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

[foxytocin]

here now what can I do about it?

Thanks for posting the info from WV policy, QoFE.

I especially liked to read this part, "WV will purchase branded infant formula, manufactured and packaged in accordance with the Codex Alimentarius standards, have a shelf-life of at least 6 months on receipt of supply, and label in appropriate language and adhere to the labeling requirements of the Code, on the open market and used without association or implied endorsement."

A lot of foodstuffs (not only formula) gets dumped in the Third world by manufacturers when their product is near the end of their European or N American shelf life. And labelling in the appropriate language is vital for formula. The NAFTA and GATT and other acronyms that proport free trade ususally mean that countries like Haiti have had subsidised first world goods dumped on their markets in the name of free trade while their farmers abandon the land and their industry crumble because they cannot compete with cheap imports.

but hey, here i go again on another tangent.

read here if you like. it is another topic for another thread.

Mila, if you had reallly understood the thread, you would have understood this:

Infant formula, if not distributed according to the guidelines, kills more babies than it saves (I know you get this)

These guidelines will be in operation in Haiti (you get this too)

Nestle have repeatedly flouted and ignored these guidelines in the past, in similar situations (links further up the thread) to the massive detriment of infant health

If they repeat this (ie continue to flout the guidelines as they have before) then more babies will die as a result.

This is about what Nestle do - what they have done in the past and what we hope they don't do in Haiti. That's all.

Hey Milamae sorry if this is all so dreadfully tedious for you!

I just take issue with you rocking up and accusing Tiktok and others of "using this very tragic situation to push your own anti Nestle crusade" and "using a tragic situation for their own means".

I found that a really offensive post. Tiktok has done nothing of the sort and I think you owe her an apology actually.

I don't see that MilaMae has disagreed with any of your points in her post above, Bosoms by the Sea.

Futhermore, the thread is actually called 'Hucking Nestle are at it again'. Big clue.

Now, it is interesting and relevant, perhaps, to discuss concerns World Vision's policies (such as in Foxytocin's post of 23.24 yesterday), but given that they seem very sensible, this should surely put to bed people's worrying about the Nestle donations, and we can all worry about the genuine and pressing needs of the people in Haiti and hope and pray that lots of companies follow Nestle in donating whatever is needed, be it money or goods, and that it gets through. Because THAT'S the important thing.

LadyThompson, we can't put to bed the worry about Nestle's donation. All donations of formula, irregardless of manufacturer, needs continuing monitoring. We can't assume that Codebreakers (all of them) will suddenly always follow the Code because from experience we have learnt that that is not what they do.

With the greatest respect, Foxytocin (and I do mean that) I'm not sure that this thread, which has at times descended into the most unedifying slanging match, is helping with the monitoring. I mean, do you?

But yes, totally agree with you - all donations of ANYTHING, not just formula, need careful monitoring. If World Vision have got procedures in place, and they have received donations, and they have people on the ground, I would rather leave it in their EXPERT hands. They don't need people wringing their hands on their sofas, making suppositions, wondering if they are doing it right and handling the formula and other donations in the correct manner.

Right, I'm going to belt up and make another donation to a charity such as WV. Which is what I think a lot of other people on here should do (if they haven't already).

World Vision Haiti Disaster donation page

I am sure this has been posted on other threads but this is a concrete way of helping - putting money in the hands of the experts, on the ground, who have over 30 years experience in Haiti and are up to speed on all the ins and outs of foreign aid and multinational donations.

Bosoms: yes but Nestle are NOT distributing formula in Haiti.

They are handing over supplies (which may or may not include formula) to a reputable agency.

So isn't the main danger that they will garner good PR? Which may indeed lead them to sneak in elsewhere with thier guideline evading marketing policies.

So, they are worth keeping an eye on for sure.

as has been said by many posters, this thread has been informative. it is not about wringing hands on the sofas it is broadening some horizons. it is not about pretending a MN thread is going to make any mner go to Haiti to monitor the Code. so the conversation wasn't always dignified. are only dignified conversations allowed these days? do the shortcomings of a thread invalidate the thread? humans and their foibles make me neglect my kids life interesting.

Of course dignified conversations aren't the only ones allowed! Heavens, 'twould be a boring world if that were so and there would be no MN! But I think they are a bit distasteful in this case (I mean the carping over grammar, the shouting and the namecalling) as it is against the backdrop of people in a dire situation. But that is by the by.

I am just a little concerned that people seem to think they know better than a charity and aid organisation. WV's stance on donated formula (because 'the whys and wherefores of Nestle donated formula' is what this thread is about, do we agree?) seems incredibly robust, so that really ought to satisfy concerns. Otherwise, it is akin to saying WV aren't capable of doing their job, and armchair pontificators know more about the issues relating to formula donations in developing or disaster hit regions than the experts on the ground.

Haven't read thread, sorry - thought y'all might be interested to see that UNICEF, WHO and WFO have released a statement about appropriate infant and child feeding in the current emergency in Haiti, here

Reading between the lines, it sounds as though these agencies are concerned about the way BM substitutes are being distributed in Haiti.

This has been an interesting topic I have been following....has it come to and end now? If Nestle are giving their donations to a reputable agency to distribute appropriately in Haiti then I guess there is nothing to be concerned about?

" But I think they are a bit distasteful in this case (I mean the carping over grammar, the shouting and the namecalling) as it is against the backdrop of people in a dire situation. But that is by the by."

I completely agree. It is pointless to re-cover old ground without looking like an 8yr old about it but being told on a msg board that i am plagarising a news article that I am dishonest and unethical, well those are pretty serious charges in my book so I could not let that issue rest. It was cringeworthy especially when it was patently clear that I had not done but the poster would not back off.

As for what other posters have done and said then they have stayed within the guidelines of MN. If there was anything distasteful, then the Report button would have been used. It is the vagueries of a msg board and no one can be individually responsible for the flow the conversation takes.

"I am just a little concerned that people seem to think they know better than a charity and aid organisation."

I can't think of who you mean. I didn't get that impression myself.

WV's stance on donated formula (because 'the whys and wherefores of Nestle donated formula' is what this thread is about, do we agree?) seems incredibly robust, so that really ought to satisfy concerns.

WV though will not be the only charity which will receive Nestle donation. Nestle and other formula producing multinationals) will be approached by lots of smaller aid organisations who may not know about the Code in the weeks and months. It is these companies' corporate duty that they always donate responsibly and I fear that it will not always be so. I truly can envision out of date or nearly out of date stuff being donated. Not just formula, but also medicines and food. This is plainly unethical. But companies do it anyway because they can use it as a tax write off so they benefit from something they would otherwise have to chuck out or pay to have destroyed.

That is why our awareness need raising. So we can slowly educate more common people to ask and look for questions when they donate not just for this disaster but for all things.

This thread began with nestle but it was never ever going to be just about nestle despite what my OP stated. Which MN thread is ever only about the OP?

Well (re: issues of grammar) it seemed to me like you were both equally unkeen to back off to me! You may not think that that sort of thing is distasteful in the light of this disaster, but I do (and clearly others did too, and remarked on it) so we will just have to agree to disagree on that one.

Some distasteful things were said, along the lines of 'do people WANT babies to die?' - to people who were merely suggesting that some formula is NECESSARY (though that remark was apologised for). The general standard of debate has been cyclical and poor, though it did encompass a variety of issues and contained elements which some may have found informative - yes. Amongst all the ballyhoo.

Of course WV won't be the only charity in Haiti, or the only one receiving donations, whether of formula or anything else. I'd be surprised if bona fide aid organisations aren't very well au fait with the Code (as basically evinced in the statement put out above and linked by Policy above, which will have been widely circulated) although I am sure you will tell me you know better And that is rather the point: UNICEF, WHO and WFO are on top of it. And WV can't be the only major league aid organisation who are too. Furthermore, according to news reports aid is still having trouble getting in, sadly, so I can't see them letting in Little Code Flouting Aid Organisation before (eg) the Red Cross (who aren't accepting Nestle donations anyway).

This thread depresses me. Somebody please correct me (please!) but it honestly seems that some people don't want formula from Nestle whatever the circumstances and however carefully it is doled out.

I am so glad that it's been established that WV's stance is incredibly robust - I think everyone would agree that's a relief. But, the question now then is what can be done about the other, smaller companies who may not be donating responsibly and the smaller aid organisations asking for them? Can anything be done?

I suppose, Miss WooWoo, it's down to:

1. Who exactly is out there (no way of knowing this, so far as I can see)
2. Are they aware of the various codes and edicts issued by UNICEF etc (no way of knowing this either.)

Unless we start some sort of mass circulation of the code all around the world, and even then...

Plus, there are other problems apart from formula for babies - obviously. Hygiene kits are desperately needed and various medicines and basic medical equipment.

I genuinely think that all people can do is donate money to a large and reputable charity, as above, and keep donating it, as they will need aid for YEARS

Ladt T, I wasn't wrong it my stance on FT posts, I also did not say it was just plagiarism, I also said it was academically dishonestly, but AT LEAST I can see a WHOLE thread for what it is and admit to my wrong doings in that we were both immature and childish!

We were as bad as each other, FT, you in the end made a laughing matter about dyslexia and you were the one who made the grammar comments, NOT ME, but at least I can be consistent in MY threads, and NO that's not a dig at you.

Lady T I do applaud your persistence and determination is showing other views, I gave up in the end as I was fed up, going down a one minded track. x x x

plagiarism is academic dishonesty. It is unethical. you need to sort out your definitions before you bandy them around. and your first post accusing me of these things did label my post as plagiarism then later on you backed off somewhat saying i was just academically dishonest.

you brought up my poor posting style after I tried to politely say that I could not understand one of yours which is why, rather than trying to clarify it I tried to ignore it but you pushed for a response. so I told you why followed by, sorry, I didn't address it.

I then tried to ask you to back off but you couldn't take the hint. I did say that your posts were not exactly eloquent to which you responded that you were dyslexic.

Fair enough. someone with dyslexia ought to be a bit more empathetic to other posters since you realise that they may also have some sort of restriction which you can't percieve. But no. you continued to harrass me with your claims that I had committed plagiarism. Despite evidence to the contrary that I hadn't.

So I corrected your grammar. Oh, but I can't do that because you have dyslexia.

Look, I work with teenagers with severe dyslexia. While I have empathy for their dyslexia, the rules by which they are educated frown them using their SEN in allow them to take advantage of others who have their own SEN statements. I have seen MNers with dyslexia which is more apparent that you say you have. They do not use it as an excuse to comment on people's posts but hold themselves above criticism.

You are doing people with dyslexia a disfavour by attacking people's posts based on your collegiate peculiar pedantry but expecting them to hold your posts beyond comment because you claim have a SEN issue.

-----------

any typos, run together senteces, lack of caps were due to breastfeeding a toddler while conversing with a 4.9yo and one hand typing.

Im not getting into a another childish argument, but you go ahead and believe that if it makes you feel better {grin]!

Just popped in...

You corrected grammar on a mumsnet post?!?!?!?

Breastfeeding a toddler????

Scandals tonight. ;)

I did, mumblecrumble. oh the shame!!!!!

well done, LMH, at least one of us has grown up.

LadyThompson I'm really surprised by your last comment in your post of 21 Jan at 16.32.

I haven't been following this thread avidly because I took issue with some of the unpleasantness on it so maybe I have missed something. However I honestly cannot see anything to suggest that there are posters here who disagree with donations from Nestle under any circumstances.

Most of the comments from those who state that it is important to support and protect BF also state that of course there will be a need for formula.

Seems to me that most of us pretty much agree with each other than donations in general (be it food or anything else) must be monitored and distributed by people with expert knowledge and experience.

I think this thread went a bit off the rails because some folks find it difficult to accept the idea that none of this (thread) is really about Nestle as such. It is about infant feeding in a disaster zone. Nestle just happens to be one factor in all that. I think the title of the thread was unwise and hasn't been helpful. I don't think the title is representative of the views expressed here though.

The accusation that posters would not agree with a Nestle donation under any circumstances is very very harsh. It suggests that people are mad enough to prefer children to starve than a company they find unethical to make a donation. Do people here honestly think that there is anyone like that here? You would have to be completely nuts to hold such a view.

If you do really think that then please put your money where your mouth is and find a quote (in context) where any poster has made such mad extreme comments. I've looked at the thread and I can't see any.

Oh and I still think Tiktok is owed an apology for some of the despicable things that have been completely unjustly thrown at her here.

I don't want to lower the tone again by citing anyone but some of you should be ashamed of yourselves.