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

[foxytocin]

here now what can I do about it?

Foxytocin and Tiktok - thank you for your informed and sensible posts. I take my hat off to you, for your in-depoth knowledge of this subject and your ability to remain calm and keep responding to the same bizarre and misguided, "a bit of formula is better than nothing" type posts.

I have just finished reading Politics of Bfing and I was shocked at the number of ways formula in disaster zones can cause problems, things I had literally never thought about before.

Like:

• labelling in the local language
• access to clean water to make up formula
• access to fuel to heat water to sterilise it
• access to reliable light at night to allow parents to make up bottles to avoid contamination
• etc

The posters who speak of dias against Nestle and suggest a bit of formula is no bad thing and accuse you (TikTok, Foxytocin) of prioritising breastfeeding above all else for political motives which only apply in the comfortable developed world have clearly never tried to make up a bottle of formula in the dark, without clean water, without decend bottles and teats, without water for washing, without clear instructions.

That's a worse bias, IMO, and shows a lack of understanding of a breastfeeding culture where wet nurses, long term breastfeeding, tandem feeding etc are established practices and require little coaching or instruction.

Bravo Gabrielle Palmer, TikTok and Foxy.

Just wanted to say thank you to Tiktok and others - this is a really informative thread.

No, of course I'm not going, and have never experienced anything like it. But some of the people posting here have seen some reasonably similar things- and have a better idea what goes on.

I have read some of the links and seen some of the issues- therefore I am concerned enough to want to know more.

I don't know for certain that the distribution is not being done appropriately- i.e. not following agreed guidelines. That is why I am asking! I don't see the problem with formula being donated where it is genuinely needed, I do see a problem with it being pushed, or promoted as the best option when an alternative is available.

Is it a crime to want to know more? Or to try and get involved if something is happening that I believe to be wrong?

so can we express milk and wet nurse

I think, if anything, it's the 'free formula is better than no formula' line that shows that we in the West live a privileged life that the vast majority of people on this planet do not share. In haiti people have no guaranteed access to clean water and no guaranteed fuel and this was the situation even before the earthquake. I know it's hard for us to imagine when all we have to do is stick on a kettle and take clean bottles, etc. out of the steriliser to reduce the risks of FF significantly but this is NOT how the people of Haiti live(and indeed will not live now for a long time).

Obviously, if there is no breastmilk available at all for a child, formula is a welcome emergency option that can save their life. But it remains the 4th best option because it is so inherently risky i.e. last resort after wetnurses, relactation, etc. Nobody on here is saying donations of formula should not be accepted, but they must only be distributed by trained aid workers who can ensure they are used as a stopgap and in line with accepted protocols.

Throwing 'stuff' at a situation and thinking that material goods alone can solve problems is a very Western way of thinking. During the Irish potato famine of the 1840s food was distributed to starving people by the government but unfortunately for them it was grain, - without the means (e.g. few quern/mills)or knowledge of how to process something very different from what they usually ate, many people couldn't eat it so they still starved to death.

God, the arrogance of some people on this thread. You think you are righteous, with your pronouncements on how anyone raising concerns about a Nestle donation must be blinded and obsessive. Idiocy.

It's not that hard to understand. INDISCRIMINATE distribution of formula in this disaster will KILL babies that would have survived, had the safe alternative been supported instead.

CONTROLLED and careful targetting of formula by the aid agencies on the ground with knowledge of how to best protect the lives of babies is the only way.

I doubt that anyone has issues with formula being given as a last resort to babies that have no alternative. They will have to take their chances of survival, which will be slim, with dirty water and no means to sterilise properly, and presumably no long term guarantee that the formula supply will continue. But for them, it's their only chance.

BUT

Nestle have a track record of 'converting' babies onto unsafe formula that COULD HAVE BEEN BREASTFED safely and survived. They have ignored the protocols that protect life, that have been developed by aid agencies that understand life and death in these situations. And then they walk away after the disaster isn't headlines any more, leaving those babies to die, which they do, in their thousands, having taken away their chance of surviving through being breastfed.

Unless the aid agencies are able to control the distribution of the formula through their safety protocols, then babies will die unecessarily because of this formula donation, babies that WOULD HAVE LIVED.

If Nestle can find a way to give their donations completely into the control of the people who know how to distribute them safely, then I have no problem.

Isn't it a bit odd though that Nestle are effectively advertising their 'goodwill' on their web site?

Maybe it's me, but I am really uncomfortable with a food manufacturer, and Nestle aren't alone in this, by broadcasting their donations to a human catastrophe.

Why, other than advertisement? The people on the ground don't care who sent the water, the NGOs organizing the relief don't care, so the only people who would notice would be those at home.

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

all they have to do is put a plain label on the container. Like Sainsbury's beans, still has all the info on the label, no pictures, no logo. Except it wouldn't also say 'Sainsbury's' Just Infant Formula.

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.

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.

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

Another one who thanks tiktok et al for their perseverance, patience and excellent explanations of the real issues here.

I'm totally that it seems so hard for people to understand that formula feeding carries huge risk for people who have limited (if any) clean water supplies, no fuel, limited access to washing facilities, etc.

And quite honestly that anyone could think that women here are concerned about this donation because they would rather babies died of starvation than Nestle got to do some advertising is disgusting and perfectly ridiculous.

All it says is that Abbott have donated phararmacuticals (sp)reflux
in children, I dont understand the connotations with them tbh?

Not that enfamil, is needed in Haiti tbh, basic formula milk will do.

Just going to add about the labeling of the distribution of formula, Im sorry but it dosent matter, if its going to be a rule for one, it should be a rule for all.

Im sure the aid workers in Haiti and also coco cola etc... should remove their branded logo, and Im also pretty sure atm Haiti have beiiger things to worry about that a packaging item.

Im actually agreeing to what you are saying, but their is anomalies that need to considered very deeply, when it comes to the5s 5ss4e and I am putting a different view on the matter, its not ridiculous by any stretch off the imagination to do so.

Pozzled: "Is it a crime to want to know more? Or to try and get involved if something is happening that I believe to be wrong?"

Nope, no crime. Mine was a genuine question. When you said "And is there anything I can do about it- somewhere to add a complaint if it's not done appropriately?" I was really wondering if you are connected in some way.

Didn't think I would know if it's being done appropriately or not unless there was any info from the ground, iykwim.

Thanks to Tiktok and Foxy for posting well written and backed up with research posts. I have learnt a lot from this thread.

I have also learnt how amazingly closed minded some people can be at times, despite a raft of evidence.

I am amazed that concern over preserving innocent babies and children lives in Haiti is deemed as an attack against an profit making multinational company which has a proven bad track record in this area.

I would of thought on a parenting forum, posters would be more concerned about children, rather than trying to prove as formula's risks can be minimised in the Western world with all the clean hot water and sterilising equipment we own, that somehow that minimisation of risks can magically extended to Haiti which has none of our luxuries and may never in these children's lives have access to such things.

Of course babies who have nothing else should/will have access to formula and many of these babies will die as a direct result but better a tiny chance of life than none for these little ones.

Lucky are the babies who have a mother/wetnurse, as their chance of growing up is so much higher.

Sigh, off to cuddle my babies and thank god that our babies have so much wealth and privilege before them, when Haiti babies have so little.

Thank you to TikTok and Foxytocin for their informative posts and the links supplied.
Had no knowledge of the risks involved in FF in developing countries and disaster areas, but I see now that is glaringly obvious that without clean water, and ways to sterilise bottles etc that it can easily be lethal.
It isnt to hard to imagine that a grandmother, aunt or even a neighbour might want to BF a baby to save its life. My FIL was BF by a neighbour cos his mother was unable to, that was 60 years ago in Italy.
I think TikToks fingers must be very tired of all the repeating she had to do!

I've also learnt a lot from this thread. I've mentioned before on mument but my grandmother wet nursed in England 60 years ago, feeding different babies in a hospital. It's not something way out of the ordinary.

It's so hard though not to have an emotional response to seeing those pictures of Haiti on the TV. Giving a bit of money just doesn't seem like anything.

For those posters that think Nestlé are donating milk out of the kindness of their hearts and without an ulterior motive

BabyMilkAction

Some people here are a bit strange.

Breastfeeding mums wouldn't switch to formula just because they have a free can of powder milk, I imagine. What about babies who were on formula before the quake? Do you think their mothers, even if they have mums now, can get more at the local store?

What about older babies who were already weaned? What about orphaned ones?

CoteDAZur - if you read the thread you will see those questions have been answered.

I think what has bothered me is the Western-centric view of this, shown by some posters...who suggest, for example, that relactation is something majorly different, or wet nursing another woman's baby when yours has died, because here in the UK both of these options would be thought of as weird or impossible.

Even in societies where relactation would be unusual (and I really don't know what the cultural norm is in Haiti), it would not take long to explain how to do it, and it would need hardly any supervision. This is not the case with formula - illiterate people cannot follow written instructions on a leaflet or a pack, and you just have to see the posts on here about how to cope with new guidance on making up formula to see that doing something different and new with measurements and mixing can confuse even non-traumatised, literate, educated women in the West.

I think the branding of product is a real issue. Ethically, using a disaster as a free bit of advertising is questionable, but this matters less with food items and pharmaceuticals. Branding formula is different, because it is in commercial competition with another 'product' (breastmilk) and branding can do so much to enhance image and create an identity. So it should not be donated with any branding on it - clearly, if it is desperately needed somewhere, I would not advocate holding up its distribution because of this, but beyond this immediate response, it needs nothing more than the name of the product and a batch number so it can be identified in cases of problems.

To my knowledge this is done in some cases, with many foods inc formula. Packages are branded with the name of the distribution agency or NGO. It's not difficult - like foxy says, it's like 'own brand' goods we get at the supermarket.

Who says Nestle is donating out of the kindness of its heart? I can't find a single post saying anything of the sort. That is not the issue.

It doesn't say anywhere on the Nestle press release that it's donating powdered milk, it implies ready-made formula. I've contacted them and asked if they will clarify this, we'll see if they get back to me.

Ready to feed has similar problems, mrss, and introduces special ones of its own, too.

It is more expensive than powder to produce and more bulky than powder to transport (look at the dreadful fuel shortages preventing goods from being distributed beyond the port and airport). A day's ready-to-feed takes up more space than a week's worth of powder.

It still requires clean bottles and teats. Its uncontrolled distribution still undermines the safer breastfeeding option. It is still an unsustainable way of feeding infants long term.

I think the problem is the usual one, really. In this country, bf is framed as the 'perfect' option, the 'ideal' one, and formula is seen as the 'adequate', 'normal' one that most people end up having to make do with - the one that anyone can access because all they have to do is go to a shop. Bf is the 'difficult' one that sometimes needs specialist help - the payoff is that it's the better food.

But in a disaster zone in a country where bf is the norm, it's 100% the other way round. BF is the normal everyday option that doesn't need specialist help - the one nearly everyone can access. Formula is the hard to access one that needs specialist support (the power, water, bottles etc.)

I think that's hard for some people to get their heads round.

I think what has bothered me is the Western-centric view of this, shown by some posters...who suggest, for example, that re lactation is something majorly different, or wet nursing another woman's baby when yours has died, because here in the UK both of these options would be thought of as weird or impossible.

sorry tiktok, I have to say, I never once said it was weird or impossible! to wet nurse another child, I said some woman may not want too or want to feed another child, as it is such a hideous stressful time, that they just might want to keep their own supplies, or are too distressed to want to feed another child, and also that dont forget that stress can affect breast milk flow and amount.

I am just saying ALL of these things need to be considered.