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:
"Catherine Watson Genna, IBCLC" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Lactation Information and Discussion <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 14 Jan 1997 10:54:29 -0800
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (56 lines)
My husband brought home Thursday's (1/9) issue of the Financial Times, a
British paper that is widely read in the banking and brokerage industry
even here in the US.  The back page carried the following article:

Baby Milk Companies Under Fire by Mark Suzman in London
        Leading manufacturers of baby milk are consistently violating
international codes designed to protect the health of infants, according
to a study released yesterday.
        The report will rekindle the debate over the use of baby milk
formulas in the developing world and could lead to an expansion in
consumer boycotts and other action against big manufacturers.
        The study by the Interagency Group on Breastfeeding Monitoring, a
coalition of 27 religious, health and development groups, concludes that
many companies regularly breach domestic and international regulations on
the marketing and distribution of breast-milk substitutes in developing
countries.
        Dr Andree Bronner, secretary-general of the International
Association of Infant Food Manufacturers , rejected the study as "biased
in design and execution" because it sought advice from some baby milk
activists.  She said it made "a sham of impartiality".
        But professor Andrew Tomkins, of the London-based Institute for
Child Health, defended the study, saying it had been carried out
according to the best international guidelines for independant medical
research.
        The International Code of Marketing of Breast Milk Substitutes
says women should be informed that breast-feeding is the healthiest
method of infant feeding.
        The code was adopted in 1981 by the World Health Assembly, the
governing body of the World Health Organization.  The code also states
that mothers should be protected from the promotional activities of
manufacturers and distributers of breast-milk substitutes, a worldwide
market estimated at $6 billion.
        The study, based on interviews with pregnant women, mothers of
small infants, and health workers in Bangladesh, Poland, South Africa and
Thailand, concludes there was "clear evidence" of violations in all four
countries.
        It found that many large manufacturers were involved in
activities such as providing free samples to clinics rather than
operating through the official health system.  Companies cited in the
report include the Swiss companies Nestle and Gerber, owned by Sandoz;
Mead Johnson and Wyeht of the US; and Nutricia of the Netherlands.
        Nestle, one of the leading manufacturers, has long been the
subject of an international consumer boycott led by the International
Baby Food Action Network and other groups because of its baby-milk
marketing activities.
        The IGBM was set up after the church of England's 1994 decision
to suspend its support for the boycott while it sought objective evidence
about the possible abuse of regulations.  The bishop of Coventry, former
head of the Church's International and Development Affairs Committee,
said the study fully met this need.
        "This report provides compelling evidence from countries round
the world that the international code is still being violated" he said.

--
Catherine Watson Genna, IBCLC  NYC  [log in to unmask]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2