Published: Thu, July 12, 2018
Medicine | By Daryl Nelson

Trump Admin Favored Corporations In Opposing Breastfeeding Resolution

Trump Admin Favored Corporations In Opposing Breastfeeding Resolution

However, the US was successful in removing language that said the World Health Organization would support countries trying to stop "inappropriate promotion of foods for infants and young children".

The resolution also called on world governments to crack down on marketing which says that substitute baby formulas are better and to 'protect, promote, and support breastfeeding'.

Breast milk is better than formula and reduces infant mortality and morbidity.

A spokesperson for the Department of Health and Human Services said to CNN, "The issues being debated were not about whether one supports breastfeeding". "We feel that it is wrong when a big country tries to push around some very small countries", A Russian delegate told the Times of Russia's decision to introduce the resolution.

While the HHS department's reasoning independently makes sense, all mothers definitely can not breastfeed for various reasons, it should be noted the resolution did not make it necessary to do so.

"We recognize not all women are able to breastfeed for a variety of reasons", it added, saying they should have "full information about safe alternatives". A 2013 study from the peer-reviewed medical journal The Lancet projected that universal breastfeeding would prevent 800,000 child deaths a year globally. "Many woman need this option because of malnutrition and poverty".

Trump tariffs send stocks tumbling
The lopsided export balance between the two countries acts as a bargaining chip for the USA in when it comes to tariffs. We will immediately lodge an additional complaint with the WTO over the unilateral acts of the United States.

Elisabeth Sterken of the Infant Feeding Action Coalition in Canada says she was among the official observers in Geneva when a US delegation took issue with various proposals that included marketing restrictions on breast milk substitutes. Most of the sources requested anonymity because they feared retaliation from US officials.

Then the United States delegation, embracing the interests of infant formula manufacturers, upended the deliberations. It is also beneficial for mothers, leading to less risk of heart disease, Type 2 diabetes, ovarian cancer, and breast cancer.

According to a now-viral report from The New York Times, American delegates took issue with a number of clauses in the breastfeeding recommendations, and threatened to impose trade measures and withdraw military aid if Ecuador refused to eliminate certain passages from the resolution. "Baby Milk Action", which was favorably quoted in the article, and ran much of the anti-formula marketing part of the assembly, is known for its long-running boycott of Nestlé, which makes and markets baby formula to mothers. The main problem is that in countries where safe drinking water is hard to obtain, mixing dry formula with local water can provoke diarrhea or other illnesses that kill babies. In war zones and during humanitarian crises, infant formula makes sense, said Gayle Tzemach Lemmon, an author and senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, in this piece.

Nestlé, Abbott Laboratories and others, in their relentless drive for profits, are trying to expand the $11.5 billion world market in baby formula.

The Times reported yesterday that the U.S.

Shonn Brown, a Dallas attorney who has worked in employment law, says most employers already have policies on breastfeeding. At the same Assembly, U.S. Representatives "succeeded in removing statements supporting soda taxes from a document that advises countries grappling with soaring rates of obesity".

Like this: