Rapid Responses to:
|
|
Rapid Responses: Rapid Responses published:
-
![[Read Rapid Response]](/icons/misc/sectionDOWN.gif)
WHO Global Strategy: a tool to protect breastfeeding and child health
- Magda Sachs (22 January 2003)
-
IFM Encourages Transparent and Official Monitoring of WHO Code
- Andrée Bronner (31 January 2003)
|
|
|||
|
Magda Sachs, Breastfeeding Supporter The Breastfeeding Network, PO Box 21116, Paisley, PA2 8YB
Send response to journal:
|
Waterson and Tumwine (1) assert that “governments should accept promotion and protection of breast feeding as a critical area for improving child health”. They are in good company, as, in May 2002, the World Health Assembly produced its ‘Strategy for Infant and Young Child Feeding’ (2). The World Health Organisation ‘International Code of Marketing of Breast Milk Substitutes’ (3) and subsequent relevant WHA Resolutions are integral to this strategy, which is intended as a model for all governments to adapt and adopt as national policy. Here in the United Kingdom there is no indication that government is considering this strategy or intends to commit to a ‘comprehensive national policy’, including the implied ‘collection and evaluation’ of information (2). Currently only some provisions of the WHO Code and WHA resolutions are enacted in UK legislation; there has been no formal monitoring; legal mechanisms for enforcement have proved cumbersome. Since the UK performs poorly in terms of breastfeeding rates in comparison with other European countries (4) there is no room for complacency. If the UK were to commit to a national policy on infant and young child feeding, this would help protect child health not only within the UK, but, if there were effective implementation of ‘full collaboration of all concerned government agencies’, aid to low income countries could include capacity-building so that countries such as Togo and Burkino Faso have the means to monitor the protection of their children’s health. Currently monitoring is all too often left to small NGO groups operating on shoestring budgets. Let us take heed of the warning from West Africa (5) and act now in the UK, in order to contribute nationally to global child health. Magda Sachs References: 1 Waterson T, Tumwine J (2003) Monitoring the marketing of infant formula feeds, BMJ 326:113-4 2 World Health Organsiation (2002) Infant and young child nutrition: Global strategy on infant and young child feeding, http://www.who.int/gb/EB_WHA/PDF/WHA55/ea5515.pdf 3 World Health Organisation (1981) International Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes, WHO:Geneva 4 Saadev R (2002) talk at the Department of Health conference ‘Barriers to Breastfeeding’, London 5 Aguayo V et al (2003) Montioring complicane with the International Colde of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes in west Africa: multisite cross sectional survey in Togo and Burkina Faso Competing interests: I am an advisor to Baby Milk Action, the UK member of the International Baby Feeding Action Network (IBFAN) |
|||
|
|
|||
|
Andrée Bronner, Secretary General of IFM 75001 Paris
Send response to journal:
|
The 18 January 2003 edition of the British Medical Journal (BMJ) included an article on the WHO Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes. This article and the study it describes are an example of why IFM supports a better way to monitor and enforce the Code in many countries. IFM member companies are committed to the health and well-being of infants and young children. They unequivocally support the aims and principles of the WHO Code. However, for the Code to succeed, national governments must oversee monitoring and enforcement, in keeping with their own legislative and regulatory framework. The Code itself recommends this, and indeed it is key to its success. The study described in the BMJ article was led by a representative of IBFAN, which has devised its own system of monitoring. Under the WHO Code, monitoring groups are required to inform companies of alleged non- compliance immediately so that they can respond and take corrective actions, if necessary. Yet in the three years since this monitoring took place, none of the researchers contacted the companies mentioned. Accusations only came to light in this article. Data collection for the study was based on inaccurate interpretations of the WHO Code. For example, most of the alleged violations refer to products that are complementary foods (such as baby cereals or fruit juices), and not breast-milk substitutes. The Code explicitly excludes complementary foods from the marketing restrictions. As the industry association representing manufacturers of foods for infants and young children, IFM is interested in cooperation and partnership with WHO, other institutions dedicated to the welfare of children, NGOs and its member companies. To protect the health and promote nutrition of infants and young children, it is essential that governments are encouraged to enforce the WHO Code, that monitoring be based on research methodologies that fulfill basic reliability criteria, that it be transparent and that it be carried out according to national legislation and standards. Only when we are focused on this shared goal will the Code succeed. Best regards Dr Andrée Bronner
Competing interests: None declared |
|||