- Home
- Media
- News
- 3 former Unicef execs back call vs move to weaken protection of infants’ health via breastfeeding
3 former Unicef execs back call vs move to weaken protection of infants’ health via breastfeeding
Ex-Unicef officials say they are aware of baby formula firms’ ‘long history’ of deception, manipulation
Three former ranking executives of the United Nations Children’s Fund (Unicef) have thrown their support behind a call to oppose a fresh move to weaken the implementation of a 40-year-old international code that aims to protect the health of infants through breastfeeding and regulating the sale of breastmilk substitutes.
In a letter and a statement, former Unicef deputy executive directors Kul Chandra Gautam and Arthur Richard Jolly, and Peter Greaves, former Unicef chief of nutrition, backed the International Baby Food Action Network’s (IBFAN) appeal to the Unicef and the World Health Organization (WHO) to dissociate from the said move.
Appeal to Unicef, WHO: Revisit endorsement of BSM Call
“I sincerely hope that UNICEF (and WHO as well) will take the IBFAN’s Counter Call very seriously and revisit its endorsement of the BMS Call to Action,” Gautam said in a letter addressed to incumbent Unicef Deputy Executive Director Charlotte Petri Gornitzka, a copy of which was recently uploaded on a website for former Unicef officials and employees.
The BMS (Breastmilk Substitutes) Call to Action Mr. Gautam was referring to was put forth by six non-government organizations – all partners and grantees of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation – that was supported by the WHO and the Unicef on June 25, 2020.
IBFAN: BMS Call to derail, delay compliance with Code
In July this year, IBFAN* made a counter-call, appealing to the Unicef and the WHO to withdraw their support to the BMS Call, saying the move would only give leeway to baby food firms to derail and delay their compliance with the International Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes.
IBFAN noted that the BMS Call was “cleverly written,” because while it had invited 24 breastmilk substitute manufacturers and industry associations “to make public commitment to and achieve full compliance with” the Code and all its subsequent resolutions,” it enjoined them to be fully compliant ̶ not immediately ̶ but by 2030.
This, even when there is nothing in the Code that says baby food companies can defer their compliance or carry it out gradually as they please, according to IBFAN, a global network of over 270 groups spread in 160 countries that has been working for the last 40 years with the WHO, Unicef, and governments to help the latter translate the Code into national measures.
‘A further decade of manipulation’
In a joint statement, former Unicef executives Jolly and Greaves pointed out that “while much progress has been made, and many governments have incorporated the Code, in whole or in part, into their own legislation, baby food companies continue to evade compliance with components of the Code.”
The two said that “even if companies make commitment” to fully abide by the Code, the BMS Call to give the firms 10 years to achieve full compliance “would imply a further decade of manipulation.”
What the Code prohibits
The Code states that “there should be no advertising or other form of promotion to the general public” of breastmilk substitutes, including infant formula, feeding bottles, and teats, through any type of sales device, including special displays, discount coupons and special sales.
It also prohibits manufacturers and distributors from providing pregnant women, mothers or members of their families, samples of breastmilk substitute products.
The Code likewise bars personnel from baby food companies to “seek direct or indirect contact with, or provide advice to, pregnant women or mothers.”
Moreover, the Code and subsequent resolutions by the World Health Assembly (WHA) prohibit any type of promotion of infant formula products in health services. Donations of free or subsidized supplies of breastmilk substitutes as well as gifts or personal samples to health workers are also disallowed in any part of the health care system.
The WHA, the world’s highest health policy making body composed of 194 member-states, adopted the Code in 1981 during its 34th session as a global public health strategy to provide safe and adequate nutrition for infants through the protection and promotion of breastfeeding.
In their joint letter, Jolly and Greaves pointed out that, “This BMS Call has not been endorsed by the WHA, so those countries whose laws are already strong may be placed in a dilemma and under pressure to weaken them.”
‘Long history of being extremely deceptive, manipulative’
Meanwhile, Gautam, in his letter to Gornitzka, told the Unicef deputy executive director that he and some other former senior Unicef and WHO officials “who were directly involved in or are very familiar with the history of the prolonged debates, negotiations, and decision-making about the Code and its implementation, were very surprised to learn about the BMS Call to Action and the IBFAN’s Counter Call to WHO and UNICEF.”
“We are painfully aware that many infant formulae and baby food companies have a long history of being extremely deceptive and manipulative about their compliance with the Code,” Gautam further told Gornitzka.
He said that, “Whenever there is a change of leadership at UNICEF and WHO, they try to convince and win over the new leadership with very clever and deceptive arguments, and “evidence” of their compliance.”
“Sometimes, lacking or ignoring institutional memory, the new leadership becomes gullible to such manipulation,” added Gautam.
IBFAN’s analysis of the BMS Call ‘raises huge, legitimate questions’
In the case of the BMS Call to Action, the former Unicef official said that “at first, it looks pretty innocent, well-meaning, and pragmatic.”
“However, we note that IBFAN’s careful analysis raises huge and legitimate questions which merit serious consideration by UNICEF and WHO,” said Gautam.
He explained that IBFAN’s opposition to the BMS Call was anchored on the 2018 report by the UN Secretary-General’s Independent Accountability Panel for Women’s, Children’s and Adolescent Health (IAO-EWEC) that made a number of recommendations to hold the private sector more strictly accountable.
“I was Co-Chair of IAP at that time, and our report was indeed quite strong in calling for holding the private sector to a much stronger and tighter framework of accountability,”said Gautam.
“We also pointed out that the UN Secretary-General’s Global Compact was being used by some private companies, including the infant formula and baby food industry, to “blue-wash” themselves and avoid accountability,” he added.
*IBFAN, a member of the Global Network for the Right to Food and Nutrition, is calling for people to support its call against this Breastmilk Substitutes Call to Action.
Know more about IBFAN, visit the network’s website via this link: http://www.babymilkaction.org/