LACTNET Archives

Lactation Information and Discussion

LACTNET@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Karleen Gribble <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Lactation Information and Discussion <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 23 Feb 2010 16:04:31 +1100
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (57 lines)
Of course you are entitled to your opinion and interpretation of the Code 
(as is anyone) but ILCA is an international organisation and one would 
imagine that as such an international perspective would be sought and 
maintained from the international experts on the Code who have no financial 
or other interest in the decision.  Really, experts with no vested interest 
should make the decision and as you described so well, ILCA has a broad 
mandate of which the Code forms on a small part- they are not the experts. 
ICDC indeed have the Code at the core of their mission- they are the 
experts.
And of course, the damage done by Pigeon to breastfeeding is not as evident 
in the US or Europe as in Asia and so the gut wrench in promoting Pigeon's 
bottom line would not be as great for those in Asia. It would be interesting 
to hear from Lactnetters in countries most affected by Pigeon's unethical 
marketing practices on this issue. I am sure we have some Lactnetters in 
Japan.

Karleen Gribble
Australia


>ILCA has a "*vision* [as] a worldwide network of lactation
>professionals [and a] * mission* ... to advance the profession of lactation
>consulting worldwide through leadership, advocacy, professional 
>development,
> and research."  (from the ILCA website).  My position is not all that
> remarkable when you step back from the politics and the passion of 
> lactation
>advocacy.  That ICDC would choose to liberally and broadly interpet the
>language of the WHO Code does not at all surprise me: look at the very core
> of their mission.

 But I am "entitled" to look at
> the face of the Code language and draw my own conclusions as to whether it
> requires one to conduct corporate ownership forensics.  *Ownership of
> companies is not something that the WHO Code examines*.  To inject such a
> requirement would do disservice to the simple manageable goal set by the
> Code:  to encourage governments to regulate marketing of the four
> product-types, and to encourage companies to market such products in an
> acceptable manner.
>
> Liz Brooks JD IBCLC FILCA (ILCA Secy 2005-11)
> Wyndmoor, PA, USA
> > 3. To unsubscribe: unsubscribe lactnet
> 4. To get a comprehensive list of rules and directions: get lactnet 
> welcome 

             ***********************************************

Archives: http://community.lsoft.com/archives/LACTNET.html
To reach list owners: [log in to unmask]
Mail all list management commands to: [log in to unmask]
COMMANDS:
1. To temporarily stop your subscription write in the body of an email: set lactnet nomail
2. To start it again: set lactnet mail
3. To unsubscribe: unsubscribe lactnet
4. To get a comprehensive list of rules and directions: get lactnet welcome

ATOM RSS1 RSS2