Psychological factors in breast feeding versus bottle feeding in the Third World.

Abstract

Some readers may be aware of the sociopolitical and moral issues associated with the theme of Brenda Meldrum's article (Bulletin, June 1982) about breast and bottle feeding in the 3rd world. For over a decade many groups (e.g. War on Want; World Development Movement) have been concerned that unnecessary bottle feeding has almost certainly resulted in considerable infant disease and mortality in the 3rd world. Morever, such groups have been well aware of the high psychological value of formula foods; and have attributed this mainly to the aggressive and fundamentally dishonest way in which food companies promote their breastmilk substitutes. In 1979, in response to the bad publicity resulting from the campaigning of 3rd world agencies, Nestle and others agreed to adopt a voluntary code of practice proposed by World Health Organization and UNICEF. However, commercial interests have prevailed--baby food sales in 3rd world account for 2 1/2% of 1 transnational group's turnover--and the malpractices have continued. In view of this we feel that it is appropriate to amend Brenda Meldrum's conclusion to: While transnational corporations continue to actively promote their baby food products in the 3rd world, there can be no reversal to the old, exclusive breastfeeding of traditional practice, and that infants that would otherwise have lived will continue to die. The boycott campaign is continuing and might we suggest that BPS members who organize conferences give some thought to the possibility of requesting that their caterers do not use products of these companies. A list of companies may be obtained from New Internationalist (February 1982) or from us.