Nestle, Death, and Discussion

When infant formula is marketed as a substitute for human milk in developing countries, babies die. Families who are made to believe that formula is healthy often lack safe, clean water to prepare the formula. Babies contract disease from contaminated water. Mothers start formula-feeding, or supplementing, often with samples donated by the formula company, but they can’t afford the full amount that an infant requires, leading to over-dilution of formula, malnutrition and death. Nestle, yes, the same company that makes the chocolate we love to eat, is the biggest player in the worldwide market of breastmilk substitutes and violator of the World Health Organization’s International Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes.

That’s the short story.

Over the past 2 days, this post by Annie at PhD in Parenting has sparked a level of intelligent, passionate, critical discussion that I have never before witnessed. In her post, she urges attendees of a Nestle-sponsored event to reconsider participation in light of Nestle’s unethical practices, and explains the background of the problem. The number of comments reached 120 by the time the discussion attracted the attention of a Nestle USA Senior Vice President who posted a comment with a general response, and the comments continue to pour in.

Years ago, Nestle bought my loyalty, but I didn’t realize it at the time. Before this, I was only vaguely aware of the problem, through my Certified Lactation Educator/Counselor course. It didn’t make enough of an impression on me to prevent me from supporting Nestle with my own professional attention and personal purchase of their formula. A few years ago, a Nestle representative took me (and 2 other pediatric dietitians) out to lunch. My impression originally was that it was to be an informative session, but I gradually caught on that we were being marketed to, and our loyalty bought by not only the pricey meal, but bags of gifts bearing the Nestle logo. He went through the biochemistry of the composition and digestion of GoodStart, showing its superiority to other formulas. It made me uncomfortable, and more so now that I am aware of their worldwide marketing practices. Yet when I later had to (temporarily) supplement my own breastfed infant, which brand of formula did I choose? Nestle’s GoodStart. I am embarrassed to admit it.

I have witnessed, to a small extent, the impact of formula marketing in the developing world. A few years ago, I spent a month living and working in a center for malnourished infants and children in rural Guatemala. It was so sad. I saw the over-dilution of infant formula, the center’s staff desperate for formula donations despite the presence of staff with abundant milk supplies (they nursed each others children) and the malnourished babies had mothers who visited them. . . why, oh why were they not breastfed? I knew so little about breastfeeding at the time, so it didn’t occur to me to ask these questions and get involved.

So please go read this post. And if you really want to get into it, read the comments. Follow the links. And in the meantime, I’m not purchasing from Nestle anymore.

Readers, have you been in a developing country and seen the marketing and use of infant formula? Is it different from these practices in the developed world? What should we do?