"Over one million babies will die this year from diarrhoea because their mothers have been sold unnecessary bottle feeds".
There seems to be little, if any, dispute amongst nutritional experts that breast milk is best for babies, and for the poor it has the additional advantage of being free. In addition, a baby receives antibodies in the mother’s colostrum which gives some immunity from a number of infectious diseases.
There are a few mothers who are unable to breast feed and have to resort to artificial feeds as a subsititute, but the vast majority of mothers are able to feed their babies satisfactorily. But capitalism is not concerned with the best interests of developing babies—profits are the overriding priority and, therefore, business strategies have been devised to persuade mothers to use milk substitutes instead.
In the industrialised countries many mothers from working-class homes have to return to work within a few weeks of giving birth to earn wages to help support their families. This forces many of them to abandon breast feeding in favour of bottle feeds which can be given by other members of the family or child-minders.
Infants from poorer families have substantially higher mortality rates than the wealthy, in which artificial feeding, by depriving the babies from receiving some of their natural immunity, plays a part. There is also a risk of over-feeding and obesity if the feed is mixed too richly. Obese children tend to develop habits of over-eating and grow up into obese adults.
In underdeveloped countries artificial feeding can be a matter of life or death. Dr Peter Poore, chief medical officer for Save The Children states:
For a sub-Saharan African baby the early termination of breast feeding can be tantamount to a death sentence. (Guardian, 8 March).
Food and drug firms in industrialised countries spend millions of pounds trying to persuade doctors, nurses and mothers in underdeveloped countries to abandon breast feeding and use artificial feeds. In 1981 the World Health Organisation and UNICEF’s code was adopted by most industrialised nations which prohibited advertising and stopped free artificial feeds being supplied to hospitals.
This has not prevented tinned milk from being donated to hospitals, allegedly for mothers unable to breast feed. But the supply of milk substitutes far outweighs the number of mothers who need it and is clearly intended to persuade other mothers to abandon breast feeding. Far from being charitable, hard-headed commercial considerations are behind the “donation” of milk substitutes.
In underdeveloped countries it is rare to find a mother who is unable to breast feed. The supply of free artificial feeds is designed to create a dependence on the product. Once the mother has stopped breast feeding for a while the milk supply dries up and the mother has no choice but to continue using bottle feeds.
The European Commission, after secret consultations with food and drugs manufacturers, has decided to remove most of the regulations governing the advertising and supply of milk substitutes. This directive will come into force in 1992 and, in the future, aggressive advertising will be used to promote artificial feeds to provide profits at the expense of babies’ lives.
Aggressive advertising
In urban Brazil, studies have shown that bottle-fed babies are 14 times more likely to die from diarrhoeal infections and three times more likely to die from respiratory infections. Many mothers in underdeveloped countries dilute artificial feeds too much because they are too poor to pay for sufficient tinned milk once they have become dependent on it. In some countries the water supply is contaminated or fuel to sterilise the bottles and teats is in short supply.
The continuation of breast feeding also reduces the chance of becoming pregnant. And while it is only partly effective it does help women in poorer countries to space their children in the absence of more effective contraceptive methods. The encouragement of mothers to abandon breast feeding removes this natural contraceptive effect and leads to unwanted pregnancies.
In addition to the supply of milk substitutes for small babies there has been the development of “follow-up” milks designed for babies over six months of age. These are blatantly advertised in underdeveloped countries and are starting to increase the mortality rates of slightly older babies. And the European Commission's deregulation of milk marketing practices next year could soon lead to these milk substitutes being advertised in Britain.
Each year underdeveloped countries spend $1.5 billion on milk substitutes which are, for the most part, unnecessary. But capitalism is not concerned with what is necessary or desirable for health. Any product, no matter how dangerous, will be produced if there is a market for it. And the same capitalist logic will prevent much needed food being produced if people are unable to pay. The death toll these result in will continue as long as this vicious system lasts.
Carl Pinel
No comments:
Post a Comment