Archive site - new site at www.babymilkaction.org

STOP PRESS:  (29.1.13) - excellent news -  GAIN's application fails. 

PRESS RELEASE

22nd January 2013

GAIN – industry's Trojan Horse to enter WHO’s policy setting process?

CLICK HERE for PDF

While the WHO Reform Process proceeds this week at WHO’s 132nd Executive Board meeting in Geneva,   IBFAN, the global network that works to protect infant health by strengthening independent, transparent and effective controls on the baby food industry, has issued a stark warning. Today, in a closed meeting, the Standing Committee on NGOs (consisting of 5 countries: Armenia, Malaysia, Myanmar, Seychelles and Ecuador) will consider an application for NGO official relations status with WHO from GAIN (the Global Alliance for Improved Nutrition). GAIN is a new type of public private entity which claims to works to tackle malnutrition - but in reality is working to open up markets for its 600 partner companies ( including  Danone, the world’s second largest baby food company, Mars, Pepsi, and Coca Cola) .  

IBFAN is concerned and has evidence that GAIN is actively undermining governments' attempts to implement WHA Resolutions on infant and young child feeding.  It is illogical for Member States  to allow such a controversial accreditation to go through while they are demanding , in the Reform Process process, more clarity on WHOs conflicts of interest procedures.  Moreover, this application comes just as WHO is working on the guidelines for the marketing of complementary foods – a key policy issue that GAIN is keen to influence.  

WHO Member States need to ensure that WHO is working impartially in the interests of public health and that the NGOs WHO collaborates with are committed to working to that end. 

For more information and specific examples about how GAIN undermines existing WHA Resolutions  please see the Note 1 or follow this link: http://info.babymilkaction.org/132ndEB2013

IBFAN has been contributing to the debate about WHO's Reform Process, particularly on the issue of Conflicts of Interest.   In this context IBFAN welcomes the proposals for a policy on engagement with NGOs and has several recommendations for its improvement, which will be offered  to Member States tomorrow:

1  While transparency and public disclosure of WHO’s interaction with NGOs and the Private Sector is both necessary and critical, it is insufficient.

2  WHO must develop a comprehensive policy on conflicts of interest with criteria that distinguishes between bodies with a commercial interest in WHO policies and those who do not.

3  Attempting to address this issue on a case-by-case basis will be subjective, insufficient and may involve substantial administrative costs. WHO and MS must establish objective criteria defining cut off points regarding acceptable levels of commercial involvement, partnership and funding. 

4  There are now many 'hybrid' NGOs that are partnerships with business or front organisations for them. These bodies - (which IBFAN calls BINGOs - Business Interest NGOs) often have multiple purposes. Alongside the public health objective they usually assist commercial companies in the creation of markets for their products.  So the criteria must not only look at direct commercial financing but also  'mission' and the composition of decision-making structures.   Once set, these bench marks can be used to frame WHO’s collaboration, consultation and accreditation process.  

5  Such a differentiation would not preclude WHO from hearing the views of the private sector, but would ensure that all its relations and interactions with external bodies would be coherently and transparently guided by a clear policy understandable to all.  We believe that this would be one important way to safeguard WHO's norms and standard setting processes. 

Note 1  see THIS LINK

  In October IBFAN learned that GAIN had been challenging the Kenya government about its proposed new law on the marketing of baby foods. In its lobby paper GAIN implied that proceeding with the law would threaten "Kenya's ability to meet its commitments as a Scaling Up Nutrition (SUN) country." Thankfully Kenya went ahead with the Law. At the Codex Alimentarius meetings GAIN consistently lobbies for companies to be allowed to use promotional claims – knowing that this would prevent Member States from banning such tactics.   In December GAIN's lack of transparency was demonstrated in an exchange in the British Medical Journal,  which challenged the groundbreaking baby food law in India that has been so critical in the protection of breastfeeding and child health.

   (http://info.babymilkaction.org/132ndEB2013)

For more information: 

Patti Rundall, Co-Chair, IBFAN/Baby Milk Action   prundall@babymilkaction.org  +44 7786 523493

Ina Verzivolli, Human Rights Officer, IBFAN/GIFA  ina.verzivolli@gifa.org

Lida Lhotska, IBFAN Regional Coordinator, IBFAN/GIFA   lida.lhotska@gifa.org

International Baby Food Action Network (IBFAN) a global network of 250 citizens groups in 166 countries. 

www.ibfan.org

Baby Milk Action press release 3 December 2012

Campaigners in the Philippines are exposing a threat levelled at the economy by Nestlé and other transnational companies if baby milk marketing regulations successfully defended in 2007 are not scrapped. Nestlé and its partners are pushing for a new, weak law to be introduced, which will allow them to advertise milks for use from 6 months of age (with the same branding as milks for use from birth) and target mothers directly. The companies have the Department of Trade and Industry lobbying legislators on their behalf, while the Department of Health, WHO and UNICEF have said in joint statement that the draft bill: "aims to support multinational companies while damaging the Filipino society: families, the mothers and children."

Regulations successfully defended in 2007 when challenged by the pharmaceutical industry at the Supreme Court regulate the promotion of foods for infants and young children up to three years of age as health officials attempt to prevent thousands of unnecessary deaths occurring every year. Other countries such as Brazil (where breastfeeding rates have increased markedly since a low in the 1970s) have introduced similar regulations in implementing marketing standards adopted by the World Health Assembly in 1981. 

A petition on the Avaaz site has already gained thousands of signatures and been reported in the Philippines.

The Department of Trade and Industry (DTI), however, has publicly stated as it lobbies on the industry's behalf that if the draft bill is not passed by Congress: "The proposed  ban on advertising for milk products jeopardizes multinationals’ plan to invest $400 million".

Campaigners have already pointed out that elections for congress take place in 2013 and they have been hearing politicians warned that investment in their constituencies will be cancelled if they do not back the bill.

Baby Milk Action press release 28 October 2012

In an attempt to divert attention from International Nestlé-Free Week (29 October - 4 November 2012), Nestlé - one of the most boycotted companies on the planet over its baby milk marketing - has announced that its two-finger KitKat chocolate bars will bear the Fairtrade logo from January 2013. International Nestlé-Free Week is a time for people who boycott Nestlé over the way it pushes baby milk to do more to promote the boycott - and for those who don't boycott to give it a go. Nestlé has also spent the past year setting up a special centre to monitor comments about it online so its agents can step in when it is criticised.

The announcement, made simultaneously by Nestlé (UK) and the UK Fairtrade Foundation on 26 October comes as thousands of boycott supporters have emailed Nestlé executives calling on them to respect international minimum standards for the marketing of baby milks and thousands have signed a petition of solidarity with the Philippines, where Nestlé is attempting to weaken regulations introduced to protect parents and health workers from misleading marketing. Baby Milk Action has produced a leaflet explaining "Why boycott Nestlé Fairtrade KitKat" with key facts on the baby milk issue, as well as concerns about Nestlé's sourcing of cocoa and other business practices. 

Press release 19 September 2012

Media coverage: Dairy reporter

In a national billboard, print and online advertising campaign in March 2012, Wyeth (part of Pfizer, in the process of being purchased by Nestlé) promoted its formula in a series of advertisements showing mothers with young children under headlines: "What's the best milk after Kate's?", "What's the best milk after Lisa's?"etc.

Following complaints by Baby Milk Action and other groups and individuals, the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has ruled the answer is NOT SMA formula.

In a ruling published today it warns Pfizer not to repeat the advertisements after finding: "the ads misleadingly implied that follow-on milk was the best alternative to breast milk" and "the ads misleading implied that SMA Follow-on milk was superior to other follow-on milks".

The ruling vindicates Baby Milk Action's successful "Stop Wyeth" campaign against Wyeth's SMA Baby Know How roadshow, which was to promote SMA formula in shopping centres in June and July 2012.

Wyeth continues to promote its formula to health workers with the claim "Drop for drop, no other formula comes close" safe in the knowledge that the ASA refuses to investigate advertising in health journals (see below).

Anyone wishing to support Baby Milk Action's work can report examples of promotion to the Baby Feeding Law Group monitoring project - click here.

Baby Milk Action also requires donations and income from membership for its work to continue - click here.