Protecting Breastfeeding
Janet Jendron
and Carole Wrede
LLLI Board of Directors
From: LEAVEN, Vol. 28 No. 1, January-February 1992, pp. 5-6
Breastfeeding rates are declining
worldwide. In NEW BEGINNINGS
(March-April 1991) Kate Sharp described the overwhelming effects of
this decline. She points out that "A bottle-fed infant can be as much
as twenty-five times more likely to die in childhood than an exclusively
breastfed infant...." Lack of breastfeeding is a major cause of diarrheal
disease and a major contributor to acute respiratory infections, which
together are responsible for six million children's deaths annually.
The WHO Code, the WHO/UNICEF
International Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes, was approved
by the World Health Assembly in May 1981. The United States is the only
country which did not ratify the WHO Code. [Ed. note: On May
9, 1994, the US reversed its opposition to the WHO Code, and joined
with other countries in support of the Code.] The code makes
specific recommendations for the appropriate commercialization of formula.
It calls for a ban on the advertising of formula, baby bottles, rubber
teats, and the prohibition of formula samples for new mothers leaving
the hospital. The code is seen as the minimum requirement to protect
health practices in infant and young child feeding. It was left to individual
countries to write laws which would make the code effective; however,
some have done very little to implement the code.
A Historical Perspective
Over the years, the LLLI
Board of Directors has become increasingly aware of the global issues
involved in protecting breastfeeding worldwide. In 1981 and again in
1987, the Board voted to support the WHO/UNICEF International Code of
Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes. (See Mary Ann Kerwin's article
on page 67 of the July-August 1981 LLL NEWS and Carole Wrede's article
on pp. 136-37 of the September-October 1988 NEW
BEGINNINGS.) A "Breastmilk Substitutes Statement"
appeared in LEAVEN in May-June 1982, reflecting
LLLI policy and our deep concern about "the needless suffering, malnutrition,
disease, and deaths of babies that follow the misuse of commercial breastmilk
substitutes." In February 1988, the Board also directed LLLI to cooperate
and network with other key breastfeeding organizations around the world
and to lend strong US support to struggling countries. In October 1988,
the Board voted to support the efforts of the American Academy of Pediatrics
for their policy opposing direct advertising of infant formula to the
public, recognizing it as a positive step toward increasing the incidence
and duration of breastfeeding in the United States. This move will undoubtedly
lend support to breastfeeding worldwide.
On July 21, 1991 an historic
meeting was held in the USA when over thirty representatives from major
US health organizations and a government observer from the US Department
of Agriculture met at LLLI's invitation to discuss the marketing of
artificial infant feeding in the US. At this meeting, (reported on p.
66 of September-October 1991 LEAVEN) a consortium drafted the "Declaration
for the Protection, Promotion, and Support of Breastfeeding."
Background on the Nestle-AHP
Boycott
In October 1988, Action for
Corporate Accountability (the US arm of the International Baby Food
Action Network-IBFAN, a coalition of over 150 citizen groups in nearly
70 countries) launched a new boycott of Nestle and American Home Products
in the United States. Similar boycotts are underway in other countries.
Nestle is singled out because it is the largest manufacturer and marketer
of breast milk substitutes in developing countries, and because their
practices are deemed as the most harmful. The Infant Feeding Action
Coalition (INFACT) Canada Newsletter says in its Fall 1991 issue:
"Nestle violates the WHO
Code more often than any of its competitors, although scant regard is
shown by most other companies. Nestle is not willing to end the marketing
practice of providing free samples of formula to hospitals and maternities
unless forced to do so by law. Free sampling is the single most effective
marketing tactic of infant formula companies since it interferes with
lactation, establishes brand loyalty (93 %), and attaches medical endorsement
to the product."
The boycott also includes
American Home Products because they have been identified as one of the
major violators of the WHO Code. As LLL Founder Vi Lennon points out,
"The whole thrust of the boycott is to stop a multi-national corporation
from engaging in a practice which discourages breastfeeding."
Some of you probably remember
the previous Nestle boycott which took place from 1977 to 1984. During
that time LLLI Headquarters staff directed inquiries about the boycott
to organizations such as INFACT, who were then sponsors of the boycott.
In 1984, the boycott was lifted when Nestle agreed to discontinue its
harmful practices. However, they did not adhere to their promises, so
a new boycott is now in effect.
Information to Members
In February 1991, the LLLI
Board of Directors voted unanimously that "LLLI provide information
to our members through various channels about the current Nestle/American
Home Products boycott." This Board decision was reported in LEAVEN,
March-April 1991, page 18. This decision was deemed consistent with
the first goal in our Strategic Plan: "To increase the incidence and
duration of breastfeeding worldwide; Strategies include: To respond
to political, social, and cultural factors which affect breastfeeding;
and the protection of breastfeeding." It was also consistent with our
promise to keep Leaders and members informed of issues affecting breastfeeding.
Deciding to avoid buying
products manufactured by companies which do not respect the code is
one way members, as consumers, may choose to help preserve the right
of mothers in all countries to breastfeed their babies. It is also one
response to the question asked by Leaders like Joan Miller, who wrote:
"Mothers in developing countries will never call me for help with nipple
confusion or slow weight gain. So how can I help them? What does it
mean to each of us to be committed to helping women an ocean away from
us?"
LLL is a positive organization.
As Carmen Vandenabeele, Director of LLL's ATW Division, put it, "LLLI
is not against bottles or Nestle, but rather for breastfeeding and respect
for the WHO Code." Pat Ezell from Colorado wrote: "Without changing
its basic purpose and philosophy, LLLI has expanded its promotion of
breastfeeding in many ways.... Informing about the boycott is supporting
our most basic cause, not adding another one."
LLLI is not endorsing the
boycott or advocating action, but informing its Leaders and members.
Like issues such as nutrition, sexuality, parenting, discipline, and
childbirth, this information should be put in perspective as something
which, individually or globally, is affected by, or affects breastfeeding.
We have every confidence that Leaders will be sensitive and use good
judgment when the issue arises.
Current boycott information
[see note below] may be obtained in North America by writing
Action for Corporate Accountability, Dr. Idrian Resnick, 29 Church Street,
New Haven, Connecticut 06510 (phone: 203-787-0061, FAX 203-787-3908).
In Europe write the Geneva Infant Feeding Association, PO Box 157, CH-1211
Geneva 19, Switzerland. In Africa contact the International Baby Food
Action Network (IBFAN) Africa, PO Box 34308, Nairobi, Kenya. Interested
Leaders may also contact Board members Barbara Heiser, Chairman of the
Action Committee, or Beth Styer, LLLI's UNICEF Liaison, c/o LLLI Headquarters.
[Ed. note: some of
the addresses above may no longer be correct.]
Page last edited Sun Oct 14 09:31:53 UTC 2007.
