Breastfeeding remains the best asset for the health of a newborn. Yet many mothers fail to reach the minimum of six months of breastfeeding recommended by the WHO. The newspaper The Lancet explains that this is partly due to the dubious practices of the infant milk manufacturers. However, other, more societal reasons suggest that infant milk still has a bright future ahead of it.
Breastfeeding has proven health benefits for mothers and babies. However, less than 50% of babies worldwide are breastfed as recommended by the WHO. In a series of articles devoted to the issue, the newspaper The Lancet points the finger at the practices of the infant milk industry, which he considers partly responsible for this state of affairs. The newspaper accuses this industry of using for decades ” underhanded marketing strategies, designed to exploit parents’ fears and concerns, to turn infant and young child feeding into a multi-billion dollar business, generating approximately $55 billion in revenue each year. »
False promises and the pathologization of infant crying
This series of three articles describes in particular how normal infant behaviors such as crying, irritability and lack of nighttime sleep are described by the infant milk industry as ” pathological » et « presented as reasons to introduce infant formula when in reality, these behaviors are completely normal during the development of the child.
Some manufacturers also claim that their products can relieve this discomfort or improve nighttime sleep, and go as far as suggest that baby milk can help brain development and improve a child’s intelligence. Deduction which does not rest on any scientific basis. Finally, the fact of having established ranges of milk for infants with a numbered progression, the cross-use of which is being promoted, ” aims to build loyalty » parents to the brand and constitutes, according to The Lancet « a blatant attempt to circumvent the legislation prohibiting [dans de nombreux pays] for infant formula. »
Ces « questionable business practices ” more ” very effective », used by the manufacturers, would be « aggravated at the same time through intense lobbying of health professionals and political decision-makers. As often happens, this lobbying sometimes takes place ” secretly through professional associations and facade groups “. For the newspaper, this set of findings leads to the conclusion that infant milk companies” exploit parents’ emotions and manipulate scientific information to generate sales at the expense of the health and rights of families, women and children. »
In France, pediatric societies under the influence
In France, at the same time, a collective appeal also denounces the “harmful role of manufacturers in the protection of infant health » which is illustrated by a recent decision of the French Society of Allergology to give 10 ml of 1st age milk, every day, to breastfed newborns with a family history of allergy from the first week of life, until diversification in order to prevent allergy to cow’s milk proteins . A decision ” problem “according to the collective because it will « completely ” contrary to knowledge and scientific consensus on protecting the health of infants and their mothers« ignoring the protection conferred by exclusive breastfeeding “and does not recognize the classification of these products as ultra-processed products” responsible for many chronic diseases ».
The collective also recalls that the French Society of Allergology was born with the ” institutional support of a company belonging to the Nestlé group, itself notorious for violations of the Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes and points to a ” obvious conflict of interest [puisque] “Infant milk” companies stand to benefit from this recommendation, which would increase their sales. »
Read also
Two new reasons to breastfeed your child
Women with double days who feel guilty
If the editors of the newspaper The Lancetas well as French professionals, are therefore calling for a “ promotion » and to a « support » plus « effective of breastfeeding, the subject remains delicate, in particular because of other issues. Indeed, if we know that breastfeeding remains the best asset for the health of the child, the new generations of mothers denounce this weight which weighs on their shoulders alone. Infant milk, popularized in the 1960s in parallel with the massive entry of women into the labor market, quite simply allowed many mothers to cope with their double days, but also encouraged the more active participation of fathers in parenting duties.
Today, many women explain that they find this injunction to breastfeed very badly and have the impression of being “bad mothers” if they do not subscribe to it, or do not succeed. Indeed, if it is recommended to breastfeed your child until he is six months old, and ideally until he is two years old, society as a whole is not yet organized to make life easier for breastfeeding women.
Breastfeeding in a public place is often frowned upon and mothers who bravely decide to express their milk in the workplace, once the two and a half months of postnatal leave have passed, often find themselves doing it sitting in the toilet or hiding as they may in unsuitable meeting rooms. Thus, as long as society as a whole is not better organized to make life easier for breastfeeding women, infant milk has a bright future ahead of it, no matter how sneaky these marketing strategies are…
Read also
Baby formula with nanoparticles
Read also
Want to breastfeed? Ban PFAs!
Under no circumstances is the information and advice offered on the Alternative Santé site likely to replace a consultation or a diagnosis formulated by a doctor or a health professional, who are the only ones able to adequately assess your state of health.
