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)