Archive site - new site at www.babymilkaction.org

Press release 22 June 2012

Wyeth has cancelled its much promoted SMA Baby Know How roadshow after shopping centres pulled out of the event. Members of the public sent messages of protest to the shopping centres in support of a Baby Milk Action 'Stop Wyeth' campaign. Baby Milk Action, a civil society organisation that aims to protect the right of mothers to independent, accurate information on infant feeding, highlights that companies are prohibited from seeking direct or indirect contact with mothers under internationally agreed marketing requirements and that Wyeth's advertising claims and labelling do not comply with UK marketing requirements (see notes).

Mike Brady, Campaigns and Networking Coordinator at Baby Milk Action, said:

"National Breastfeeding Week is about to start, which reminds people of the health benefits of breastfeeding. Baby food companies seek to undermine breastfeeding to boost sales of their products. Company marketing strategies are also bad for mothers who use formula, who ultimately fund these self-serving marketing activities through higher prices. Hundreds of people have already signed our petition calling for baby milk companies to end promotion and make formula cheaper."

Click here for the petition on change.org

The first event at Lakeside shopping centre on 14 June was cancelled the day before. The second event at Bluewater scheduled for 21 June was cancelled on 16 June, though Wyeth continued to advertise it until announcing the roadshow as a whole was 'postponed' on 20 June after other shopping centres also pulled out. Baby Milk Action is calling on the shopping centres to put in place policies to respect baby milk marketing requirements to prevent a repeat. Click here for email campaign.

Wyeth already has a criminal conviction for breaking the Infant Formula and Follow-on Formula Regulations and complaints against its formula advertising have been upheld by the Advertising Standards Authority. Baby Milk Action had signed people up for protests at the shopping centres and continues to monitor the situation in case Wyeth's current owner, Pfizer, tries to relaunch the roadshow  (Nestlé's recent purchase of Wyeth is still going through regulatory approval).

Baby Milk Action had leaflets ready to distribute at the events had they gone ahead

Wyeth headed the webpage for its SMA Baby Know How roadshow as the 'London Blitz'. The stated purpose was described by its PR company as follows:

"The road-show is called SMA Baby Know-How and will be taking place at various shopping centres around London. The stand will be somewhere mums can get advice, meet other mums, demo a couple of SMA products and sign up to Know-How, our baby club. In addition, we’re going to have a number of competitions and giveaways on offer and will be offering mums a free mummy and baby photo on the stand." 

At the end of May, Baby Milk Action registered complaints with the Advertising Standards Authority and Trading Standards about Wyeth's direct marketing after a mother complained at the demoralising email she received when her baby was four weeks old. 

Ostensibly offering support for breastfeeding, this raised questions such as:

"If you’re breastfeeding, do you sometimes wonder if your baby is getting enough milk?"

"Feeling sore? .... If the pain continues or your nipples start to crack or bleed…."

It finished (left), "Thinking of bottle feeding?" and advertised SMA infant formula with misleading claims suggesting its ingredients are "closer to breastmilk". Full analysis on the Baby Feeding Law Group website - click here.

Baby Milk Action has also registered complaints about Wyeth's national advertising campaign that suggests its SMA formula is the best on the market. A ruling from the Advertising Standards Authority is expected shortly - click here.

Mike Brady said:

"Mothers have a right to independent information, which is available through the health care system and mother support groups. That is true for all mothers, whether they intend to use formula or to breastfed. We respect a mothers right to make her own decision. Baby milk companies should respect the marketing rules, stop promotion and make formula cheaper, instead of making unsubstantiated claims to drive up prices. If formula were cheaper more mothers who use it may then feel able to follow the Department of Health advice to discard unused formula after a feed."

As part of its aim to protect babies fed on formula, Baby Milk Action also works at European Union level and at the Codex Alimentarious Commission to improve the quality and safety standards for baby foods. As a result, industry analysts Euromonitor have commented: "In Western Europe, most parents are unaware that, as a result of stringent EU regulations on permitted levels of pesticide residues in baby food, there is very little difference between regular and organic baby food."

Note: Baby Milk Action's partners in the International Baby Food Action Network (IBFAN) in Italy successfully campaigned against a cartel of formula companies keeping prices artificially high there. The companies involved were taken to court by the competition authorities and fined over Euros 9 million. 

For further information contact Mike Brady on 07986 736179.

Note: 

1. The International Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes and subsequent, relevant Resolutions of the World Health Assembly are minimum requirements for all countries. Article 11.3 of the Code requires companies to ensure their activities comply with the provisions independently of other measures.
2. The four countries of the UK have introduced the Infant Formula and Follow-on Formula Regulations and associated Guidance Notes which "shows how the regulations should be interpreted." 

Press release 3 June 2012

President Benigno S. Aquino III of the Philippines, who will shortly arrive in the UK, has been sent a message by Baby Milk Action and members of the public from around the world calling on him to stand firm in the face of lobbying from the baby food industry. The Infant and Pediatric Nutrition Association of the Philippines (IPNAP), consisting of Nestlé, Mead Johnson, Abbott and Fonterra, is pressing for amendments to Philippines law to be allowed to promote baby milks and target mothers with so-called 'educational' activities. Strong regulations came into force in 2007 after the industry brought an unsuccessful challenge against the government at the Supreme Court. According to the World Health Organisation 16,000 babies die every year in the Philippines due to inappropriate feeding.

Over 1,200 people from more than 40 countries have signed a petition of solidarity with the people of the Philippines.

For further details, download the attached letter and see:
http://info.babymilkaction.org/philippines2012 

Contact: Mike Brady, Campaigns and Networking Coordinator, on 07986 736179.

Press release 26 May 2012

Health campaigners including the International Baby Food Action Network are welcoming a new resolution (WHA 65.6) passed at the 65th World Health Assembly which calls on governments to strengthen controls on the marketing of breastmilk substitutes and to establish 'adequate mechanisms' to deal with conflicts of interest.

The Resolution will be especially important in relation to the new partnerships and "multi-stakeholder" arrangements that are springing up to tackle poor nutrition - many of which are pushing fortified processed baby foods and fuelling the multi-billion 'business of malnutrition.'  

Proposed by Canada, UK, Swaziland and Mexico, the Resolution ushered in WHO's Comprehensive Implementation Plan on Maternal, infant and young child nutrition, which emphasises the importance of breastfeeding and sound infant and young child nutrition in child survival.

An initial strong Resolution proposed by Swaziland and Uganda to protect infant health, prompted several days of behind the scenes wrangling, where Canada and the US called for the deletion of everything except a single line adopting the Implementation Plan. One particular sticking point was Paragraph 3.3. which requests the Director General of WHO  " to develop risk assessment, disclosure and management tools to safeguard against possible conflicts of interest in policy development and implementation of nutrition programmes consistent with WHO’s overall policy and practice."    The US wanted this tied down to the 'country level.'  However, after Norway stepped in, with support from Swaziland and other countries, saying that Conflicts of Interest need to be addressed at all levels, the reference to 'country Level'  was removed.  

During the Assembly debates several Member States expressed concerns about the emphasis on fortified processed foods and supplements, which may not be necessary and can also undermine support for and attention to breastfeeding and nutritious, affordable, culturally appropriate and sustainable local foods.  Indeed, instead of improving child health, many feared that the market-led approaches to "prevent" malnutrition championed by public-private-partnerships, could actually worsen the situation and increase further the double burden of malnutrition -  both under and over nutrition. In response to the particular concerns of Finland regarding the overemphasis on fortified supplements and other issues, the tables contained in the Action Plan were removed.   

The Global Alliance for Improved Nutrition (GAIN), which works with over 600 companies,  including Danone (the world's second largest baby food company and violator of the World Health Assembly baby food marketing requirements), PepsiCo, Mars and Kraft,  is one such body that has been lobbying to use health and nutrition claims to promote baby foods. Another initiative called, Scaling Up Nutrition (SUN) was wholeheartedly supported in the speech by the International Special Dietary Industries (ISDI). SUN has been encouraging developing countries to partner with companies to address malnutrition. However, it has yet to formulate its own conflict of interest safeguards. 

In calling  for Conflict of Interest safeguards at all levels and mandating WHO "to provide clarification and guidance on the inappropriate promotion of foods for infants and young children"  the Resolution could do much to clean up these initiatives and ensure that they work truly in the interests of child health.

Welcoming the Resolution,  Dr Francesco Branca, Director of WHO Nutrition, stressed the importance of having an agreement on a common vision on targets which can be measured, and where an accountability framework can be developed.

Maternal, infant and young child nutrition (WHA 65.6)

Resolution proposed by the delegations of Canada, Mexico,Swaziland and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

The Sixty-fifth World Health Assembly,

PP1  Having considered the report on maternal, infant and young child nutrition: draft comprehensive implementation plan,¹

1.    ENDORSES    the comprehensive implementation on maternal, infant and young child nutrition;

2.    URGES  Member states ² to put into practice, as appropriate, the comprehensive implementation plan on maternal, infant and young child nutrition, including:

1. developing or, where necessary, strengthening nutrition policies so that they comprehensively address the double burden of malnutrition and include nutrition actions in overall country health and development policy, and establishing effective intersectoral governance mechanisms in order to expand the implementation of nutrition actions with particular emphasis on the framework of the global strategy on infant and young child feeding;
2. developing or where necessary strengthening legislative, regulatory and/or other effective measures to control the marketing of breast-milk substitutes;
3. establishing a dialogue with relevant national and international parties and forming alliances and partnerships to expand nutrition actions with the establishment of adequate mechanisms to safeguard against potential conflicts of interest;
4. implementing a comprehensive approach to capacity building, including workforce development.

3.    REQUESTS the Director-General:

1. to provide clarification and guidance on the inappropriate promotion of foods for infants and young children as mentioned in resolution WHA63.23, taking into consideration ongoing work of the Codex Alimentarius;
2. to support Member States to monitor and evaluate policies and programmes, including those of the global strategy for infant and young child feeding, with the latest evidence on nutrition;
3. to develop risk assessment, disclosure and management tools to safeguard against possible conflicts of interest in policy development and implementation of nutrition programmes consistent with WHO’s overall policy and practice;
4. to report to the 67th World Health Assembly through the Executive Board on progress in the implementation of the code of marketing breastmilk substitutes and related WHA resolutions.

• IBFAN/Consumers International  Statement on WHO Reform read by Ina Verzivolli 

  IBFAN Comments on WHO Reform 

  IBFAN/Consumers International Statement  on Infant and Young Child Nutrition read by Dr Arun Gupta 

   

  WHO Reform and Public Interest Safeguards: An Historical Perspective, 

  by Judith Richter Social Medicine (www.socialmedicine.info) 147, Volume 6, Number 3, March 2012  (attached)  CLICK HERE

  http://info.babymilkaction.org/sites/info.babymilkaction.org/files/14.12.WHO reform Richter.pdf

   

• Thank you, chairperson.

  As Consumers International, the global federation of consumer organisations worldwide and an IBFAN founding member, we welcome the opportunity to address the Implementation Plan on Maternal, Infant and Young Child Nutrition.

  Poor infant and young child feeding practices are central to the problem of child malnutrition and survival and yet resources to protect, support and promote breastfeeding are far from commensurate with its importance and UNICEF warns that breastfeeding rates are stagnant or declining in many areas.

  We are concerned that the overemphasis on micronutrient interventions in the current plan, neglects the underlying causes of childhood malnutrition, many of which are in the 2002 Global Strategy for Infant and Young Child Feeding.

  We wish to raise the following points:

  Firstly the implementation plan should include indicators for the periodic evaluation of policies and programmes, as well as the identification of gaps and action plans to bridge them.

  Secondly we would like WHO to assist countries to end the inappropriate promotion of commercial complementary foods for infants and young children (WHA 63.23). In order to halt any further reappearance of promotional strategies that contravene the International Code on Marketing, the implementation plan should also include independent monitoring and reporting of such Code violations. This would be in line with Para 44 of the Global Strategy, which specifically obligates the infant feeding industry to provide safe products according to Codex Alimentarius and follow the Code and all its resolutions.

  Third, the proposal in para 31 to establish adequate mechanisms to safeguard against potential conflicts of interest should also be addressed by WHO and international partners, and not limited to member states. These mechanisms should be established before initiatives such as SUN are promoted to member states.

  We endorse the Resolution proposed by Swaziland and Uganda in Conference document 6.

  Finally we invite Member States to join us for the World Breastfeeding Conference in New Delhi on 6-9th December, in partnership with Government of India, which focuses on the Global Strategy and with the oblective of “Lets Protect Every Feeding Mother”, and campaign line, “Babies Need Mom-made Not Man-made”.

  Thank you Chair.

  
  

Press release 23 April 2012

Nestlé has won a fierce battle with Danone to acquire the Pfizer Nutrition business, including brands such as S-26, SMA and Promil brands of breastmilk substitutes. Nestlé is the one of the four most boycotted companies on the planet and the most boycotted in the UK - where it now enters the mass formula market - according to a past survey by GMI Poll. On 19 April Nestlé Chairman, Peter Brabeck-Letmathé, rejected a call at the company's shareholder meeting by Baby Milk Action to bring baby food marketing practices into line with World Health Assembly minimum standards, stating it was not for Baby Milk Action to tell him what to do.

Concerns raised by Baby Milk Action include Nestlé's targeting of health workers and parents. The International Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes prohibits companies from seeking direct or indirect contact with pregnant women and parents of infants and young children. In its press release announcing the Pfizer purchase, Nestlé CEO, Paul Bulcke, states: "The combined entities will enable us to deepen our engagement with consumers, offering them a wider choice of nutritious food to ensure their children make a healthy start to a healthy life."

Nestlé says of Pfizer Nutrition, "85% of its sales are in emerging markets". In poor conditions, breastfeeding saves lives. According to UNICEF: "Improved breastfeeding practices and reduction of artificial feeding could save an estimated 1.5 million children a year."

Baby Milk Action's Campaigns and Networking Coordinator, Mike Brady, said:

"Last week Mr. Brabeck rejected our call at the Nestlé shareholder meeting for Nestlé to bring its baby food marketing policies and practices into line with World Health Assembly minimum standards. Nestlé's announcement today reveals one of the ways the company undermines breastfeeding by suggesting mothers need Nestlé products to 'ensure their children make a healthy start to a healthy life'. Children fed on formula are more likely to become sick than breastfed children and, in conditions of poverty more likely to die, which is why breastfeeding is the true healthy start. Nestlé aims to be the largest player in any market it enters, driving down standards, which means things are about to get a whole lot worse in some countries where Pfizer's brands trail the competition."

See Baby Milk Action's press release: 
Nestlé Chairman rejects proposals from boycott coordinators at company AGM at:

http://info.babymilkaction.org/pressrelease/pressrelease19apr12

The purchase brings Nestlé into the UK market where it only has specialist products. The market leaders in the UK are Danone (Cow & Gate, Aptamil brands) and Pfizer (SMA brand). Current marketing violations by these companies are exposed on the Baby Feeding Law Group website at:
http://www.babyfeedinglawgroup.org.uk/reports/bflgreports 

Contact

Mike Brady on 07986 736179 or Patti Rundall (Policy Director) on 07786523493

Notes for editors

1. Nestlé is singled out for boycott action as it is the worst of the baby food companies in terms of the type and number of violations. Danone has become increasingly aggressive, particularly in asia, at it tries to compete following its takeover of the NUMICO brands in 2007. Baby Milk Action and its partners in the International Baby Food Action Network (IBFAN) expose violations by all companies and are in communication with executives encouraging them to bring policies and practices into line with World Health Assembly minimum standards.
2. Nestlé responded to the last global monitoring report from IBFAN, Breaking the Rules, Stretching the Rules 2010, by saying it would act on just four of the 130 violations it counted in its profile, or just 3%. Danone claimed to have already taken action accounting for 50% of the violations in its profile and subsequently agreed to remove its Immunofortis health claim, exposed in the report, from labels around the world.
3. According to industry analysts Euromonitor, Nestlé controls about 29% of the global baby milk market and Danone 15%.