FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

How Corporate Interests Hijacked World Breastfeeding Week

The first week of August marks World Breastfeeding Week (WBF), touted as a ‘vibrant global movement for action to promote, protect and support breastfeeding by anyone, anywhere and at any time.’ Breastfeeding is back in fashion, and how. In a remarkable U-turn on their infamous attitude towards breastfeeding in days past, even the bête noire of breastfeeding advocates everywhere, Nestlé, is getting in on the act and launching campaigns to promote breastfeeding in China.

Sounds like a positive initiative on the face of it, but the underlying issues are much more complex than they appear. Of course, there’s nothing wrong with supporting mothers who want to breastfeed. It’s the healthiest choice for babies under six months, according to the World Health Organization, and confers a number of health benefits for the mother, including reduced risk of some cancers, cardiovascular disease, and obesity. But as it stands, the WBF campaign runs the risk of becoming only yet another example of how society – and now, corporations – just can’t seem to stop telling women what to do with their bodies. Of course, there’s a longstanding history of politicization of women and their personal choices, and breastfeeding is no exception.

Once seen as necessary fallback rather than an equally valid choice for feeding babies, infant formula became fashionable in the 1960s and ‘70s partly due to a culture that increasingly valued the breast more as a cosmetic sex symbol than as a source of nourishment – plus ça change – and partly because of businesses such as Nestlé that saw a ripe opportunity to create new markets for their products where none existed before. Unfortunately, these markets didn’t only include well-off cities and suburbs. As is now well known, Nestlé executives deliberately targeted less developed countries by convincing often uneducated and destitute mothers that expensive formula was better than the free milk they themselves produced. Of course, after being roundly denounced as baby killers and after the WHO enacted a new set of standards on infant formula marketing, Nestlé soon adjusted their tactics and public opinion swung back in favor of breastfeeding. But has it swung too far?

There is now enormous pressure from nearly all sides on mothers to breastfeed. Indeed, the benefits have often been over-stated in the campaign to get mothers to step away from the sterilizer, and many women complain of pervasively Pollyannaish and unrealistic rhetoric around the issue that leaves no room for dissent. What’s more, very few breastfeeding advocates seem to pay heed to the major class considerations around the practice. For example, in the US, 70.1% of college educated mothers were still breastfeeding at six months. Just 37.9% of their peers who had never finished high school were doing the same. This is not just down to different social norms, but policy issues such as the lack of maternity leave requirements in the country. And no amount of sloganeering can change the fact that in spite of an onslaught of advice from public health advocates, all but the most privileged women are still broadly denied the accommodation that’s necessary for breastfeeding at work. Even the UK, which has stronger laws protecting women’s rights to care for their children, only one in 200 women still breastfeed their babies after their first birthdays, citing physical pain, difficulty, lack of support from others, and embarrassment.

Of course, it’s not just society at large, and arguably well-meaning groups like UNICEF and the International Baby Food Action Network (IBFAN), that are putting pressure on women to breastfeed at all costs – whether or not the right infrastructure exists for them to do so. It’s also corporations with commercial stakes in the issue, and sordid histories of unethical marketing practices in the formula sector, that are now jumping on the WBF bandwagon – adding it to their arsenal of marketing collateral even as they find new ways to ensure formula remains a profitable business. Nestlé, for example, is disingenuously proselytizing about breastfeeding just weeks after authorities charged six of their Chinese staff with paying bribes to medical personnel to illegally obtain medical records and improve their formula marketing methods. This latest scandal came four years after journalistic investigations exposed how company employees were breaking both WHO standards and China’s 1995 regulation barring the promotion of infant formula to families of babies younger than six months. Given such a history, it comes as little surprise that the company’s China division has launched a series of publicity events around the campaign. It seems that Nestlé has jumped on the WBF bandwagon this year mainly as a way to “green wash” corporate misdeeds of the past.

Such a state of affairs means the NGOs and health institutions that provided the momentum to create WBF in the first place need to take a step back and return to their roots: promoting sound medical advice, offering tips and other means of support for women, and opening up a platform for dialogue about the benefits and difficulties of breastfeeding – not simply wagging their fingers at women as has so often been the case in the past. Most importantly of all, it means dumping the corporate interests that have started to tag along – and run the risk of tainting the whole campaign.

Jo Simmons is an American writer and consultant currently living in London.

More articles by:
Weekend Edition
July 20, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Paul Atwood
Peace or Armageddon: Take Your Pick
Paul Street
No Liberal Rallies Yet for the Children of Yemen
Nick Pemberton
The Bipartisan War on Central and South American Women
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Are You Putin Me On?
Andrew Levine
Sovereignty: What Is It Good For? 
Brian Cloughley
The Trump/NATO Debacle and the Profit Motive
David Rosen
Trump’s Supreme Pick Escalates America’s War on Sex 
Melvin Goodman
Montenegro and the “Manchurian Candidate”
Salvador Rangel
“These Are Not Our Kids”: The Racial Capitalism of Caging Children at the Border
Matthew Stevenson
Going Home Again to Trump’s America
Louis Proyect
Jeremy Corbyn, Bernie Sanders and the Dilemmas of the Left
Patrick Cockburn
Iraqi Protests: “Bad Government, Bad Roads, Bad Weather, Bad People”
Robert Fantina
Has It Really Come to This?
Russell Mokhiber
Kristin Lawless on the Corporate Takeover of the American Kitchen
John W. Whitehead
It’s All Fake: Reality TV That Masquerades as American Politics
Patrick Bobilin
In Your Period Piece, I Would be the Help
Ramzy Baroud
The Massacre of Inn Din: How Rohingya Are Lynched and Held Responsible
Robert Fisk
How Weapons Made in Bosnia Fueled Syria’s Bleak Civil War
Gary Leupp
Trump’s Helsinki Press Conference and Public Disgrace
Josh Hoxie
Our Missing $10 Trillion
Martha Rosenberg
Pharma “Screening” Is a Ploy to Seize More Patients
Basav Sen
Brett Kavanaugh Would be a Disaster for the Climate
David Lau
The Origins of Local AFT 4400: a Profile of Julie Olsen Edwards
Rohullah Naderi
The Elusive Pursuit of Peace by Afghanistan
Binoy Kampmark
Shaking Establishments: The Ocasio-Cortez Effect
John Laforge
18 Protesters Cut Into German Air Base to Protest US Nuclear Weapons Deployment
Christopher Brauchli
Trump and the Swedish Question
Chia-Chia Wang
Local Police Shouldn’t Collaborate With ICE
Paul Lyons
YouTube’s Content ID – A Case Study
Jill Richardson
Soon You Won’t be Able to Use Food Stamps at Farmers’ Markets, But That’s Not the Half of It
Kevin MacKay
Climate Change is Proving Worse Than We Imagined, So Why Aren’t We Confronting its Root Cause?
Thomas Knapp
Elections: More than Half of Americans Believe Fairy Tales are Real
Ralph Nader
Warner Slack—Doctor for the People Forever
Lee Ballinger
Soccer, Baseball and Immigration
Louis Yako
Celebrating the Wounds of Exile with Poetry
Ron Jacobs
Working Class Fiction—Not Just Surplus Value
Perry Hoberman
You Can’t Vote Out Fascism… You Have to Drive It From Power!
Robert Koehler
Guns and Racism, on the Rocks
Nyla Ali Khan
Kashmir: Implementation with Integrity and Will to Resolve
Justin Anderson
Elon Musk vs. the Media
Graham Peebles
A Time of Hope for Ethiopia
Kollibri terre Sonnenblume
Homophobia in the Service of Anti-Trumpism is Still Homophobic (Even When it’s the New York Times)
Martin Billheimer
Childhood, Ferocious Sleep
David Yearsley
The Glories of the Grammophone
Tom Clark
Gameplanning the Patriotic Retributive Attack on Montenegro
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail