Haiti - F*****g Nestle is at it already.

[foxytocin]

here now what can I do about it?

Sorry, Doris, for assuming you did not read the thread. I couldn't believe that someone could have read it and come out with something so ill-informed.

I can see it was maybe a little difficult for you to understand.

Here's an explanation - I'll try not to accuse you of being 'mental'.

The biggest health risk to infants in the wake of a disaster like this where food and fluid is in short supply and where dead bodies are everywhere, and where basic sanitation is poor, is infection.

The use of formula in these conditions adds to this risk. In addition, the risks accumulate as time goes on - there may be clean water on day 1, but not on day 2, or 3 and so on. You say the babies 'have a chance of survival' - well, I suppose they have a chance but their risk of dying of untreated infection/dehydration/diarrhoea is increased and international protocols are in place to make sure that any breastfeeding is protected, that measures to replace maternal breastfeeding are supported, and that formula usage is restricted to those infants who cannot be breastfed/get breastmilk.

You imply that any 'debate' on what these babies actually get is pointless as they may die anyway. That's rather bleak and dismissive.

"if the children may die anyway, why debate what they get"
Oh FFS
because if they get FORMULA they are MORE LIKELY to die
get it? i honestly don't understand what is so complicated about that

the important word is may
this thread is making me feel sick these are real children, real lives, their best chance is bf

apologies for the swearing
the "they'll die anyway so who cares" made me see red
but i shouldnt have sworn

so, what's to be done then and how? What is the answer to OP's question?

oh and I'd appreciate not being told to "read the thread"

I have

but your questions had been answered? Why should stuff be repeated?

oh forget it

Interesting thread.

I have looked at the link to the nestle website and they say they are donating water and food to haiti. There is no mention of formula.

I have also googled and it just says food and water. Does anyone have a link saying they are donating ready made/powder formula?

The OP's question was what can be done about it, and it's a fair question. Seems to me that the distributor, World Vision, are aware of the UN/WHO advice re: implementing breast feeding policy, especially in disaster areas.

As far as what other people can do, write to Nestle and give them your opinion. Write to your MP and say that you are angry.

I see you understood my post ilovemydog

I couldn't address your question about Abbott because it was too garbled. sorry. I tried 2 or 3 times to read the post and it didn't make sense.

I think you were saying that Abbott makes Enfamil AR (?) If so, they make a lot more that that. they are one of the largest formula brands in the US and Canada. And it is marketed aggressively.

"Until now, new mothers have often been given infant formula by doctors and midwives in the hospitals, on commission from the milk formula companies, he said.

The new rules ban formula salespeople from even entering hospital grounds.

Not surprisingly, the baby formula companies, including Mead Johnson, Wyeth and Abbott Laboratories, are unwilling to give up a lucrative market."

This is what Abbott, Wyeth and Mead Johnson, all reputable pharmaceuticals, are doing to babies in the Philippines.

In fact they have lobbied the US Congress to put pressure on the Philippine government to not make parts of the WHO Code, law.

linky

sorry have cleared some cobwebs now

abbott makes similac
mead johnson makes enfamil

both of them along with nestle and other formula making pharmaceuticals aggressively market formula in the 3 world.

tiktok - Are you seriously saying that those poor women should now "relactate"? Like, stick starved babies onto their empty boobs for a few days and hope milk comes out at some point?

re "There were very few of [babies on formula before the quake]t - Haiti is a predominantly bf culture and most babies feed for a long time"

WHO says that median exclusive breastfeeding in Haiti is 1.5 months. So at least some of those poor kids were on formula before the earthquake. Even some previously breastfeeding mums will now find it hard to do so, following trauma and malnutrition.

Out of the rest, many are orphaned. No more mommy and no more mommy boobs. As hard as it may be for you to believe, not many breastfeeding mums ready to adopt these orphaned kids, either.

In these circumstances, I find it shocking that, from the safety of your couch, with your children safe and nourished, you would go on about how starving people and their starving children shouldn't be given formula.

I have lived through the 1999 earthquake near Istanbul, and have an idea about the desperation of these people in Haiti. Your "they should relactate or find a wet nurse" is no less ignorant of these people's plight than "if they can't find bread, they should eat cake".

Please can someone link to where it says that nestle are sending formula as the link in the OP just says food and water.

so what unbranded formula do you propose, id rather a company that is known and their formula used worldwide and is proven to be safe, than that of a lesser known one.

All formula is branded, and is out to make money, be it nestle or Gerber.

why on earth does it matter if its a branded milk or not, all companies who make milk are out to make a buck, a hefty one at that, its completely irrelevant, Im gad the big companies are doing something, as they can cope with the supply and demand and also donate more to the catastrophe that is Haiti.

The problem here is, the word nestle any other unknown company would not be a problem, did you know that coca cola, Kellogg's, wall mart, abbot pharmaceutical, Heinz, McDonalds, Tesco, Toys R Us, + all other corporations, banks, companies etc..... ALL have donated cash and goods, all even tho have donated will be getting publicity in somewhere or another from their donations.

Its aid none the less and if you have a look at the BCLC Blog>> Haiti, it says that nestle have donated $1,million in bottle water.

Its needed, yes their is a wider issue, and hopefully WHO and aid workers will keep the bigger issue in the forefront of their minds.

Hopefully the WHO and other aid organisations have learnt from Africa diabolical, as atm its all assumptions.

My post above. Your post below foxytocix

I needed to make the last post clearer.

LittleMissHappy. Erm,it is easy for nestle to donate unbranded formula.

all they have to do is put a plain label on the containers or milk they already produce. Like Sainsbury's beans, still has all the info on the label, no pictures, no logo. Except it wouldn't also say 'Sainsbury's' or 'Nestle' anywhere on the label just 'Baked Beans' or just 'Infant Formula'.

And the formula would be given to the aid agencies on the ground who are dealing with Infant feeding.

It ain't rocket science!

I can see I am speaking to someone who refuses to admit that she doesn't know as much as she does about this sort of event but is willing to open her mind to other viewpoints

and then you said this?

then littlemiss happy, i do hope that Abbott doesn't donate branded formula. they make enfamil

It wasn't me who said Abbott donated enfamil, it was YOU, I said Abbott donated to Haiti

I then asked you what the connotations are with this pharmaceutical company!

whats not to understand? you evidently understood my posts to answer them, you were the one who had to re-write your post for it to make sense, I stand by what I say, as at least I can be open minded about this dire Catastrophe and look at ALL possibilities, and not be so narrow minded and one minded tracked! to be so so BF from your sofa philosophy!

You simply portray yourself in trying to look intelligent in the topic, by telling me I dont know much about this "event" . When clearly I do, (I am just viewing it from a different perspective and open mind)but ho hum, I didn't know we had to agree for you to "try" unsuccessfully to try and belittle me, when it WAS YOU who mentioned about Abbott and enfamil.

But also can you post your own posts please and instead of C&P from a article at 19.37 (your post) if were going to be pedantic!

I will ask again also what about the HIV/AID in wet nursing and re-lactating, or are we too narrow minded that maybe this is not a option in fear of the children getting this immunodeficiency syndrome?

So what you are saying is dont give them formula (rightfully in some circumstances) but wet nurse and they can possibly get this virus?!

No one is saying formula shouldn't be given where it would save a life.

The point here is that more often than you would expect (from the safety of your couch at home) it kills more than it saves. Immediately. And therefore it's not the wonderful gift it can seem and should be distributed in such a way that it doesn't kill more than it saves.

That's all.

ISNT, their is not one, I cannot find any, Im just debating the, even the donation BCLC Blog, just says $1, million of water, it was a newspaper from the OP that said calorie food, so I am assuming from that and because its Nestle, they have went off on a tangent.

Im not arguing about Nestle tbh, just trying to view it from different perspective, and all anomalies, as its evidently clear that Haiti WILL NEED formula distribution.

CoteDAzur, excellent posts and is highlighting what I have been saying all along x

isn't - mny computer crashes when I do the link but if you scroll down you will see they have donated milk. Presumably formula or powdered milk.

Hmm, I wouldn't call it an excellent post, since it completely misunderstands what most of the thread is about, and implies Tiktok has said things she absolutely has not - i.e. that starving babies with no access to breastmilk should be denied formula. No one, but no one, has said this.

And no one has said that Haiti should not receive any formula. Just that formula donations in general need to be managed carefully because they are not as benign and helpful as they might seem, given all the things using formula depends on if it's not to be dangerous. And that the motives of donors of formula are often a bit suspect.

Where do people get this idea from that people in armchairs here are saying starving babies should be denied formula if it's all they can get?!

"Are you seriously saying that those poor women should now "relactate"? Like, stick starved babies onto their empty boobs for a few days and hope milk comes out at some point?"

I breastfed my daughter. OK, so I'm not from Haiti and have cultural differences etc. BUT if it were me, and my sister's/friend's/whoever's baby was orphaned and starving- and if I was told that I had a good chance of relactating, and that the alternative was to make up formula with dirty water- then I wouldn't hesitate to "stick a starving baby on my empty boobs and hope that some milk would come out." If that obviously wasn't working, I would give the baby some formula- while still trying to relactate. If you thought that there was a good chance that you could save a baby's life, and the alternative had a very real chance of killing them, or making them seriously ill- wouldn't you do it?

Where do people get this idea from that people in armchairs here are saying starving babies should be denied formula if it's all they can get?!

No one has said this, AT ALL, we are arguing about mothers, wet nurse might not want to wet nurse or mothers who have stopped breastfeeding re-latate.

Cote also has not said babies SHOULD NOT get formula, she has been saying *from what I gather from her post) about maybe woman dont want to do neither, by putting a baby on a empty boob for a few hours until milk comes (if it does) come through!

It might not be a excellent post in your opinion (one minded tracked) but has been highlighting what I have been saying ALL along.

All I have seen from these posts, is a one tracked mind and that all wet nurses or re-lactate mothers, SHOULD BF any infant, it sadly not as easy as this, due to the dire circumstances and tragedies within families and culture.

I'm not sure I understood your post, LittleMrsHappy- are you saying that my post shows a 'one tracked mind'?

In no way would I advocate forcing a mother to re-lactate or wet nurse against her wishes- I would not wish to distress someone who had been through so much already. However, some people have the view that it would be completely unreasonable to expect someone to re-lactate. I only wanted to give another possibility- that there may be many mothers out there who would wish to help in this way. That they would do so very willingly if this was presented as an option- the safest option.

On the other hand, if they believed that formula was safe, I think it quite likely that they would choose to use it- and in doing so, would be exposing the babies to risk of illness.

No, not you Pozzled, other posters.

I brought this up before and all I got was "have you read the posts" or *you refused to admit you dont know much about the "event" or that I was trying to make it into a BF vs FF etc... you get the drift.

I also said about the purification tablets, as I have yet to find any information about it being safe even with these tablets, when the water "might" have been in purified with deceased bodies of a grand scale and then add dirt, dust and disease etc..... (anybody know this) For me a purification tablet cannot contend with this much contamination.?

I was trying to get them to see that due to the circumstances, it simply cant be as easy as 1,2,3 and trying to fathom for myself and not disregard ALL posssibilies, instead of it being from here a one minded track.

I agree with your post pozzled also x