Infant feeding is a human rights issue.
Globally, only about 1/3 of infants under 6 months are exclusively breastfed. The World Health Organisation estimates that increasing breastfeeding to near-universal rates could prevent 800,000 child deaths annually, the majority of these being children under 6 months in low and middle income countries. Up to half of diarrhoeal and respiratory illnesses – two of the biggest killers of children under 5 – could be prevented by optimal breastfeeding.
In industrialised nations, lifting breastfeeding rates would see significant reductions in common childhood illnesses, and the costs associated with treating these illnesses. But racial and socioeconomic disparities mean that even in wealthier countries, the burden of preventable formula-related illness falls disproportionately on women and children of colour.
The rhetoric of choice employed in our Western ‘breast vs bottle’ debates is privilege writ large. Among educated wealthy white women, our formula use is heavy with guilt hang ups about eczema and ear infections. Using formula does not cost children their lives in our neighbourhoods, where safe water and electricity are taken for granted and nobody waters down formula to make the can stretch further.
The Fed Is Best Foundation is based on the distortion of evidence and public health information in order to promote support the use of infant formula. FIB casts breastfeeding as inherently unsafe and downplays the risks of infant formula because “mothers shouldn’t be shamed”. In the world of FIB, the biggest risk of formula is that a mother might feel bad about using it. Which is why they can post statements like this:
Our privileged society is eager to point fingers and shame families who nourish their babies with formula. In Africa, families live in deplorable poverty and these babies would die without formula. Their families are forever grateful when they have the opportunity to use it. #FedIsBest
My instinct is to respond to this by pointing out that 800,000 families a year are grieving babies who they lost thanks to their ‘opportunity’ to use formula. But having personally witnessed Dr Christie del Castillo-Hegyi flatly deny these figures on multiple occasions, I’m not going to bother with silly things like evidence because the FIB Foundation is clearly embracing life in a post-truth world.
Instead, let’s just take a moment to acknowledge the racist, classist underbelly that FIB has revealed here. The post they shared is from an organisation called 2ndMilk. 2ndMilk appear to be a small USA-based Christian charity run by a wholesome-looking young couple with excellent dental hygiene. 2ndMilk’s mission statement is: “To feed at risk malnourished babies and give them the best opportunity for a healthy life.”
2ndMilk are suffering from a bad case of White Saviour Complex. Through their ‘partnership’ rich Americans can sponsor cute little orphans and enjoy poverty tourism activities like handing out lollipop, distributing something called PB&J (which they actually refer to as “Peanut Butter & Jesus”), and finding new babies to save. This is the kind of charity work which people who genuinely understand issues of poverty and development – not to mention many African people themselves – are begging people to stop.
But the FIB Foundation love it. They love it so much that they don’t even bother to point out that the babies in the photo they shared are extremely unusual babies in the majority world – babies who are adequately cared for once orphaned, and for whom formula is a genuinely life-saving intervention as opposed to something which puts their life and health in jeopardy.
2ndMilk’s work benefits approximately 60 babies. This is not evidence that formula saves lives. This is evidence that white people can fly half way across the world and pop in and out of the lives of impoverished black babies. But the FIB Foundation want us to look at these babies and see ‘families in desperate poverty’, in fact not just ‘families in desperate poverty’ but ‘families in desperate poverty who are forever grateful for the opportunity to use formula’.
Let us be perfectly clear: this is cultural imperialism at its most egregious, and it is putting the lives of poor black babies second to the desire of rich white women to feel comfortable with their infant feeding choices. Breastfeeding in the majority world and emergency situations is unquestionably and unequivocally life saving. Formula use is so dangerous in some situations that organisations such as UNICEF support lactation specialists in crisis situations to help women to re-establish their breastmilk supply to be able to feed their babies safely. And spreading misinformation to further the FIB Foundation agenda is going to do nothing but undermine work which does not need to be made more challenging than it already is. But I guess it’s not our babies who are dying, is it.
February 16, 2017 at 3:53 pm
Excellent post.
LikeLiked by 1 person
February 16, 2017 at 7:35 pm
Thanks Olivia! And thanks for stopping by ❤
LikeLike
February 16, 2017 at 9:58 pm
I’m a big advocate for giving credit where it’s due and this newer org has done some amazing work – Nurture Project International. They worked with communities in refugee camps after well intentioned saviors donated formula in a place without safe water. Babies and children were losing weight and suffering ramifications of inadequate nutrition. NI was able to help refugee moms re-establish milk supply, set up bf supportive environments for moms and kids, and supply formula safely in cases where babies needed it. If we can get names of orgs like this out there, and show how effective they are at turning bad situations into better outcomes I think it goes really far in delegitimizing the work of FIB and the like.
http://nurtureprojectinternational.org
LikeLiked by 2 people
February 17, 2017 at 12:29 am
Thanks Marissa! Looks like a really interesting organisation. The other group I’m aware of doing similar work is Safely Fed (http://safelyfed.org/home/). Never ceases to amaze me that in emergencies and crisis situations how many people are happy to buy and send cans of formula but don’t want to give money for lactation support as they see it as too emotionally loaded…
LikeLiked by 1 person
March 2, 2017 at 3:55 am
Thanks for sharing about safelyfed, I am glad to have learned about them and I will definitely be donating ❤
LikeLike
March 1, 2017 at 12:17 pm
Thank you for mentioning Nurture Project
They do promote breastfeeding while supporting mothers who are formula feeding. I went to a camp where Nurture Project was just setting up. Water to make up feeds was being heated up in plastic water bottles over fires. Bottles were left to heat up in the sun ‘kind’ volunteers were making up bottles of feed and distributing them daily, there were no fridges. Aid agencies were distributing 3 nappies a day great when your baby has diarrhoea and medical services were poor to non existent.
LikeLike
February 17, 2017 at 12:40 pm
Where’s the real world evidence for those 800,000 dead babies? Autopsy reports? Copies of death certificates with cause of death listed as “death by infant formula?” And again, if there are such a number of you so concerned about formula being provided to orphaned babies in Africa–what are you doing about it? Where’s the blog post about the foundation you’re starting up in Malawi to assist African women in setting up a donor milk bank? Where’s the blog post about the fundraising you’re doing to help women in Africa buy appropriate food and clean water to help them increase their breastmilk supply so that they can donate to help babies there that would otherwise starve to death?
LikeLiked by 1 person
February 17, 2017 at 8:41 pm
Hello Serena,
I provided a link to the WHO/Lancet source for the 800,000 figure – although if the evidence of international health authorities is insufficient for you, I somehow doubt there’s much else I could provide or say to convince you.
Thank you for your concern and advice about my own personal activities. Regardless of what you think I should be doing, the fact remains that FIBF’s post was racist at best and at worst downright dangerous. Unsafe bottle feeding is deadly and decades of work has been invested in appropriate health promotion in resource-poor settings. It is utterly disingenuous to present the photos from 2ndMilk as if they are ‘families’ and that ‘fed is best’ when safe feeding options are so radically different to the context of the FIBF audience.
2ndMilk do not provide any information as to how they ensure safe preparation of the formula they provide and until this is demonstrated it is reasonable to hold concerns. I’d welcome any further clarification on this as well as clarification of whether or not 2ndMilk have any ties to the companies who supply the formula they give.
Regards
Nicole
LikeLike
February 18, 2017 at 5:16 am
“Where’s the blog post about the foundation you’re starting up in Malawi to assist African women in setting up a donor milk bank? Where’s the blog post about the fundraising you’re doing to help women in Africa buy appropriate food and clean water to help them increase their breastmilk supply so that they can donate to help babies there that would otherwise starve to death?”
Sounds like some great projects for the 2ndMilk folks, given that they have already developed a donor base, infrastructure and the mission to save starving babies.
Alternatively, maybe the formula companies that are handing out millions worth of formula (as ‘free’ samples) like candy in this country could donate their products instead of using it for predatory marketing? Oh, I forgot, they only donate the stuff that’s not good enough for the babies of white privileged parents.
LikeLike
February 20, 2017 at 8:17 pm
I’ve been debating responding to this, since I doubt this is worth my energy, as nothing I or anyone says that doesn’t conform to your personal beliefs will be believed, no matter how many links from any number of sources I post. But I have a hard time letting go of the perpetuation of lactivist half truths, so will keep this short. What’s actually disingenuous is portraying yourself as having any concern at all about dying babies in Africa, when really your only interest in the now oft cited 800,000 dead babies is because you use those dead babies to further your own breastfeeding-superiority agenda. This has absolutely nothing to do with race. And you turned the FIBF’s post about an organization that actually does something to help babies that would otherwise starve into just one more thing to further your own agenda. Here is information from the WHO and UNICEF about infant and child mortality. ”
-5.9 million children under the age of 5 years died in 2015.
-More than half of these early child deaths are due to conditions that could be prevented or treated with access to simple, affordable interventions.
-Leading causes of death in children under 5 years are preterm birth complications, pneumonia, birth asphyxia, diarrhoea and malaria. About 45% of all child deaths are linked to malnutrition.
-Children in sub-Saharan Africa are more than 14 times more likely to die before the age of 5 than children in developed regions.”
Would breastfeeding save some of those 5.9 MILLION lives? Absolutely. Is the number of lives that could be saved around 800,000? Possibly, but the Lancet numbers are theoretical. That leaves 5 MILLION plus babies and children that would still die. Truly, since breastfeeding is your only interest, do something for mothers and babies instead of badmouthing an organization that is actually doing something, and an organization that supports others in actually doing something.
http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs178/en/
http://data.unicef.org/topic/child-survival/under-five-mortality/#
LikeLiked by 1 person
February 20, 2017 at 11:20 pm
Hi again Serena,
My ‘personal beliefs’ about breastfeeding and global development are informed by the international body of peer-reviewed evidence demonstrating the impact of infant feeding on child morbidity and mortality. The agenda is to see a reduction in preventable deaths and illness. The importance of breastfeeding, particularly in resource-poor settings, is recognised by every leading health authority in the world.
That children die of causes which cannot be prevented by improving breastfeeding rates does not somehow render irrelevant the deaths which breastfeeding *can* prevent. It is bizarre, if not callous, to disregard this as ‘theoretical’.
If you want to talk about disingenuous half truths or using babies for an agenda – I’m more than happy to point you back to the FIBF’s misrepresentation of images of orphaned babies in Malawi to prop up their campaign against the BFHI in wealthy Western settings.
Nicole
LikeLiked by 1 person
February 21, 2017 at 12:40 am
“The agenda is to see a reduction in preventable deaths and illnesses. The importance of breastfeeding, particularly in resource-poor settings, is recognised by every leading health authority in the world.”
So you’re pursuing that agenda by writing blog posts denying that mom shaming is a thing and saying the FIBF is racist? That’s how you’re demonstrating your concern for children dying of preventable illness in resource-poor settings? That’s how you’re supporting breastfeeding in resource-poor settings?
What’s bizarre is claiming to have such concern for the theoretical lives that could be saved if more mothers were able to and chose to breastfeed, but completely ignore the fact that over 5 million children would still die from birth complications, preventable illnesses, and malnutrition. Because as I already stated, your only interest in the Lancet numbers is using them to bolster your stance regarding the superiority of breastfeeding. As demonstrated by your response, that is the only thing you care about.
LikeLiked by 1 person
February 21, 2017 at 3:05 pm
It is very clear that your inability to recognize that even African babies need formula to live because not all of them can be successfully breastfed is privileged and racist. Your ability to criticize an organization that wants to feed babies who would die without formula is privileged and racist. So should we let those 60 babies die instead? Mothers are quickly recognizing how judgmental and ugly-natured lactivists are and that you would rather compromise the self-esteem and the mental health of mothers as well as the physical health of a babies in order to push your agenda and win the “best mommy contest.” You are acting like rabid animals and it is very obvious from this blog post how desperate you are to regain the attention and power you once had over mothers.
LikeLiked by 1 person
February 21, 2017 at 10:10 pm
Hi Dr CHDH, wondered if you’d show up. Is this a ‘no YOU’RE privileged and racist’ kind of thing?
“African babies” (remembering that Africa is a diverse continent of over 50 different countries) deserve better than to be used as a pet project for wealthy Americans. That includes both the paternalistic operational approach of 2ndMilk, and having their stories distorted to push the FIBF agenda.
There are many organisations already effectively working within African nations to improve rates of safe infant feeding on the ground, including UNICEF, Save the Children etc. These organisations are well-equipped with knowledge and experience when it comes to providing support for safe use of formula if and when appropriate. You should check them out some time.
Nicole
PS gosh, it’s a long time since I’ve been compared to a rabid animal! Thanks though
LikeLike
February 21, 2017 at 3:24 pm
Furthermore, your lack of awareness of who the new Nestle is in infant feeding shows your privilege too. Pediatricians and epidemiologists in the developing world are recognizing a new problem in infant feeding, which is starvation-related jaundice caused by the Baby-Friendly Health Initiative. All over the world, babies are starving like my son did but instead of surviving because of the availability of ICU care and emergency services, they just die. Some survive brain injured and disabled for life. It is one if the greatest public health disasters in the developing world and the most common cause of newborn hospitalization. Previously healthy babies who would have been supplemented with pre-lacteal feeds are now lined up under bili-lights destined to live out the rest of their lives unable to speak or learn. Here is a quote from two of the pediatrician epidemiologists who write about the problem. The WHO, UNICEF, LLLI and the BFHI are no saviours. Their policies were not tested for safety and they compromised the lives and brains of babies all around the world to promote EXCLUSIVE breastfeeding when we evolved to supplement breastfeeding to keep babies from starving. From the study quoted below, 114,000 babies a year die from severe hyperbilirubinemia. You might want to subtract that from your figure from now on.
“Hyperbilirubinemia is one of the most common causes of morbidity in newborns worldwide, and the most frequent cause of hospitalization or readmission for special care in the 1st week of life. Recent global estimates suggest that every year, roughly 1.1 million babies would develop severe hyperbilirubinemia (>20 mg/dL) and the vast majority reside in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia.[4] Available evidence also shows that severe hyperbilirubinemia, with or without bilirubin encephalopathy, is associated with substantial mortality and long-term morbidities in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). This is corroborated by several studies spanning more than five decades in Nigeria, where the burden of severe hyperbilirubinemia is underpinned by widespread glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) deficiency, by polymorphism of the UGT1A1 gene, and widespread exclusive breastfeeding in the first few days of life.
http://www.njcponline.com/article.asp?issn=1119-3077%3Byear%3D2016%3Bvolume%3D19%3Bissue%3D1%3Bspage%3D1%3Bepage%3D17%3Baulast%3DOlusanya
“..severe hyperbilirubinaemia may progress to acute bilirubin encephalopathy (ABE) or kernicterus with a significant risk of mortality in newborns. Survivors may also acquire long-term neurodevelopmental sequelae such as cerebral palsy, sensorineural hearing loss, intellectual difficulties or gross developmental delays. It is estimated that, worldwide, severe hyperbilirubinaemia affects at least 481,000 term or near-term newborn babies annually, of whom 114,000 die and more than 63,000 survive with moderate or severe disability. At least, 75% of the affected infants reside in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia [14].”
http://bmcpediatr.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12887-015-0358-z
LikeLiked by 1 person
February 21, 2017 at 10:11 pm
Do you type these comments out every time, or have you got a stash of them lying around ready to cut-and-paste?
LikeLike
February 21, 2017 at 7:13 pm
How can you call yourself a feminist when you insist women should use their boobs to feed their child? Some women dont want to, have sexual abuse histories etc. Are you prochoice? If you are please consider your hypocrisy.
LikeLiked by 1 person
February 21, 2017 at 10:12 pm
Hey Jennine,
Can you please show where I ‘insist women should use their boobs to feed their child’?
Thanks
Nicole
LikeLike
February 22, 2017 at 2:36 am
Your inability to acknowledge the babies harmed by the BFHI, UNICEF and the WHO using poorly researched and frankly dangerous means of promoting breastfeeding shows you care more about the breastfeeding policy than you care about protecting the lives of babies. Nestle brushed babies killed and injured by their recommended form of feeding at one point. Guess who is doing it now?
LikeLiked by 1 person
February 22, 2017 at 3:31 am
Oh I love guessing games! Is there a prize? I think I know this one too… It’s your Fed Is Best Foundation right?
LikeLike
February 22, 2017 at 8:13 am
You are impressing no one but yourself nic j. It must feel lonely. The BFHI and it’s brainless advocates are brushing killed and injured babies under the rug. It is a wonder that mothers trust people like you with their babies.
LikeLiked by 1 person
February 22, 2017 at 9:01 am
I never brush anything larger than a mouse under the rug, it’s a tripping hazard.
LikeLike
February 22, 2017 at 10:31 am
to the formula fantasists – there is no need to “bolster” any “stance” on breastfeeding. It is recognised by the world’s top medical organisation as the optimal way to feed a child. End of. It doesn’t really need to be stated about developing countries without clean water, power, etc. and the dangers of formula feeding in these circumstances.
Now, you’re banging on about what is being done to set up projects in Malawi for donor milk banks, etc. – what are YOU doing, if formula has a major place there – to ensure that not only is there clean water, but have you set up projects for road-building to maintain the supply chain, consistent electric power to EVERY home, garbage collection to deal with packaging waste, and organized translation of instructions to safely make it up in all the local languages?
It all starts to sound a bit ridiculous, doesn’t it, that formula would become the norm there?
Own your decision to formula feed, or accept that if you “couldn’t” breastfeed you were probably let down by the healthcare system and stop pushing this dumb “formula for African babies” agenda. That goes for you, too, Dr FIB.
LikeLiked by 1 person
February 23, 2017 at 10:33 am
I did breastfeed all my babies. I breastfed by first born for 20 months if that matters to you. It’s very nice of you to think you are insulting me by thinking that I “decided” to formula-feed (i.e. make sure my baby didn’t die from starvation) or “couldn’t” breastfeed as if that is a completely fictional thing because no child ever died from starvation due to insufficient breast milk. Yet another ugly lactivist who only sees the world through their lactivist eyes and can’t see reality like, African babies die from lack of breast milk too, not just formula. Formula saves lives. Probably as many lives, if not more, than breastfeeding, because insufficient breast milk is common when you study reality instead of living a world of fantasy like some of the people posting on this blogsite.
LikeLiked by 1 person
February 23, 2017 at 4:16 pm
ah yes, Dr FIB, I believe you mentioned somewhere you felt “superior” for breastfeeding. Actually, when I talked about “you” I meant “you plural” – funny how you think the world revolves around you!
Actually, how an individual feeds their babies is of no consequence to me whatsoever, but please, promoting formula in poor places of Africa would make you seem the one with a very ugly agenda. There’s only one person here living in formula fantasy world!
LikeLiked by 1 person
February 23, 2017 at 4:45 pm
Does ANYONE understand how this delusional person thinks an ORPHANED child in Africa is going to live without formula?
LikeLiked by 1 person
March 2, 2017 at 3:27 am
…breastmilk.
LikeLike
February 23, 2017 at 4:46 pm
That wasn’t the context of the conversation. 2nd Milk provides formula to babies who would die because they were orphaned. Please explain.
LikeLiked by 1 person
February 24, 2017 at 3:57 am
“Our privileged society is eager to point fingers and shame families who nourish their babies with formula. In Africa, families live in deplorable poverty and these babies would die without formula. Their families are forever grateful when they have the opportunity to use it.”
I think FIBF need to get a better spell checker because when you typed ‘orphans’ it seems to keep coming up as ‘families’! Oops!
While we’re talking orphans, on their blog one of the 2ndMilk workers talks about showing “mothers or guardians” how to prepare bottles. Orphaned babies with mothers, please explain?
LikeLike
February 24, 2017 at 11:18 am
Bazinga! don’t forget – preparing the bottles over a fire, for which they must go out and collect the wood.
LikeLike
March 1, 2017 at 12:05 pm
I am imagining an alternative universe where infant formula milk producing companies don’t just give their formula away as a marketing poly but give their formula to all that want/need it for babies in low and middle income countries and of course to the orphans . Of course they would also provide the clean water and fuel to boil that water and provide sterilisation for all those bottles and tears.
It is hard if not impossible to afford to buy formula when people live on less than $5 or even $10 dollars a day, the price of formula does not magically reduce in low and middle income countries.
Am I being totally unrealistic? Are Nestle etc al going to become totally philanthropic?
LikeLike
March 2, 2017 at 12:01 am
Great point Autumn – the amount of free formula given to families in the USA is staggering. Surely they could provide that to their market (oops I mean families) in poorer countries?
LikeLike
March 2, 2017 at 3:46 am
Wouldn’t it be great if feeding babies involved the promotion and feeding of their biological norm (breastmilk), rather than promoting a product that is marketed for corporate profit.
Instead of pushing a capitalist product that provides excessive profits to a few, we could promote and support the creation and donation of something that we make ourselves and keep the power and money in our own communities. Formula marketing and promotion is riddled with immoral and unethical “bottom-lines” and profit-margins…
#informedisbest
LikeLike
March 4, 2017 at 5:50 am
Wisdomandbest, maybe like in Brazil and Cuba?
http://www.scielosp.org/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1555-79602014000100005
https://www.unicef.org/infobycountry/brazil_70944.html
LikeLike
April 7, 2018 at 5:13 pm
https://goo.gl/images/2aUnya This image still holds true today 🤱 breastfeeding saves lives mums and bubs worldwide. Industrial artificial powder (formula) is a factory product.
LikeLike