If we really want a 'Happy Yew Year' for families of the world, a few
little things have to change. Primarily among them is the power of big
business (international but heavily US-based) to direct national policy.
Here is a classic example from the Philipines (from earlier this year) of
an issue that has been of concern to the global health community for many
years, the aggressive marketing of infant formula. As ever, the US
continues to back the 'rights' of big business over public health
concerns, to the detriment of infant health.

* * * * * * * * * *

Don't listen to what the rich world's leaders say - look at what they do
Take the thousands of Filipino children who die every year courtesy of the
formula milk corporates, backed by US lobbying

George Monbiot
Tuesday June 5, 2007
Guardian

It is time once again for that touching annual ritual, in which the world's
most powerful people move themselves to tears. At Heiligendamm they will
emote with the wretched of the earth. They will beat their breasts and say
many worthy and necessary things - about climate change, Africa, poverty,
trade - but one word will not leave their lips. Power. Amid the patrician
goodwill, there will be no acknowledgement that the power they wield over
other nations destroys everything they claim to stand for.
The leaders of the G8 nations present themselves as a force for unmitigated
good. Sometimes they fail, but they seek only to make the world a kinder
place. Bob Geldof and Bono give oxygen to this deception, speaking of the
good works the leaders might perform, or of the good works they have failed
to perform - but not mentioning the active harm. They refuse to acknowledge
that what the rich nations give with one finger they take with both hands.
Look at what is happening, right now, in the Philippines. This country has
many problems, but one stands out: just 16% of children between four and
five months old are exclusively breastfed. This is one of the lowest
documented rates on earth, and it has fallen by a third since 1998. As 70%
of Filipinos have inadequate access to clean water, the result is a public
health disaster. Every year, according to the World Health Organisation,
some 16,000 Filipino children die as a result of "inappropriate feeding
practices".

These are the deaths caused only by acute results of feeding children with
substitutes for breastmilk. A summary of peer-reviewed studies compiled by
the campaigning groups Infact and Ibfan suggests that breastfeeding also
reduces the incidence of asthma, allergies, childhood cancers, diabetes,
coeliac disease, Crohn's, colitis, poor cognitive development, obesity,
cardiovascular disease, ear infections and poor dentition. Switching from
bottle to breast could prevent 13% of all childhood deaths - a greater
impact than any other measure. Panaceas are rare in medicine, but the
mammary gland is one.

Both the government of the Philippines and the UN blame the manufacturers of
baby formula for much of the decline in breastfeeding. These companies spend
over $100m a year on advertising breastmilk substitutes in the Philippines,
which equates to more than half the department of health's annual budget.
Those who appear most susceptible to this advertising are the poor, who are
also the most likely to be using contaminated water to make up the feed.
Some spend as much as one third of their household income on formula.
Powdered milk now accounts for more sales than any other consumer product in
the Philippines. Almost all of it is produced by companies based in the rich
nations.

Since Ferdinand Marcos was deposed in 1986, the government of the
Philippines has been trying to stand between these corporations and
vulnerable mothers. It has failed. It plugs one loophole; the formula
companies find another. Baby Milk Action, one of the world's most impressive
public health campaigns, has compiled a dossier of breaches of the marketing
code drawn up by the World Health Organisation. Formula companies have been
dispensing gifts to both health workers and mothers, running promotional
classes and meetings and advertising their wares on television and in
magazines and papers. These practices, though mostly legal in the
Philippines, are all discouraged by the code.

In February this year, the Pharmaceutical and Healthcare Association of the
Philippines (Phap), which represents multinational companies, ran a series
of advertisements expressing concern for women unable to breastfeed their
children. The campaign was described by Jean Ziegler, the UN's special
rapporteur on the right to food, as "misleading, deceptive, and malicious in
intent". He claimed the adverts "manipulate data emanating from UN
specialised agencies such as WHO and Unicef ... with the sole purpose to
protect the milk companies' huge profits, regardless of the best interest of
Filipino mothers and children".

Last year, in the hope of arresting this public health disaster, the
Philippines' department of health drew up a new set of rules. It prohibited
all advertising and promotion of infant formula for children up to two years
old. It forbade the formula companies from giving away gifts or samples, and
from providing assistance to health workers or classes to mothers. The new
rules seem stiff, but they all come straight from the WHO's code. Phap,
whose members include most of the world's largest pharmaceutical companies,
went to the supreme court to try to obtain a restraining order. When it
failed the big guns arrived.

The US embassy and the US regional trade representative started lobbying the
Philippines government. Then the chief executive of the US Chamber of
Commerce in Washington - which represents 3m businesses - wrote a letter to
the president of the Philippines, Gloria Arroyo. The new rules, he claimed,
would have "unintended negative consequences for investors' confidence". The
country's reputation "as a stable and viable destination for investment is
at risk". Four days later, the supreme court reversed its decision and
imposed the restraining order Phap had requested. It remains in force today.
The government is currently unable to prevent companies from breaking the
international code.

So the department of health asked a senior government lawyer, Nestor
Ballocillo, to contest the order. In December Ballocillo and his son were
shot dead while walking from their home. The case remains unsolved;
Ballocillo was working on several contentious cases at the time. Last month
the US regional trade representative paid another visit to the Philippines
government. The department of health appears to be wavering. In two weeks
the campaigners promoting breastfeeding will present their arguments to the
supreme court to try to get the order lifted, and the formula companies will
try to stop them. If the companies win, thousands of children will continue
to die of preventable diseases.

The pressure to which the US government and the US Chamber of Commerce has
subjected the government of the Philippines is at odds with almost
everything the G8 now claims to stand for: the millennium health and
education goals, the eradication of poverty, fair terms of trade. But the G8
nations will pursue their stated objectives only to the point at which they
collide with their own interests. Away from their sentimental summits, they
pull down everything they claim to be building.
The G8 demands action on climate change; the World Bank, controlled by the
G8 nations, funds coal burning power stations and deforestation projects.
The G8 requests better terms of trade for Africa; Europe and the United
States use the world trade talks to make sure this doesn't happen. The G8
leaders call for the debt to be reduced; the IMF demands that poor nations
remove barriers to the capital flows that leave them in hock. The G8 leaders
simultaneously wring their hands and wash their hands: we have done what we
can; if we have failed, it is only because of the corruption of third world
elites.

The question is no longer whether the undemocratic power the G8 nations
exert over the rest of the world can be used for good or ill. The question
is whether it will cease to be used.