UK breastfeeding picnics - 20 July 2009

Breastfeeding picnics in the UK, as reported on Morgan Gallagher's blog. See:

http://one-of-those-women.blogspot.com/

MAIN EVENT

Protect My Baby, Protect Me

Monday July 20th, 2009

Noon - 3pm

Victoria Tower Gardens

-o0o-

Birmingham Picnic

Monday July 20th, 2009

11am - 2pm

St Phillip's Cathedral

Colmore Road

Birmingham

Facebook Event

contact: breastfeeding@codepoets.co.uk

-o0o-

Poole Picnic

Bosum Buddies - Dorset

Monday July 20th, 2009

11am - 2pm

Poole Park

Poole

Facebook Event

contact: sophiesmailbox@yahoo.com

-o0o-

Stroud Picnic

Monday July 20th, 2009

11am - 3pm

Stratford Park

Facebook Event

contact: stroudrose@yahoo.co.uk

-o0o-

Warrington Picnic

Monday July 20th, 2009

Town Hall Park

Sankey Street

Warrington

Facebook Event

contact: jenniestevenson@googlemail.com

-o0o-

Salford Picnic

Monday July 20th, 2009

Noon - 2pm

Buile Hill Park

(in front of Mansion)

contact: j.wallsworth@gmail.com

-o0o-

Durham Picnic

Monday July 20th, 2009

Noon - 3pm

Palace Green

Durham

contact: sonia.bailey@gmail.com

Should mothers who use formula feel guilty?

Should mothers (and fathers) feel guilty for using formula rather than breastfeeding?

Plenty do - or feel they are expected to. Here's a comment someone has just posted anonymously on an earlier blog here:

---

Since all of you are clearly obsessed with the idea that formula feeding is bad, bad, bad - perhaps I should mention that for some mothers, it's the only alternative. My wife tried to breastfeed and in the end had to resort to bottle feeding. We didn't want to, and we didn't like it. But it was the only option we had. So for all you mums who sneer at the poor ignorant women formula-feeding their babies - good for you. We had no choice - and guess what? Our baby is a year old, healthy and a joy. So stick that in your narrow-minded obsessive pipe and smoke it.

---

I've also recently been contacted by a health worker who says she sees the ill health resulting from formula feeding - such as gastro-enteritis, ear infections - and raises the greater risk of diabetes and other long-term illnesses. She asks: " There seems to be an obsession about fear of "making Mums feel guilty" when it comes to breast feeding, but NOT with other health advice e.g. smoking and healthy eating and vacinnation advice etc. I don't know why this terror of Mums feeling guilty seems UNIQUE to breast feeding."

I stand by my often repeated - but as often ignored - comment that it is a mother's decision how she feeds her child and nobody should attempt to make her feel guilty about it.

I appreciate that some may disagree, but my view is that mothers have a right to accurate, independent information on infant feeding and the health implications of not breastfeeding. If a mother makes an informed decision not to breastfeed, then there are presumably reasons why other factors were judged to be of greater importance than breastfeeding. If she decided not to breastfeed because she was misinformed or misled by company propaganda which suggests formula and breastfeeding are equivalent, or did not have the support to overcome difficulties with breastfeeding, I'm not sure that it is either fair or productive to blame her for being failed by those responsible for regulating marketing practices and providing support.

Remember, in the UK, 90% of mothers who stopped breastfeeding before their child was 6 weeks old said they wanted to breastfeed for longer. The mother cited in the first quote, tried to breastfeed and wasn't able to make it work.

The ones who should feel guilty are those who have failed to implement and enforce the marketing standards that were adopted by the World Health Assembly in 1981 and Resolutions since which update and clarify them. In the UK, this means the drafters of the Infant Formula and Follow-on Formula Regulations which allow misleading advertising and labels to go onto the market. The ones who should feel guilty are the company executives who, as policy, seek to weaken legislation and systematically break the Code and Resolutions.

Those of us trying to promote and support breastfeeding need to do a better job of reaching mothers - it is not easy because the formula industry is far better resourced and uses dishonesty to undermine breastfeeding and suggest that formula feeding and breastfeeding are equivalent (or formula feeding is better - despite the legally required 'breast is best' message).

Rather than using guilt as a lever over mothers, I think a better approach is to understand the role of formula marketing and find better ways to communicate to mothers, particularly those who have had, or are having, a bad experience with breastfeeding. I do appreciate tireless efforts are being put into this already by many.

I do think all of us who are attempting to change formula-feeding cultures back into breastfeeding cultures - which exist or have been recovered in many countries - should redouble our efforts. Promoting the ONE MILLION CAMPAIGN is a good start:

http://www.onemillioncampaign.org/ - also shaming Nestlé, the worst of the baby food companies by promoting the Nestlé boycott: http://www.babymilkaction.org/

As a final thought, I think it is important that those who do use formula, for whatever reason, are also protected. Information should be accurate. Instructions should be correct. And formula should be cheaper - it has one of the highest mark-ups of any product. This is the aim of our safer formula campaign - see the site.

ONE MILLION CAMPAIGN - presentation at the World Health Assembly in May 2009

Please watch this film showing the presentation of 45,000 petition signatures gathered so far in the ONE MILLION CAMPAIGN to support mothers to breastfeed. Today there are over 59,000 signatures.

If you have not yet signed up, you can do so at:

http://www.onemillioncampaign.org/

If you have signed up, then spread the word using the resources you will find on the site.

Global Compact Critics on our Nestle complaint

Our complaint to the UN Global Compact office regarding Nestlé bringing the voluntary initiative into disrepute by using it to cover up its malpractice, is being downloaded and reported elsewhere.

The Global Compact Critics website tracks the shortcomings of the UN initiative. Its report on our complaint can be found at:

http://globalcompactcritics.blogspot.com/2009/06/international-campaign-calls-on-global.html

The World Alliance for Breastfeeding Action has highlighted the complaint on its front page at the moment. There is also news there of the rd WABA Global Forum, 14 -17 June 2010, Quebec City, Canada. See:

http://www.waba.org.my/

Interview on Nestlé's UN Global Compact cover up

I recently gave an interview to a Sheffield Live! radio station as part of an international student initiative in the build up to the next G8 summit. This has appeared on various websites, where you can listen to in online, including:

http://www.canstream.co.uk/sheffieldlive/index.php?id=16726

This included an exclusive on the launch of our report: Nestlé's UN Global Compact cover up. This report exposes how Nestlé breaches human rights and environmental standards and the strategies it uses to divert criticism. Amongst these is using the UN voluntary Corporate Social Responsibility initiative, the Global Compact, to portray its impact as wholly beneficial. We and colleagues who contribute to the Nestlé Critics site have lodged a formal complaint calling for Nestlé to be expelled from the initiative. See our press release for information at:

http://www.babymilkaction.org/press/press17june09.html

It is possible to download the report from the above link.

Fundraising to hold UK formula companies to account

We are waiting for the UK government's review panel to give its recommendations on what to do in response to continued aggressive marketing of formula following the introduction of the new Infant Formula and Follow-on Formula Regulations 2007 and the associated guidance notes.

As the monitoring reports we produce for the Baby Feeding Law Group (BFLG) show, violations remain 'commonplace' - to use the word of the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child in its assessment of the government's performance in protecting child rights. The Committee, like all health worker bodies, mother support groups and the government's own Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition have called for stronger regulations.

We continue to monitor the companies and will be producing a further report in the coming months. The next report will respond to the action - or lack of it - taken by the review panel. It will also go to the home authorities responsible for enforcing the regulations, to the Advertising Standards Authority and the Food Standards Agency. As the latest report shows, this has stopped some questionable marketing practices, but has mainly demonstrated the failings of the current regulatory and enforcement system.

To do this work, we rely on the support of volunteer monitors (some of whom we have trained), donations and sales of reports.

We are grateful to LatchOn.org for listing our project on its site at:

http://www.latchon.org/projects.htm?region=17

You can make a donation via that site or the BFLG site:

http://www.babyfeedinglawgroup.org.uk/

You can download the latest report and purchase a printed copy at:

http://www.babymilkaction.org/shop/publications01.html#bflgreports

Call for Nestlé to be expelled from UN initiative

As you may recall, Nestlé attempted to hi-jack the Nestlé Critics site shortly before its launch. The site serves as a portal for information on various aspects of Nestlé malpractice. See:
http://www.nestlecritics.org/

Nestlé not only tries to silence critics and to spy on them (see the report on the site), it uses a UN initiative called the UN Global Compact as cover so its abuses of human rights and the environment can continue. Nestlé produces glossy reports which are published on the UN Global Compact and have even been launched at joint events.

Unfortunately the UN Global Compact has no procedure for confirming if the reports are accurate and complete. Indeed, it stresses it is not intended to be an enforcement or verification agency. Its aim is to encourage corporate responsibility through voluntary means and by holding up good examples of 'Communications on Progress' - Nestlé has been honoured in this way.

So the initiative is fundamentally flawed and much criticised. I wrote a chapter in the book 'Global Obligations for the Right to Food' analysing these issues and calling for a regulatory system that could stop malpractice.

The Global Compact does have integrity measures, under which complaints can be filed if it is thought that a company is bringing the initiative into disrepute by systematic abuses of the principles it claims to support. Nestlé does this and more: it uses the initiative as cover so abuses can continue.

So the Nestlé Critics have filed a complaint and Nestlé has 3 months to respond. We and our partners have raised our various concerns with Nestlé repeatedly without success, so if they are dismissed again, will the Global Compact act to remove Nestlé's reports and strike it from the list of partners? We shall see.

There is a rather nice report of our own to go with our complaint, which I have put together. You can download this from our website, via the press release issued today at:
http://www.babymilkaction.org/press/press17june09.html

Martek profits boosted by formula company bogus claims

Martek, the company that produces Long Chain Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids, from algae for adding to formula is doing well for itself.

The BioHealth Investor site reports "its fiscal 2009 second-quarter profit rose by 20 percent"

Why such demand for LCPUFAs? The report notes: "Omega-3 fatty acids are believed to play an important role in brain and eye development."

True, as far as it goes. Adding processed LCPUFAs to formula, a different environment to breastmilk, where human LCPUFAs naturally occur, is not found to provide any benefit.

The independent and respected Cochrane Library reviewed the evidence and concluded:

http://www.cochrane.org/reviews/en/ab000376.html

"It has been suggested that low levels of long chain polyunsaturated fatty acids (LCPUFA) found in formula milk may contribute to lower IQ levels and vision skills in term infants. Some milk formulas with added LCPUFA are commercially available. This review found that feeding term infants with milk formula enriched with LCPUFA had no proven benefit regarding vision, cognition or physical growth."

Of course, the facts do not prevent Nestlé claiming its formula with LCPUFAs contains 'brain building blocks' or UK formula companies claiming they benefit brain and eye development. The companies do not follow the marketing requirements adopted by the World Health Assembly unless forced to do so.

This need not worry investors however. As Hambrecht & Quist said when it strongly recommended investors to buy shares in Martek Biosciences in the 1990s when it launched its Formulaid LCPUFA additive:

"The history of infant formula has shown that virtually all similar examples have led to wide-scale introduction of such additives into infant formula, even if there was no evidence that the additives were important. Infant formula is currently a commodity market with all products being almost identical and marketers competing intensely to differentiate their product. Even if Formulaid had no benefit we think that it would be widely incorporated into most formulas as a marketing tool and to allow companies to promote their formula as 'closest to human milk.'"

The question that parents need answered is whether it is worth spending more on formula that contains LCPUFAs. We have to direct parents to their health worker for information. However, as the World Health Assembly marketing requirements are not enforced in many countries, we know that health workers are not only misled by companies, but bombarded with gifts and hospitality to influence their views of the companies and their claims.

The official UK Department of Health line is that all formulas have to comply with composition standards so all formulas are equally suitable. There is no requirement to add LCPUFAs as there is not proven benefit from adding them. They are, however, believed to be safe.

The formula marketing regulations in the UK allow companies to add new ingredients to formula without proving their benefit or even safety: all they have to do is submit a copy of the label they plan to use to the Food Standards Agency.

This means that we are seeing what some have described as mass uncontrolled trials on populations of babies. While some parents may be persuaded to use formulas with LCPUFAs just in case, there is also the possibility that there may be unknown risks. In the US, a freedom of information request found that the Food and Drug Administration had registered reports from parents who believed their babies had had an adverse reaction to these ingredients. See:

http://boycottnestle.blogspot.com/2008/01/lcps-questioned.html

Formula is a nutritional medicine and, like any medicine, is intended for specific cases where it is needed. If it can be avoided, then the known health risks and possible unknown ones can also be avoided. This common sense approach is lost in the hype around formula - hype which is intended to make formula use seem to be a simple question of lifestyle so as to boost sales and profits for companies such as Martek.

It is a mother's right to decide how to feed her child and no-one should try to make her feel guilty for her decision: there are many factors involved.

It is not my purpose in pointing out what companies hide to make mothers feel guilty, but to shame our politicians for allowing companies to make bogus claims. My purpose is to defend a mother's right to make an informed decision. If she decides to use formula afterwards in any case, a decision based on facts rather than misinformation should be empowering.

While we have to be aware that some mothers feel pressured to breastfeed and demonised if they decide not to (or have no choice), I think it is also wrong and patronising to believe or argue that information should be kept hidden.

Those that use formula require better information: independent, objective information from health workers that have not been targeted by companies seeking to increase sales.

Demos against Nestlé and calls for leaders to act against baby milk pushers

It was a busy week last week with the World Health Assembly. We have had:

• New charts downgrading European countries for failing to act to stop aggressive marketing of breastmilk substitutes;

• The presentation of a petition calling for leaders around the world to act to protect their people;

• In the lead up to the Assembly, Baby Milk Action's Policy Director standing up at the Nestlé shareholder meeting, calling for Nestlé to change its ways, and a demonstration on the doorstep of Nestlé (UK).

Our partners from the International Code Documentation Centre launched a new State of the Code Chart by Country at the Assembly. This shows the action taken by governments to implement the World Health Assembly marketing requirements for breastmilk substitutes. Many have taken effective action, action which is helping to protect infant health. However, others have not done so. Indeed, most of the countries of the European Union have failed in their responsibilities to such an extent that they have been downgraded on the chart following the introduced of a new Directive in 2006. Only two countries, Luxembourg and Norway, put the well-being of their people first by going beyond the Directive. Read a press release from ICDC at:

http://www.babymilkaction.org/press/press21may09.html

The Chart can be ordered through the Baby Milk Action online Virtual Shop at:

http://www.babymilkaction.org/shop/publications01.html#socs

The ONE MILLION CAMPAIGN presented a petition with over 40,000 signatures calling for leaders to do more to protect, promote and support breastfeeding - thank you to everyone who has signed. If you have not done so, please do so. If you have, then please keep encouraging others to add their names as the petition will be used nationally and internationally in the future. See the ONE MILLION CAMPAIGN press release at:

http://www.babymilkaction.org/press/press23may09.html

Nestlé is found to be the worst of the baby food companies. Patti Rundall OBE, Policy Director of Baby Milk Action, raised concerns at the shareholder meeting in April. These were dismissed by executives, but then the problems come from the very top: in the adjoining hall examples of Nestlé formula tins were on proud display with labels claiming it would 'protect' babies. In reality, formula-fed babies are more likely to become sick in the short and long term and, in conditions of poverty, more likely to die.

Images from this and the annual demonstration at Nestlé (UK) HQ on 16 May can be found at:

http://www.babymilkaction.org/press/press22may09.html

Many thanks to everyone who came to the demo, organised things locally or participated in the virtual demonstration on facebook: over 700 people signed up, prompting a reaction from the police Intelligence Unit. Find out more on the newswire report at:

http://www.communitynewswire.press.net/article.jsp?id=5787939

World Health Assembly President receives ONE MILLION CAMPAIGN petition

Congratulations to the ONE MILLION CAMPAIGN, to everyone who has signed the petition and everyone who has been encouraging others to sign. Don't stop! The growing petition will continue to be used nationally and internationally.

Press release from the ONE MILLION CAMPAIGN:

Voices of 45000 People Reach World Health Assembly with a Call to Save Newborn Lives

This week, IBFAN, the International Baby Food Action Network, made a clear call when it launched its ‘One Million Campaign: Support Women to Breastfeed’ (www.onemillioncampaign.org) at World Health Assembly. The IBFAN team submitted a petition to the President of World Health Assembly, Mr. NS de Silva, signed by more than 45000 people from 161 countries.

Mr. de Silva said as he received the petition: “…In Sri Lanka we have very specific indicators……with our campaign for promoting (exclusive)breastfeeding, it has come to 78% , we are happy about it, and we want the Asia region, and whole world should promote this concept !”

The petition demands concrete support systems for breastfeeding women to increase the coverage of early and exclusive breastfeeding. This would help save more than one million newborn and infant lives annually, as well improve the health of their mothers. Needless to say, it will also set a path for healthy adult life.

Dr. Arun Gupta, the regional coordinator of IBFAN Asia, went on to present the demands of the petition to the World Health Assembly, urging the Assembly to adopt a resolution in 2010 to deal with 4 key issues. First, to prepare a specific plan of action on infant feeding which is budgeted and coordinated in the same way as action plans for immunisation. Second, to ensure the end of promotion of baby milks and foods intended for children under 2 years in a time-bound manner, that is by 2015. Third, to end partnerships in the area of infant and young child feeding and nutrition with commercial sector corporations that present conflicts of interests. And fourth, to create support and maternity entitlements for women both in the formal and informal sectors, so that mothers and babies can stay close to each other for six months at least.

Today, the World Health Organisation recognised the importance for infants to be exclusively breastfed: at the launch of the World Health Statistics Report 2009, for the first time, this key indicator was included in the statistics. While including an indicator on exclusive breastfeeding is good step forward, says Alison Linnecar, of IBFAN, "Early and exclusive breastfeeding should be monitored in the process of tracking progress of Millennium Development Goal (MDG) 4 goal of child survival, both nationally and globally".

The report reveals that about only 48 million of 135 million babies born are able to benefit from exclusive breastfeeding, due to reasons such as aggressive promotion of baby milks and baby foods and lack of supportive health systems.

Many countries have still to enact national legislation to end this promotion in compliance with the International Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes that was adopted by the World Health Assembly in 1981. Says Annelies Allain of IBFAN “Action must be accelerated on this crucial intervention”.

According to Dr Gupta, "There is an increasing trend towards mobilising public private partnerships in these areas, which is not healthy. These are a way for corporations to increase their profits….It is business for corporations meeting their basic objectives. Commercial interference on parents’ infant feeding decisions should end."

Contacts:

Arun Gupta, IBFAN Asia

Phone: +91119899676306

E-mail: arun@ibfanasia.org

ONE MILLION CAMPAIGN launched in Bangladesh

The ONE MILLION CAMPAIGN is presenting a petition at the World Health Assembly this week, calling for leaders at the meeting of the world's highest health policy setting body to do more to protect, promote and support breastfeeding. Signatures will continue to be collected. You can sign at:

http://www.onemillioncampaign.org/

An official launch of the campaign took place in Bangaldesh this week, with speakers from the International Baby Food Action Network (IBFAN), WHO, UNICEF and a government Minister and other officials.

There is a report in the Daily Star at:

http://www.thedailystar.net/newDesign/news-details.php?nid=89341

"Nestlegate' spying scandal returns to the courts - will be raised at Nestlé demonstration Saturday

At the Nestlé shareholder meeting on 23 April, ACTARES, a group of campaigning shareholders, raised the case of Nestlé employing a spy to infiltrate the group ATTAC Switzerland.

Nestlé Chairman, Peter Brabeck-Letmathé, apparently stated that he did not believe they did anything wrong, and if it it was found to be, such as practice was contrary to Nestlé policies and would result in disciplinary action.

Strange then, that in the court case brought by ATTAC Switzerland documents apparently reveal that the spy, employed through SECURITAS, reported to a former MI6 officer, John Hedley, Nestlé's head of security. Details have been posted on the Nestlé Critics site at:
http://www.nestlecritics.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=54&Itemid=1

Now, Nestlé is fighting the case in the courts and did succeed in having it thrown out. Today, however, it is reported that an appeal court has overturned this decision. ATTAC Switzerland had complained that the investigation had not been through enough. See:
http://worldradio.ch/wrs/news/wrsnews/activists-win-court-round-against-nestl.shtml?13669

So perhaps the courts will yet tell Mr. Brabeck that spying on campaingers is wrong and next meeting he will have to report on the disciplinary action taken against those (including himself?) who thought it was acceptable.

In light of the fact that the Chairman's speech to shareholders misses much out about the companies practices, I will be making an alternative Chairman's speech on his behalf on the doorstep of Nestlé (UK) HQ on Saturday as part of the annual demonstration. Check back here for the text and film of the event. There is an early report on this and the virtual event on facebook on Community Newswire at:
http://www.communitynewswire.press.net/article.jsp?id=5787939

For reports on the spying case in the Swiss press this week in French see:

http://www.romandie.com/infos/news2/090513165052.zxz94nhl.asp

http://info.rsr.ch/fr/rsr.html?siteSect=840&sid=10693526&cKey=1242240054000

http://www.20min.ch/ro/news/vaud/story/18152062

Message from the ONE MILLION CAMPAIGN: Add your name in time for the World Health Assembly

Just a Few days to go to submit the petition to World leaders ! Sign it NOW !

About 10 million of the world's children die every year before they reach their fifth birthday. That is, over 27,000 per day, or over 1100 per hour. Of these 1100, over a third - more than 450 - are less than a month old. Evidence tells us that good breastfeeding practices can save thousands of these babies. Unfortunately, not even half the women of the world can carry out adequate breastfeeding. 135 Million, babies are born every year. Only 64 million women can initiate timely breastfeeding. Only 48 million women can practise exclusive breastfeeding for six months. They cannot carry out adequate breastfeeding of their babies because they lack support.

IN JUST 5 DAYS we will make the first petition presentation to policy makers at the World Health Assembly in Geneva to demand this support to women for being successful in breastfeeding and stop unethical marketing of baby foods/formula. More than 40,000 people have already joined. Add your voice to strengthen the petition. http://www.onemillioncampaign.org/en/Details_Petitions.aspx

So Hurry Up, and Sign It Now and use Tell Your Friends option to ask as many people as you can to sign before then.

Thanks !

Team ONE MILLION CAMPAIGN- Support Women to Breastfeed

www.onemillioncampaign.org

Association of Breastfeeding Mothers conference 20 June 2009

The Association of Breastfeeding Mothers will be holding their Annual General Meeting on 20 June at DeMontfort University, Leicester.

You can find additional details at:

http://www.abm.me.uk/ABM%20conference%202009.htm

Speakers include Gay Palmer, whose updated book The Politics of Breastfeeding has just arrived from the publishers and is available at:

http://www.babymilkaction.org/shop/publications02.html#politics

Further details on the ABM site.

ABM has been working for 30 years to bring mothers together to improve protection, promotion and support for breastfeeding. Long may it continue to thrive!

NBAW, PoB and Demo

I've sent out the following email alert. You can subscribe to receive alerts at:

http://www.babymilkaction.org/pages/contact.html#contactform

---

This email contains news on:

1. A talk for UK National Breastfeeding Awarness Week (11 May 2009)

2. The Politics of Breastfeeding NOW AVAILABLE - including limited number of signed copies

3. Reminder of demonstration at Nestle (UK) HQ Crodyon 16 May, 11:00 - 12:00.

[Information on how to unsubscribe - we won't spam you!!]

1. A talk for UK National Breastfeeding Awarness Week (11 May 2009)

UK National Breastfeeding Awareness Week begins on 11 May 2009. Baby Milk Action has prepared a presentation for this with information from the UK monitoring project we coordinate on behalf the Baby Feeding Law Group, a coalition of UK health professional and mother support organisations. The talk can be viewed at:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GxPUsbTqa0I

And at:

http://boycottnestle.blogspot.com/2009/05/nbaw-09.html

Reports prepared as a result of the project have been submitted to enforcement authorities. Trading Standards have raised our concerns with the companies, which are resistant to change. However, Heinz is removing its non-compliant 'prebiotics' claim from labels. Wyeth is removing its 'new improved protein balance' claim and has improved its instructions to bring these closer to UK Department of Health guidance for parents (indicating using water above 70 deg. C to reconstitute powdered formula and then allowing this to cool - however, it does not explain this is because powdered formula is not sterile and may contain harmful bacteria). Nestlé has been warned it cannot distribute a video to health workers as it has not obtained the required permission from the Department of Health.

However, overall the responses from the authorities show that the UK regulations issued in 2008 are having little effect in curbing aggressive marketing and that associated Guidance Notes are unenforceable. These responses have been submitted with the final report sent to a government review panel investigating the effectiveness of the law. The panel will issue its recommendations shortly. Our report can be downloaded at:

http://www.babymilkaction.org/shop/publications01.html#bflgreports

Reports were also submitted to the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, which called on the Government to fully implement the International Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes in its report on the UK in October 2008.

Monitoring continues and we are seeking further donations to enable this work to continue. You can make a donation at:

http://www.babymilkaction.org/shop/donation.html#bflg

Please do continue to report cases of malpractice via the site:

http://www.babyfeedinglawgroup.org.uk/monitoring.html

2. The Politics of Breastfeeding NOW AVAILABLE

At last this in-depth, fascinating examination of cultural influences on breastfeeding is available once again, completely updated.

Subtitled 'When breasts are bad for business' and written by Gabrielle Palmer, a founder of Baby Milk Action, it provides insight into the strategies used by the baby food industry since its inception and how the campaign to hold it to account has turned the tide.

A limited number of signed copies are available:

http://www.babymilkaction.org/shop/publications02.html#politics

3. Reminder of demonstration at Nestle (UK) HQ Crodyon, UK, 16 May, 11:00 - 12:00.

If you can't make it to Croydon, why not hold a demonstration at another site linked to Nestle, such as a factory, a Body Shop outlet (part-owned by Nestle) or shops selling Nestle goods?

If you are coming to Croydon, please let us know (if you have not done so already) at:

http://www.babymilkaction.org/action/demo09.html

You can use the same page to order leaflets for a local event.

Also see the boycott section of our online Virtual Shop for useful materials:

http://www.babymilkaction.org/shop/boycott.html

You can also support the online virtual demonstration, by signing up on Facebook at:

http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=59171734370

A talk for UK National Breastfeeding Awareness Week

National Breastfeeding Awareness Week begins next week and I've prepared a youtube talk to mark it.

This is a good time to remember that companies continue to undermine breastfeeding and put formula-fed babies at risk with their practices. Governments in many countries are failing to stop them, including here in the UK.

Our colleagues in India launched the ONE MILLION CAMPAIGN to gather signatures on a petition calling for our leaders to act. I've prepared a powerpoint presentation and talk about this, which anyone is welcome to adapt for their own use. Just contact me.

It is available on youtube with me giving the voice over. Take a look and if you find it useful, pass it on. Whatever, please sign up to the ONE MILLION CAMPAIGN at:

http://www.onemillioncampaign.org/

Did you unfortunately object to the EU feeding bottle image?

There is a way of apologising that is no apology at all.

Here's an example: "It is unfortunate that you interpreted my suggestion that you go and jump off a cliff as an insult. That was never my intention."

Further discussion can be forestalled by adding: "It was a off-hand comment which I have no intention of repeating."

So the person who complained was at fault for their interpretation and would be small minded if they continue to make an issue of it.

This is similar to the approach taken by the European Parliament when people have raised its use of a feeding bottle in a promotional campaign for the forthcoming European Election. This was used to highlight parenthood and work-life balance. See below and my blog at:

http://boycottnestle.blogspot.com/2009/04/baby-care-signs.html

Here is the response:

---Email from the European Parliament

Dear ****, 

I refer to your recent message about the use of a picture of a baby's feeding bottle in the EP's publicity campaign to raise awareness of the 2009 elections.

I understand that the poster campaign was for a limited period and has now ended. I would point out that the purpose of the campaign is to remind voters that, throughout our lives, we are required to take decisions and that it is for each of us to exercise our responsibilities in this respect. In the present case, we should participate in the democratic process.

The different images all point to choices with which we are faced but they do not prejudge the answers and most certainly do not indicate a right or wrong course of action. On the particular issue of breastfeeding and its desirability, the European Parliament is not contesting this - quite the reverse since the Parliament has on many occasions supported breastfeeding in all possible circumstances. I can assure you that your views have been noted and that it is unfortunate that this image has been interpreted by some as encouraging bottle- feeding. This was never the intention. 

Thank you for your message and your interest in the European Parliament. 
Sincerely, 
***** 
----------------------------------------------- 
European Parliament 
Directorate General for Communication 
Correspondence with Citizens Unit

Well, yes, it is unfortunate that this poster is interpreted as encouraging bottle feeding. But it is more unfortunate that more thought was not put into the use of images.

And more unfortunate still that the response shows nothing has been learned by the Directorate General for Communication.

Policing the Nestle demonstration in Croydon and cyberspace

The annual demonstraton at Nestle UK HQ will take place in Croydon on Saturday 16 May 2009 from 11:00 to 12:00 (noon). For details and to sign up to let us know that you are coming, go to:
http://www.babymilkaction.org/action/demo09.html

If you can't make it to Croydon, you could organise a local event at a Nestle factory, Body Shop (part-owned by Nestle) or a retail outlet selling Nestle products. See the above link for information, resources and leafleting guidelines.

This year we are also holding a virtual event, which you can sign up to on Facebook at:
http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=59171734370

The numbers of people signing up on Facebook has put the local police into a bit of a panic! We have been contacted asking to discuss arrangements for crowd control. I've responded pointing out that this is usually a problem with events in cyberspace!

However, just to be sure people are not jetting into Croydon from China, the US, New Zealand and some of the other places 'confirmed' participants live, please complete the online form if you are REALLY intending to come to the REAL event outside the REAL Nestle HQ.
http://www.babymilkaction.org/action/demo09.html

We hope to see as many of you there as possible. This is a family-friendly event. There will be a short theatre piece alongside the leafleting and hopefully we'll be able to post this online soon afterwards for those who attended in spirit.

Nestle's 142nd AGM

Today it's Nestle's 142nd Annual General Meeting in Lausanne, Switzerland.

I bought a Nestle share a few years ago to attend and raise questions, but Nestle wouldn't allow me to register it to have this right, something the stockbroker had never come across before. All the same I was able to attend a couple of years ago, though not to speak.

Some people did raise some issues of importance to shareholders regarding the criticisms Nestle was facing around the world. They were hissed and booed for doing so. Read my report here:
http://boycottnestle.blogspot.com/2007/04/glimpse-of-nestls-soul.html

There is a webcast from this year's AGM on the Nestle site. It will be interesting to see if they include any critics who are able to speak.
http://www.nestle.com/InvestorRelations/Events/AllEvents/142nd+Annual+General+Meeting.htm

More on what happened shortly.

April Fool: the American Academy of Pediatrics is not really cutting its links with formula companies

Did you see the apparent press release from the American Academy of Pediatricians (AAP) stating that the US body would no longer accept sponsorship from the infant formula industry? Did you notice the date was April 1st - April fools' day?

The fact is that the AAP, which has been criticised in the past for sponsored events and materials, is not cutting its links with the industry. The bogus press release which the hoaxer attributed to the President of the AAP stated: "Further, I would like to apologize for our past mistakes involving the> breastfeeding advertisement campaign and allowing the maker of Similac> infant formula to print its corporate logo on the cover of a special edition> of the academy's book on breastfeeding."

This was a reference to a past controversy, as reported in the Abott Ross entry in Breaking the Rules, Stretching the Rules 2004, produced by the International Baby Food Action Network (IBFAN) International Code Documentation Centre:
http://www.ibfan.org/site2005/Pages/article.php?art_id=302&iui=1

---Extract begins
This same strategy [of image transfer] was used for a well-known breastfeeding book published in 2002 by the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP); Abbott bought 300,000 copies and added the Rosco bear to the cover. Mothers and doctors who receive a free copy, get a double message. Does it promote breastfeeding or Similac? The chairman of the AAP breastfeeding committee called it “Thievery”. But AAP makes a profit and agreed to sell Abbott another 300,000 copies in 2003. Abbott has continously nurtured close ties with the AAP by giving grants for its awards and donating at least $500,000 towards AAP’s operating budget. The company also contributes to the $1 million renewable grant to the AAP by several formula manufacturers. Little wonder that AAP came to the companies’ aid when they felt a 2003 US government campaign to promote breastfeeding was too hard-hitting on the risks of formula feeding. The campaign has now been watered down.
---extract ends

The hoax press release ended: "Again, I can cannot express enough regret and can assure you that the AAP will immediately seek compliance with the WHO Code and will promote the Baby Friendly Hospital Initiative."

The issues of sponsorship and conflicts of interest are addressed by the International Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes and subsequent, relevant Resolutions of the World Health Assembly, calling for care over links with commercial enterprises.

The hoax was sent by a doctor to the Lactnet discussion group. AAP's lawyers have called for past postings, from an identified doctor, to be removed after apparently being contacted by members of the public about the change in policy.

So to be clear, the policy has not changed. The AAP has yet to be persuaded to comply with WHA Resolutions on conflicts of interest, including the latest to deal with this WHA 58.32 from 2005, which calls for action to: "ensure that financial support and other incentives for programmes and health professionals working in infant and young-child health do not create conflicts of interest."

Baby care signs

People have been contacting us about promotional materials for the forthcoming European Parliamentary elections taking place in June.

It's one of those cases showing that bottle feeding is so deeply lodged in the culture that it is used to signify babies. One of the postcards states: "How should we help balance family and career?"

Family is symbolised by a feeding bottle.


We raised these concerns with the media. The Observer reported on the controversy last Sunday:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2009/apr/12/european-parliamentary-election-breastfeeding-poster

Too often the same approach is used with baby care rooms in pubic places, when it does not take very much imagination to use an alternative symbol.

A straightforward approach is to show a baby. This example includes braille for when it is used on a door, available at:
http://www.uksafetysigns.co.uk/order/products.asp?id=2624




The Australian Breastfeeding Association is promoting this image along with minimum criteria for baby care rooms:
http://www.breastfeeding.asn.au/products/babycare.html



It is important to remember, of course, that providing a room for mothers to go with their babies is no justification for prohibiting them feeding their child elsewhere, whether bottle feeding or breastfeeding.

The International Breastfeeding Symbol organisation is promoting a logo for breastfeeding-friendly organisations. You can also place it on your site with a link back to:
http://www.breastfeedingsymbol.org/

Using a botle in the European Parliament campaign or for baby care rooms is sending a strong message about what is considered to be the norm for infant feeding, whether intentional or not. I'd be surprised if the Australian baby care symbol or even the International Breasfeeding Symbol have the same negative impact as the breastfeeding position is a nurturing position. I'm interested in feedback on this.

Of course, formula companies use similar images to link their products with the idea of breastfeeding. As with the SMA logo, subvertised in this short clip I put together:



Wyeth introduced this logo for its SMA formula after being required to remove its 'closer to breastmilk claim' from labels. However, enforcement authorities have taken no action on the grounds that the breastfeeding logo could just be a letter 'M'. My response is, if Wyeth wanted it to be a letter 'M' it would have used a letter 'M'.

Nestle uses a similar approach on its Bear Brand products - I highly irresponsible marketing approach as these are unsuitable for infant feeding. The example below is from coffee creamer:


After the impact of this logo in promoting misuse of the product as a breastmilk substitute was highlighted in research in the British Medical Journal Nestle eventually agreed to change it:
http://boycottnestle.blogspot.com/2009/01/nestle-bear-brand.html

Which just goes to show the impact of images and why those behind the European Parliament campaign should re-think.

For more on the use of images to convey meaning and the feeding bottle in particular, see this blog from Morgan Gallagher:
http://one-of-those-women.blogspot.com/2009/04/signs-symbols-barthes-bottles.html

Action to protect infant health - events coming up in May

Here is a round up of news and coming action, covering:

* Our new UK monitoring report: Hard Sell Formula 2009.

* Gather signatures for the ONE MILLION CAMPAIGN ready for the World Health Assembly in May 2009.

* Demonstration at Nestle (UK) HQ, Croydon, 16 May 2009.

Our new UK monitoring report: Hard Sell Formula 2009.

Thank you to everyone in the UK who has provided monitoring evidence to the project we run on behalf of the Baby Feeding Law Group. This evidence goes into reports sent to the UK enforcement authorities and the government panel reviewing the law. Past reports have profiled the main companies. The March 2009 follows an alternative approach, giving an overview of marketing strategies.



The strategies covered are:

• START before they are born...
• PUSH in supermarkets...
• IDEALISE products...
• OFFER gifts...
• ADVERTISE...
• CO-OPT health workers...

The report can be downloaded free of charge. Printed copies can be purchased, which helps to fund the project. See:
http://www.babymilkaction.org/shop/publications01.html#bflgreports


Gather signatures for the ONE MILLION CAMPAIGN ready for the World Health Assembly in May 2009.

The World Health Assembly in May will be examining various health issues and members from the International Baby Food Action Network (IBFAN) from several countries will attend to inform policy makers about the latest concerns regarding infant feeding. The practices exposed in our monitoring report and those of other groups around the world show the need for action to strengthen and enforce marketing standards.

To help gain policy makers' attention, people are signing a petition calling for action to protect breastfeeding. If you haven't signed already, you can do so at:
http://www.onemillioncampaign.org/en/Details_Petitions.aspx

If you have a blog or website, why not add the logo shown on this blog?

For other ways to promote the campaign see the Facebook group at:
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=50360141389


Demonstration at Nestle (UK) HQ, Croydon, 16 May 2009.

The annual demonstration at Nestle (UK) HQ will take place from 11:00 - 12:00 on Saturday 16 May 2009.

If you can't make it to Croydon, why not hold a demonstration at another site linked to Nestle, such as a factory, a Body Shop outlet (part-owned by Nestle) or shops selling Nestle goods?

You can find information and resources at:
http://www.babymilkaction.org/action/demo09.html

Also see the boycott section of our online Virtual Shop for useful materials:
http://www.babymilkaction.org/shop/boycott.html

You can also support the online virtual demonstration, by signing up on Facebook at:
http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=59171734370

The right to food book reviews

The book Global Obligations for the Right to Food has been reviewed in a couple of current publications. The International Lactation Consultant Association features it in its March 2009 review.
http://www.ilca.org/

The Food Magazine, which examines the practices of the food industry and the action needed to protect and improve its impact on public health, carries a review in January/March 2009 issue (no. 84) available on its website:
http://www.foodmagazine.org.uk/

My chapter on holding corporations to account is one amongst ten, edited by Professor George Kent. The Food Magazine review states: "Kent’s book is a valuable start into this world of politics, money and power. It pleads for greater institutional (national and UN-based) involvement in ensuring that the principles established in the right to food and the other charters and conventions that lay down human rights are put into practice in national law and international agreements."

You can find more at:
http://boycottnestle.blogspot.com/2008/02/global-obligations.html

You can order the book at:
http://www.babymilkaction.org/shop/publications02.html#gorf