The Infant Formula Controversy

Presented to: Presented by: Prof. Himanshu Mohan Arun kumar ambati

Ajeet swain Chandan kumar Jha

Deepika Taneja Vaibhav Jaiswal

Introduction

• Nestle is of vevey, Switzerland is one of the world’s largest food processing company.

• It has worldwide sales of over $8 billion.

• Nestle was subjected to international boycott.

• Nestle has been directly or indirectly charged with involvement in the death of third world infants.

• Charges revolve around sale of infant feeding formula which leads to mass deaths of babies in the third world.

• In 1974‘’Nestle kills babies’’ pamphlet was published.

Charges against Nestle •

• Parents believe that bottle itself has nutrient qualities.

• Some parents diliute the formula to stretch their supply.

• New born babies are loosing weight & suffering malnutrition.

• In rural Mexico, the Philippines, Central America, Africa, there has been decrease in mother feeding.

• Intensive advertising & promotion of infant formula as radio jingles

i.e. “White man powder will make baby grow & glow”

i.e. “Milk nurses visit nursing mothers in hospitals & their homes & provide samples of formula.””

Defences by nestle Following pts are made in defence –• Nestle agrues & said mother feeding is best.

• In support, they said they have nestle’s oldest educational booklets on infant feeding & hygiene” which dates from 1913 & encourages mother feeding.

• When the mother cannot or chooses not to feed naturally. It works as a substitute.

• Mothers in developing countries often have dietary deficiencies.

• Working mothers are forced to use formulas.

• Avg. well nourished western woman can’t only feed her baby naturally beyond 5 or six months but a women can feed for 1-2 yrs to have healthy baby.

The resolution• In 1974 nestle increased access to radio & television for marketing formulas.• In 1978 adverting of infant formulas was

banned.• The nestle started comprehensive health

education programs to ensure that an understanding of proper use of their products reached mothers especially in rural areas.

• Nestle fully supported the WHO code.

• It continued promoting mother milk is the best & ensure that marketing of formulas is not affecting mother feeding.

• In 1977 the interfaith center in new

york complied a case against nestle as a CSR.

• Third world institute launched a boycott against many nestle products.

• The infact( infant formula action coalition) along with other organization lobbied the WHO to draft a code to regulate the advertising & marketing of infant formula in the third formula.

• In 1981 nestle said it would support the code & waited for individual countries to pass national codes

• At the end of 1983 25/157 member nations of the WHO had established national codes.

• In 1982 nestle formed the nestle infant formula audit commission(NIFAC).

Nestle supports WHO code• In 1981 its nestle announced it would support

WHO code.

• In 1982 it started implementing the code.

• Nestle Consultated with WHO, UNICEF, NIFAC on how to interpret the code.

Policies of nestle• No advertising to the general public.• No sampling to mothers.• No mothercraft workers.• No use of commission/bonus for sales.• No use of infant pictures on labels.• No point of sale advertising.• No financial or material inducements to

promote products.

• No samples to physicians except in three specific situations-

a new product, a new product formulation a new graduate phyisician & ltd to 1-2 cans of product.• Limitation of supplies to those requested in

writing & fulfilling genuine needs for mother milk substitute.

• A statement of the superiority of mother feeding on all labels.

i.e mother milk is best

• Labels & educational material clearly stating the hazards involved in incorrect usage of infant formula, developed in consultation with WHO.

Good time for nestle

• In 1988 a call to resume the 7 yr boycott.• In 2001, 3.8 million children around the world

had contracted the HIV through mother feeding. so bottel milk was recommended.

• Majority of women in developing countries they dont know whether they are HIV infected or not.

• healthy mothers to make their child safer they started using infant formulas

• In thailand pregnant women are offered testing & if found HIV positive are given free milk powder.

• In african countries HIV rates are 25% & 2% in thailand.

QUESTIONS?????????

Ques: What are the resonsibilities of companies in this or similar type of situations?

• they should train & educate the expecting mothers & educate them that mother feeding is very essential & also about the products .

• Arrange some programs i.e. for caring pregnant womens

Encourage mother feedingMust not promote their product through wrong way

which makes their product a fashion or a substitute for a nutrient feed.

Ques2: what could nestle have done to have avoided the accusations of “killing third world babies” & still

market its product?• By doing programmes not only in villages but also in

metros with the help of doctors in getting the mothers know about the programs which will impart training to the expecting mothers.

• They should educate the mothers that god’s gift can not be purely a substitute.

• And also educate them about the HIV that if they are infected later so they can use infant formula as a substitute.

Ques3: After nestle’s experience, how do you suggest it, or any other company, can protect itself in the future?

• Don’t give advertisement which will any how discourage the natural thing or disturbs anything which is especially god gifted.

• Show crystal clear situation to the customers as if you are offering these kinds of products which are for sensitive customer.

Ques4: Assume you are the one who had to make the final decision on whether or not to promote & market

nestle’s baby formula in third world countries.

I would promote or market my product but the way which I will use it will be not be media but also i would convey it to the customers in such a way that would not discourage mother feeding but also the full knowledge of the product and also make them clear that if u depend on this it can be harmful because after all mother milk is best.

Ques5:What advice would you give to nestle now in light of the new problem of HIV infection being spread

via mothers milk?

• I would now say that they must promote but be alert that the message must not discourage the mother feed which are not infected.

• The campaigns they must do. Which will teach they about the product & how it can be useful for their children.

• They can advertise as for infected mothers. And in those countries where HIV infected persons are more.

Thank you!