The Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health (RCPCH) in the UK is accused of accepting sponsorship from baby milk companies in violation of WHO regulations. WHO in 1981 established a tough code on how baby milk substitutes should be marketed, and the World Health Assembly in 2016 discouraged professional health bodies from accepting funding from baby food companies.
RCPCH was accused of obtaining sponsorship funding from Nestle, Nutricia and Damone among other sponsors for its first international conference billed to hold on January 29 in Cairo, Egypt. To this extent, 13 health groups and over 100 medical professionals wrote to RCPCH president, Russell Viner, asking him to remove Nestle, Nutricia and Damone among other baby milk companies from its list of sponsors.
Exclusive Breastfeeding Will Prevent About 900,000 Children Deaths Every Year in Poor Countries
Nigel Rollins, a professor at the WHO’s department of maternal, newborn, child and adolescent health, said it is wrong for the health association to collect sponsorships from baby milk companies because that would indicate to the general public that baby formulas are better than actually breastfeeding babies directly.
The critics of the sponsorships are worried that RCPCH would be seen as endorsing baby formulas over breastfeeding, and that Egypt event would make low- or middle-income countries vulnerable to predatory advertising. The risk here is that mothers in these countries may be confused with adverts into thinking that baby formulas are better than breastfeeding.
The critics said breastfeeding should be promoted at all costs, and not breastmilk substitutes where mothers could favour the latter. Studies reveal that about 900,000 child deaths would be prevented annually in low and middle income countries if breastfeeding were enforced. Unfortunately, only 40% of children below six months of age are fully breastfed in such countries.
RCPCH Said It Does Not Flout Any Laws in Accepting Funding From Breastmilk Substitute Companies
But RCPCH denied any wrongdoing, saying the World Health Assembly actually prohibits sponsorships from breastmilk-substitute companies, but the prohibition was not adopted as part of WHO’s 1981 code.
The Guardian and the Save the Children Foundation in 2018 found in an investigation that Nestle induced doctors, midwives and local health workers to win loyalty to their products in the Philippines. This they did by sponsoring the professional health workers to lavish conferences, dinners, cinema shows, and even gambling treats. This develop clearly violates the law in the Philippines.
Nestle was not rebuked or sanctioned in any way in the Philippines, and the company said everything it did adhered to the Philippine Milk Code (EO51). About the RCPCH conference coming up in Egypt, the organization said accepting sponsorship from breastmilk substitute companies does not contravene the necessary WHO code as well as local regulations in Egypt.