paddington Bear dressed as a
doctor, even though a forthcoming law will ban the use of pictures which
idealise the use of baby milk.
[log in to unmask] (Arly Helm, LC)
|
