Marketing of formula
Main articles: infant formula and Nestlé boycott
Beginning in the late 1970s Nestlé began to attract global criticism for its
infant-formula marketing policies, especially those conducted in
developing countries. Public outcry peaked with the
Nestlé boycott of 1977 which (though suspended for several years in the mid-1980s) it remains in effect today. Nestlé is the most boycotted company in the world as a result
[1].
Evidence
[2] shows that Nestlé advertised and still advertises its formula as a risk-free substitute (or even a preferable alternative) to
breastmilk, resulting in increased use and often replacing available breastmilk. There is a substantial body of evidence
[3] on the risks of the use of formula. Risks stem from the intrinsic problems of use of a non human substance as a food for the human infant, the risks of contamination of the product itself with chemical contaminants or pathogenic bacteria
[4] or the risks of incorrect or unsafe making up or storage and use of formula in bottles. The risks of formula are much greater when used in the developing world with about 1.5 million deaths a year attributable to lack of breastfeeding
[5]. However deaths also occur in the developed world
[6] especially among premature infants who are at increased risk of necrotising enterocholitis when fed with formula.
The promotion and distribution of formula, particularly in undeveloped regions, continues.
[11][12] Responding to criticism, Nestlé now labels all non-formula milk products (such as
coffee creamer) with explicative warnings such as, "this product is not to be used as a breast milk substitute."
[13] The agricultural conglomerate also voiced its agreement to abide by the nonbinding
International Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes established in 2004 by the
World Health Assembly, though the company has faced multiple allegations of breaching this policy.
[14][15][16][17] The most recent evidence of malpractice came in February 2008, to which Nestlé responded by halting distribution of one product line and shutting down the operations of an independent licensee.
[13]
