"Baby Milk Action’s focus is ‘protection’. We work for products to be marketed appropriately and that is to protect both breastfeeding and babies fed on formula.
The protection we have achieved for mothers and carers who use formula is real and it is a bit disappointing to have our hard work in this area dismissed with a ‘glance’ at our website. However, I have learned to take comfort from knowing that we are helping mothers and babies, however they feed, whether we get thanked for it or not.
For example, if it was not for the work we have done with our partners at the European Union, the Codex Alimentarius Commission and elsewhere, the limits on the levels of pesticides in formula would be higher than currently permitted, inappropriate ingredients would be more common and marketing even more bogus and aggressive.
To take a for instance: Nestlé has tried several times to break into the UK market. The last time it did so was by launching a product called Nan HA, which is promoted as hypoallergenic. Nestlé was stopped from calling it ‘hypoallergenic’ in the United States and Canada after parents fed it to babies with cow’s milk allergy when it is unsuitable for this purpose - babies have suffered anaphylactic shock as a result. Hypoallergenic is a health claim and should not be used. We raised concerns about this when Nestlé launched the product in the UK and Nestlé was required by the Department of Health to add warning stickers to lids saying it should not be fed to babies with a known cow’s milk allergy. Health workers generally advise that allergic babies who are not being breastfed should use a fully hydrolysed formula. Soya formula can be used, but only on medical advice, due to other concerns about the safety of soya formula.
|Guardian: May 2007|
Now, people can be as cynical about Baby Milk Action as they like, but that piece of work to ensure that babies who needed it received fully hydrolysed formula or soya formula rather than Nestlé’s unsuitable product was not anti-formula. It was focused on what is always our primary focus: the well being of babies and the right of their mothers, carers and health workers to accurate information. "
"What makes Nestlé take notice is a hit to its profits and public image. Our job is to increase the pressure and exposure to force movement - which has happened time and again. We will eventually stop the ‘protect’ logos we are calling on Nestlé to remove from its formula labels. But the executives try all they can to divert criticism and have a big budget to link their name with good causes, so people look on them favourably. Nestlé has also tried to improve its image by launching a Fairtrade KitKat. This involves just 1% of the cocoa Nestlé purchases. At the same time, it has failed to deliver on a promise made in 2001 to stop child slavery in its cocoa supply chain within 5 years (by 2006). Campaigners in the US have taken Nestlé to court on behalf of children who were trafficked to farms supplying the company. There are also concerns over the source of palm oil in Nestlé products and the destruction of Indonesian rainforests to produce it. This was targeted in a Greenpeace campaign this year and Nestlé has said it will change its suppliers of palm oil - within 5 years.The more people who boycott Nestlé and tell the people who run the company, the more influence we have."
I have copied over from the website, The bits that moved me. I believe it is an issue that needs addressing. I for one believe in the power of the consumer. We are boycotting Nestle & all companies they profit from from New Years Eve.
For more info please see babymilkaction.org