As a “new” mother who is breastfeeding I am saddened by this. Breastfeeding should thrive in developing countries not only because it’s the best (and sometimes the only available) food for infants, but it is also FREE!
15
This was a pathetic, abominable act on the part of the US! Using this kind of bully tactics to get their way.
12
Yes, the Trump administration does shameful things to promote the interests of businesses. But the benefits of breastfeeding are grossly overstated in this article.
Breastfeeding could save lives in developing countries because many people don't have access to clean water to mix the formula. In the United States, however, formula is safe.
Yes, breastfeeding is associated with a host of positive outcomes for children. But studies that control for confounding factors like socioeconomic status (e.g. the PROBIT study and sibling studies) show that these associations disappear. That means breastfeeding does not cause these positive outcomes; they are the result of children being born into families with more education and higher incomes.
In the US, the best predictor of long-term positive health and education outcomes for children is family income. Giving false information about breastfeeding benefits contributes to monumental social pressure on women to breastfeed. In a country where there is no paid parental leave, that means many women will either not return to work–thereby doing great harm to their children in the long-term–or, because not working is impossible for most families, these women will simply feel terrible about themselves.
Until paid parental leave is a reality, reduced risk of eczema and GI disorders in infancy may not be worth the sacrifices women have to make to exclusively breastfeed.
2
My hypothesis was that lack of confidence by most Americans would be political-economic suicide for all.
As these momentous, divisive issues and phenomena seem to currenty
be in ascendency if not our national cultural reality, I am flumoxed.
Is it true, for instance, that breast-feeding is anti business?
That opposition has to do with hurting business interests too much?
In plain words the arguments are about $ rather than health?
I think seriously about what is moral and immoral.
I suppose many/most humans do too.
To think we have this issue involved in politics is absurd.
Though I realize it has been an issue for at least 50 to many, many years.
Therefore if Trump is pronouncing his opinion one way or the other, I frankly
shouldn't comment.
The person I am mentioning isn't ... fit to judge.
This person is apparently against environmental protection--which he apparently interprets as an economic/business decision.
In good conscience I cannot abide by his flawed, backward, anti science
rhetoric about formula versus breast milk, and in whatever issues he seems
to be lacking in sound judgment.
However our society functions, everything he says and does is apparently political or demagogic or selfish if not nutty.
1
By pushing baby formula in poor countries, these companies may be increasing diarrhea, an international killer. The water that baby formula is mixed with is often polluted.
7
Maybe the headlines everyday should be: Our Country Has Fallen to a Another New Low.
Of course, many of our government's policies in the past have been imperfect and caused harm, but I don't remember another time in recent history (with the possible exception of the Nixon years), when we had both a president and political party set out to systematically destroy our democratric institutions. The problem is the extreme right has a plan to reshape this country and helping the working class, the elderly, or children isn't part of their agenda. But mother's milk? Really? Is there nothing these people won't keep their dirty hands off?
18
There is a rumor around that members of the elite 1% believe that it is imperative to reduce the world population. The US bullying to help the baby formula manufacturers would definitely further that agenda in countries with very little access to clean water. Most of the rest of the Trump agenda to increase pollution and decrease the access to health care at home and in the poor countries will also raise the death rate. Whether the Trump administration is doing it on purpose or just to help the profits of the largest corporations will make no difference on the ground. We can expect Kavanaugh's decisions will fall in line, despite his professed Roman Catholicism.
6
Power corrupts. Separation of powers was the genius solution of our Founding Fathers. They didn't foresee the rise of corporate power, which has no checks and balances and now controls almost everything and everyone. We must overturn Citizens United and restore checks and balances before it's too late--if it isn't already.
12
Lest we forget the scandal that Nestle created in 1974 in Africa by supporting formula over breast feeding. Corporate greed resulted in the deaths of many African children and health problems for subsequent generations. Refer to: http://www.businessinsider.com/nestles-infant-formula-scandal-2012-6
7
»The chief business of the American people is business.«
--Calvin Coolidge
[Our national motto is 'In Business We Trust'.]
»Buy cheap, sell dear.«
― Hetty Green (The 'Witch of Wall Street')
[Get people to transfer their wealth to you.]
«“All Marketers Are Liars«
― Seth Godin
[Believing makes it true.]
»Mankind was my business. The common welfare was my business; charity, mercy, forbearance, benevolence, were all my business. The dealings of my trade were but a drop of water in the comprehensive ocean of my business!«
― Charles Dickens, A Christmas Carol
[But only if they are White.]
4
Trump defies common sense ,anything he pontificates on
You can find in the uneducated, ignorant, and just plain wrong
Column.
One day he’ll be gone then we can put up with hen pecked
Pence the other mistake so many made recently.
The Federalist eviscerated the NYT's reporting on this story:
"As with much media coverage of the Trump administration, The New York Times’ extremely negative story elided crucial facts, was based on anonymous sources, and contained false information. Whether or not you call it fake news, at the very least the public was not well served by the story."
https://tinyurl.com/y8d7rpv4
As retired OB-gyn clinician, I worked my entire career to counter formula industry's attempt to convince women to reject breastfeeding and go instead to the expense, inconvenience, and vastly inferior value for health/nutrition for newborns of formula.
Trump's understanding of breasts is most likely as sexual objects that undermine corporate profit when used as they are designed to...provision of the perfect, God-given food and antibody protection for our babies.
14
Another despicable act by this despicable administration.
5
What's next--a tariff on mammory glands?
6
We now know that under Trump the US is firmly on the side of big US corporations and their profits at the expense of health, mothers, infants everywhere. Within the US, the Trump administration is rolling back protection of consumers, including consumers of financial services, and the general public to give free rein to polluters and the chemical and fossil fuel industries. It also hates poor people, single mothers, poor women and tries to deny their access to reproductive health services. Furthermore, muslims generally, and in particular from a list of countries, although curiously not from any of the countries from where the 9/11 attackers came. It hates refugees fleeing from crime infested countries, destroyed by the rise in crime created by the gigantic demand side of American drug users. The list goes on and on.
My sympathies go the majority of Americans who still have dignity, honesty and guts, but who are apparently helpless to cast out this menace that is fast making America small, dirty and loathed all over the World.
8
"...bullying, anti-science, pro-industry, anti-public health and shortsighted, to name a few. ". Yep, obtuse is another.
4
Once again, as nearly every day, the first and strongest response to action by the Trump is to cry out Shame!
5
The story of Donald’s life.
When you run an obsolete business model - like the baby formula industry - just coerce unwilling stakeholders, collateral damage be damned.
Mob tactics from the White House.
17
Oh what a bunch of horse manure. threatening other countries so some people can make a buck. Yes of course all mothers cannot breast feed for all kinds of reasons. That is part of the reason their were wet nurses and old crones who would dip a piece of cloth into warm milk and let the babe suck on it. Some how our race survived with out formulas. I remember breast feeding my son for six months in1964.
And for some reason this was shocking in the rural area
where I grew up. I had a friend who steered me towards natural childbirth which was a great experience and the steering included breast feeding.None of the kids I grew up with were ever breast fed. When did that ever stop? I will have to look it up. It was an embarrassing topic. I did it because it was easier than sterilizing all those bottles and warming them up and I had heard that the baby gets protection from your own immune system. I was shunned out of sight for feedings so as to not offend people, Ha! And I do not even remember much of a formula, it was just give them cows milk. I do remember a neighbor who knew more about nutrition, lamenting when I did give my son a bottle using canned milk,that it was dead milk and had no value. It was years before I understood what he meant. God are there soy beans in those formulas? I will have to look that up. It was a lovely experience, breast feeding, well after the first painful week, and except when I had to hide out doing it.
8
When I had my son in the late 90s at a public hospital in Hong Kong, nurses came to watch me nurse my baby. They said they had never actually seen anyone nurse! I believe it was due to Nestle’s effective marketing of their infant formulas and also some status related thinking that brought this about. It’s bad enough that Nestle and other companies would denegrade nursing, so much so that nursing women are called obscene—to which I say, it’s all in the eye of the beholder—but for a country to actually promote infant formula over breast milk is immoral at best. It’s akin to the government promoting cigarette smoking as “calming and good for weight-loss.”
16
Good point. I knew a woman who was pregnant in the 1960’s and smoked while pregnant b/c she took that weight loss claim to heart and figured that smoking cigarettes during pregnancy would result in a smaller baby, thus easing childbirth. And she was a smart, savvy, well-educated woman of means. One can only guess what women with fewer of those resources conclude from misleading advertising and promotional campaigns.
3
"Should American officials prevail in the current case, the outcome will be easy enough to guess: People will suffer. Industry profits will not."
Yes, "people will suffer". After that, they will DIE. Shouldn't those who knowingly, intentionally cause the death of tens of thousands of innocent babies be held accountable? Isn't that a crime against humanity?
14
Breasts are not important. Hence his suggestion that his daughter get hers augmented to help her become more successful as a model and if Melania had a child that she quickly regain her figure. Why are we surprised at this?
3
How stupid can the Trump administration get? Trump complains about the price of drugs in the US. He touts that he wants to push US drug prices down. Does he really think that other countries will constrain their demands for lower prices, if he is asking the same things of pharma?
One might argue that he wants other countries to put more money into supporting pharma. That being said, the "author" of "The Art of the Deal" would advocate that the right thing to do is get the best deal for you, regardless of the costs to everyone else.
Classical Trump, do what I say, not what I do. Trump, the master of "The Art of Cognitive Dissonance".
2
Greatness! Much Greatess! So much greatness!
4
This is so appalling I have nothing really to add, but thanks to the NY Times for running the picture of the baby nursing, and not giving in to the fear that ignorant people will be squicked out by the image of a breast.
5
Remember that Obama promoted the same groveling, disgusting bowing before profits that infused and shaped the Trans Pacific Partnership.
What is Melania Trump’s opinion on breast feeding vs. formula in third world countries?
2
"...the overwhelming balance of evidence tells us that breast milk is the most nutritious option for infants, by far"--IN COUNTRIES WITH INCONSISTENT ACCESS TO CLEAN WATER. There. Fixed it for you.
Can we please, please, please stop pressuring women to breastfeed when the working world makes it all but impossible for women to do so? Yes, in underdeveloped countries, it makes sense to do this because water borne diseases are a problem. But shouldn't we address, then, the clean water issue first? Because most assuredly if the baby's parents don't have access to clean water either, illness will affect the baby's care regardless.
1
The "clarification" that formula is only worse for the baby in places without clean water is incorrect. It is also worse than breast milk when made with clean water, because formula contains none of the mother's antibodies and other beneficial components of breast milk. To suggest otherwise is misleading.
7
Yes, the president knows about the needs of women.
America the bully boy of small children. Who knew.
5
Women scare Donald Trump.
It's that simple.
2
Quite clear this country cares not one bit for children. Where will you stand supporters of this regime when they take actions that affect your children.
1
This (from CNN) sums it up:
Donald Trump had an "absolute meltdown" when a lawyer requested a break from a 2011 deposition to pump breast milk.
"He got up, his face got red, he shook his finger at me and he screamed, 'You're disgusting, you're disgusting,' and he ran out of there," attorney Elizabeth Beck told CNN's Alisyn Camerota on Wednesday morning.
11
When I think we can't go any lower into the toilet, Trump and his administration makes the cellar look like a penthouse; supporting business interests at the expense of health and well being is sick, ney criminal.
Breast milk is best. Trying to create a market for baby formula at the expense of breast feeding is criminal and these slime buckets who push formula at the expense of breast feeding need to pay. Prison is too good for them.
4
Please NY Times, post the names and photos of the US delegates to the WHO for this meeting. Taxpayers want to know! And this should help you get started.
http://apps.who.int/gb/ebwha/pdf_files/EB143/B143_DIV1Rev1-en.pdf
3
Keep talking about about my latest outrage,forget about Russia.
3
A bold move by a loser, Trump, who has "milked" the system all of his miserable life.
3
The US is an exceptional country. Exceptionally ignorant, exceptionally greedy, and exceptionally horrible.
Sad.
3
Breasts are best--as all pediatricians would agree, whether they are female or male.
So, is Trump looking for payoffs from corporations? He knows nothing about the subject, other than the money, period
Stop ruining the planet for money......
Formula is not a substitute for breast milk, no matter what your corporate masters say....
3
One other thing, about the photo your editor no doubt thought wise to use. The process of natural fertilization is incredible. Seeing the semen shoot into the vaginal cavity and igniting implantation is a fantastical moment of science and human nature. But you don't post photos of it. Promoting it. Not even in pro birth or anti abortion editorials. It's kind of a discreet process, depicted in science, but not gratuitously promoted as your editor does here, in defiance, it seems. I'm a woman. I don't want to see this photo any more than I want to see the moment of conception. Your photo is just another subliminal message that women are vessels of life only, here to live and breath in the service of you.
The seem to have introduced swamp monsters instead of draining the swamp.
2
People will suffer. Corporate profits will not.
Part and parcel of what is wrong with just about everything since Trump took office, but beginning with Ronald Reagan and "supply side economics" otherwise known as voodoo.
The love of money is the root of all evil. Since we have put corporate profits above everything else...health care, the earth itself, safety, human decency, honesty, truth, fairness, the common good...hundreds more items, our society has been falling apart. Sure, there are more jobs, but those folks we see soon enough they have been sold down the river. Having religion shoved down our throats in a country that is supposed to separate church and state while at the same time watching what is completely "unchristian" behavior towards immigrants, women, LGBTQ, and minorities is astounding. Every day.
Who could more represent the Ugly American but Gordon Gekko (excuse me, DJ Trump)? What other more disgusting collection of greed, hubris, arrogance, condescension and bad taste could we have found? Thank FOX, the Koch Brothers, Sinclairs/Mercers, Adelson, and PUTIN. A wonderful bunch.
Women are supposed to walk 10 steps behind, be quiet, have a perfect face and body (be a 10, remember?) and lie on their backs as needed. Breasts are not for nutrition they are for oogling and grabbing. Women are dangerous!
Thank you for the editorial, NYT. Good job.
3
Profits over people. What can go wrong?
Diplomacy in the age of Trump.
Whether a mother should nurse her baby is entirely up to her, as the Christians should understand, it is devised by God. US mustn’t interfere in that sacred mother- child bond.
We all are aware of the Nestle fiasco in promoting baby food in Africa.
The US must stop bullying in the global stage. I predict that it will happen as a consequence of the path taken by the current Republicans. To wit, the dismantling of NATO will free the Europeans from American Dominance. Once that happens there will be no US base in Germany or elsewhere. US will withdraw from Souht Korea. Pakistan, once our client state, has veered to China as the US is most hated there. With the way we are treating our neighbors from the south, pretty soon our influence on them will be diminished. Not a bad picture, as far as I am concerned.
1
This blatant pushing for corporate profit over all else, including bonding between infant and mother and the health of the individual, is not only evil but a gross interference in even free market principles and placing weight on the most dehumanizing of so called liberal economics. I write evil and I mean it as it destroys truth and trust in government and hurts millions of people. I will not even address the medical facts as it is so well known that mother's milk is absolutely the best for human babies for too many reasons to enumerate here.
Why was Donald Trump tweeting about breast feeding? Certainly, he saw it on Fox News, has friends in the formula business - but my lord!
The approach makes Trump like more like Al Capone who said "You can get much farther with a kind word and a gun than you can with a kind word alone".
The gangster like approach seems to be norm of Trump international policy.
His administration had threatened in a similar vein India too when the country decided to go in for the Russian S-400 Triumf anti aircraft missile system.
I hope our American friends realize the immense harm Trump is doing for his country by converting most of the friendly countries into enemies.
For courageous choices guided by principle and statesmanship do not look to Trump Washington. It is the wrong address.
Here is what parents should know. Do both. We were told by the pro- breast feeding group that if we gave our baby a bottle she wouldn't breast feed. Total nonsense. There is no doubt that breast feeding has its advantages, but so do bottles.
1
Hard to believe that Trump's USA is the same country as the one Abraham Lincoln envisaged. Perhaps it isn't.
This would be a great premise for a Hollywood movie comedy if it weren’t so cynical and if it didn’t affect the lives of millions of infants around the world. So much for concern about “LIFE.”
1
Maybe Trump is trying to eliminate breast feeding for the toddlers of the world because of a huge cut from the "$70+ billion baby formula industry" as you hinted here.
It is also reprehensible that he's threatening countries like Columbia with military force if they "cut prescription drug prices " as per your article.
While we all grew up with our own mothers' breast milk including Trump, it seems like we're witnessing an episode of "Handmaid's Tales" the way Trump and his baby and poor people killing thugs are operating as if they're ruling the Republic of Gilead, not the United States just like they showed in the episodes of the above serial.
Now if I don't quote one dialogue "The Republic of Gilead knows no bounds" from the above serial then the rest of the Americans and the people of the world who didn't watch the above serial will not understand about what Trump is about to do.
The above quote had to be mentioned here in the same context of Trump's authoritarian worldview when he doesn't want our future babies to the same most healthy nutrition which he and most of us found in our mothers' breast milk.
Yes, what Trump is doing to us in america and to the poor people of the world who cannot afford to buy baby formula nor pay sky high prices for prescription drugs is something that even worst dictators and total butchers didn't do to their own people.
Watch out America,the way Trump is acting now pretty soon he'll change the name of America to the Republic of Gilead.
It's bad enough that Trump and the Republicans stick their noses into our personal lives, but how dare they push policies for other countries. Pushing a policy that women in developing countries buy American-made formula instead of breast feeding is indefensible. They must know that mixing formula with tainted water could mean a death sentence for plenty of babies. However, we know that they have no conscience when it comes to interfering in the mother/child relationship after what has been happening at our southern border.
1
Breast feeding is necessary for good health and a good immune system for the baby. It is criminal to suggest otherwise and obviously corrupt. It's all about money not health. It is so sad that America values its corporations more than its people.
4
Too often the strange noises and bad smells of a failing power system are excused and ignored until the lights go out. Then the innocent victims are awarded the blame (because it's their fault for being poor). That's the hazard of empire and its delusional power, recorded by reality in the dust and ashes to which its big shots must also return.
1
As scientific understanding grows it becomes very clear the value of breast milk over formula. From such diverse research as studies of the mothers antibodies which inoculated the child, to the analysis of what happens to infants gut bacteria when fed mothers milk - milk which they have discovered contains various molecular constituents designed strictly for gut bacteria but which, tangentially, benefits the child, it becomes clear the value of breast milk.
I get that this is not always an option for mothers (or Fathers). And I get that formula has its place. But as the science advances it becomes clear that to rear an infant on formula alone, strictly from the standpoint of our burgeoning understanding of the biology involved, must be akin to an adult surviving solely on vitamin-laced potato chips.
But since Trump and his minions do not read; do not follow much less believe in science, this stance of theirs isn't surprising is it? The idiocy of our current ruling elite continues to astound, doesn't it? So it goes...
John~
American Net'Zen
2
The Pharma industry, just like the NRA, has paid off elected officials from both political parties. No one is going to oppose them while they bleed us.
5
Where are the "right to lifers" on these issues? Nowhere.
6
Not to forget that breast-feeding protects from pregnancy in most cases. Economic benefits for the family.
6
"thanks, oddly enough, to Russia."
Nothing odd about it. Russia was the hero of the day. This move increases Russia's influence and goodwill worldwide while we decrease ours.
11
Way to make the US a pariah; Make Russia Great Again--MRGA!
It is very simple.
2
Comments seem to be divided, not on what's right as much as what's worse to promote.
Having lived in 5 African countries, including in the 1960's when our own USAID had a program (which my husband led) to counter Nestle's promotion of its formula as the modern and best food for babies, I am horrified that the cycle of danger is out there yet again. My husband led that. I visited a clinic sometimes for sick babies that did provide safe formula if the mother had no milk. I once rocked a sick, dying baby who might have survived if he'd been there earlier.
There is NOT one 'right way'! But when it comes to feeding newborns (even into toddlerhood, for some) in the poorest places, mother's milk is the FIRST (and by far the best) right way - and IT'S FREE! Formula can save lives - or kill. When there is no refrigeration, no directions with the formula that the mother can read, not enough money to keep increasing the amount as baby grows (so formula may be watered down), babies die from 'the-disease-babies-get-when-weaned' far more often than those on mother's milk till they are crawling and stronger and more gradually exposed to germs.
It is disgusting that a corporation would misguide vulnerable people so blatantly; but far more shocking that our once caring nation has sided with money against the vulnerable.
28
Not to forget that breast milk confers passive immunity from the mother's antibodies it contains.
4
43 years ago my husband and I took a course in birthing and caring for a baby. I was pregnant and knew nothing about babies. The Overlook hospital in Summit, NJ, may the gods bless it, offered the course to expecting couples.
The first thing we were told was that they would shamelessly plug one thing - breastfeeding. We listened, despite the fact that women in my husband's family were full of horror stories about the practice.
Nursing my child was the best thing for me as a new mother. It gave me confidence in my ability to raise a thriving baby. Brand new in the States, with no family of my own except for my husband, I soon realized that I can take care of the wondrous creature we created.
Breastfeeding is such a bonding experience between mother and baby. And yes, my baby was calm, healthy and met all the growing marks.
He grew up calm, healthy and - bonus - never overweight. I'm not saying that he still has a full head of hair thanks to breastfeeding but who knows?!
25
Until the US initiates a world wide program of providing safe clean drinking water to the entire world, then the US has no moral authority to push for formula feeding of infants in poor nations. The formula sold in places like Ghana must be reconstituted. There are villages here where the only water comes from ponds,streams, rain collection into non food grade plastic barrels. Even municipal water often is not treated properly because of breakdown of equipment, or ruptured supply piping allows soil contamination of water before it reaches municipal taps where people collect it in all manner of unsanitary vessels. This water is not sterilized before it is used to mix powdered formula, nor are the baby bottles properly cleaned. Poor people often do not bother heating water over a charcoal fire to wash their dishes as they need the charcoal to cook their food. They do not know the water they drink and use to reconstitute formula is full parasite cysts and eggs, chemical contaminants like pesticides, or enteric viruses that can harm their babies when used to mix up formula. The big formula makers have advertised for years here, same as they did in the US, that feeding with formula is the " modern" thing to do. Aside from the big business aspect of this story, the public health and infant mortality story is much more serious. Essentially blackmailing countries to force them to push formula over breastfeeding is a moral outrage.
36
The US should not have moral authority over any people anywhere. We can not govern ourselves or provide healthcare for our own citizens. In the US most hospitals’ maternity wards push breast feeding to the point of shaming women publicly who can’t or won’t breast feed. But will push women in poorer countries to use formula “made by American companies” at a price no one can afford. Let nature have the say in every country & every woman have the final say over her own body. Get out of the human body, America.
61
We aren't going to have clean water in America why should we push for clean water in another country. All this man is worried about is loss of profit to some company when he won't have his own brands made in america. America is in a dangerous place now.
The issue of the wrongful promotion of formula in developing countries is not new. I recall being part of a boycott of Nestle who promoted formula in Africa in the 1980s.
A central problem is the widespread absence of clean water in many countries still and people so poor they cannot aford the quantities required for adequate nutrition which children could readily get from their mothers at no expense. The Western device of formula was incorrectly perceived in developing countries as progressive.
This is a cynical marketing ploy, but not new but when backed by the US and it's President, incredibly dangerous.
25
Unless the United States delegates to the WHO act independently of presidential directives, there can be no doubt that these actions to promote formula abroad are Trump driven.
The bigger point is that access to clean drinking water is a serious global problem. Powder formula needs mixing with water. If the formula is already liquid, there is the problem of expense.
I'm a former La Leche League member and district advisor who worked with nurses in an urban women's hospital to promote the WHO Baby Friendly Hospital initiative (also adopted by the USA) back in the 90s. This current effort to thwart breastfeeding is an outrageous step backward, and dangerous for babies and moms worldwide.
And by the way, of course there are situations where a baby and mom need access to affordable, safe infant formula. This latest action does not seem to be about making that happen, either.
11
There is no end to corporations' efforts to monetize every aspect of human life from birth to death. At the same time, there appears to be no end to Mr. Trump's administration's support of corporate interests.
One of the largest international suppliers of infant formula, Nestle, has had a running dispute with NGO's over its formula marketing practices. Nestle has even pushed to continue its production of water from California's aquifer during its drought.
Every time I see bottled water, I think my head will explode. Is there nothing we cannot or should not sell for a profit?
13
While breast milk is likely the safest option, we don't live in a world where women have the economic autonomy and security to breast feed, making alternatives like formula vital. Making formula somehow seem less then optimal, despite decades of research otherwise, is just irresponsible. Pick another battle with DT.
He's right.
1
This statement is incorrect. In most developing countries, breastfeeding is not viewed with the same Puritanical, Victorian horror it is in the United States. It is done without shame in public and no-one pays the slightest attention. The major point here is that in developing countries, breastfeeding (where the mother is capable of it), is the safest, healthiest and cheapest option available. Decades of research supports the fact (not notion) that formula is inferior to breast milk. Formula is an alternative for a number of situations, but the WHO statement did not outright dismiss formula, merely made it a policy objective to encourage breastfeeding where possible. To cajole and bully representatives to prevent a simple fact-based policy statement borders on the criminal.
5
Didn't we fight this one 40 years ago? Economic autonomy? In places where you can't mix formula in a sanitary way? Give a rest.
"Among many other benefits, it has the potential to ward off diarrheal diseases and respiratory infections, both of which are prevalent in low-income countries." Another way to have fewer babies arriving at our borders?
3
This is downright evil. As the United State's influence, prestige, and power under Trump falls with markets soon to follow, I predict this evil will be met with punishment. Unfortunately, we will all pay.
22
Perhaps this is why an informal slogan of the Miss Universe contest could be "Boobs are for babes, not babies".
On a more serious note American intervention on behalf of corporate greed opened the door for Russia championing a reasonable public health measure, a great propaganda victory for Vladimir Putin. What an exceptional coup for the Russians, lined up on the side of the poor and vulnerable as they resist the pressures of the rich and powerful. Not only does President Trump manufacture a claim on political donations from the baby food industry but goes off to meet with Putin having delivered another blow against America's international credibility. Should Donald Trump ultimately be unmasked as a Russian agent, whether for reasons of cupidity or fear, the damage he has done to this country's reputation will dog us for generations.
Why does Donald Trump hate babies?
22
I remember that he said he doesn't like women after they had given birth, saying once "disgusting" to a breast-feeding mother.
1
He doesn’t hate babies. He simply loves profits above all.
1
If the TPP was in place, could the baby formula manufacturers sue for loss of anticipated profit as a result of this decision?
4
I cannot believe the sheer depravity of valuing profits above life, health and environment.
Humanity is about to get walloped with a gigantic disaster and we will have earned it.
We're wiping out entire ecosystems, including our own glorious Yellowstone Park. We are tormenting small countries. We deprive our own citizens of health care and affordable housing and good basic education.
I'm beginning to believe in evil. I'm beginning to believe in sin.
63
Perhaps the Trump children were not breast fed. Trump would thus resent the acceptance of the idea that others, even poor children, had a natural advantage over his family, and he is helpless to change that.
8
If the US has actually taken this position, this is hugely embarrassing. Exclusive breast feeding for the first six months of life is the gold standard recommendation for mother/child public health. Has been so for years. For the overwhelming majority of women and children, breastfeeding is both the cheapest option and by far the safest and healthiest. There is no serious dispute about that which is why this breast feeding resolution was I'm sure viewed as non-controversial by nearly all observers.
Goodness, what is next? Opposition to statements that the earth is flat because that would be in some fashion unfair to the Flat Earth Society? A vote to ban labeling poisons as poisons because that might reduce arsenic sales?
Thank you for printing this NYT. At the same time, your reporting needs to include the names of the corporations that are pushing to prevent a pro-breastfeeding resolution. We deserve to see the names. We also deserve to see their weaselly CEOs called upon to justify this irresponsible position in public, where their shameless antics can be subject to the cleansing benefits of sunlight.
43
Names are named in the story that broke reporting this vile action. It is iconned to the right of this editorial.
1
Hit these companies that peddle infant formula to poor countries where it hurts, if you care about this issue. Boycott Nestlé, Abbott, Mead Johnson and Wyeth (now owned by Nestlé).
The problem is that many in the US, like some of those commenting here, are profoundly ignorant of the science that supports the superiority of breastfeeding over formula. That ignorance is why the US government funds public health campaigns to encourage breastfeeding here in the states. Or at least they did before this current evil administration took charge.
http://www.businessinsider.com/nestles-infant-formula-scandal-2012-6
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2018/feb/27/formula-milk-compan...
2
Will we ever stop pinning the health of world citizens on the profits of Big Pharma? That they reach their tentacles into the lives of the poor across the world through our government is unconscienable.
13
I expect "Trumpian" will enter the popular lexicon to describe a certain type of cruel, corrupt, short-sighted and self-serving action and that it will live on long after its originator has met his demise. This will be Trump's legacy and, unfortunately, ours.
23
Indeed. Move over, Benedict Arnold, there’s a new infamy in town.
4
Infant formula= Fast food for babies.
16
No it is not. Shame on you for shaming families who may have to rely on formula to save the health and even the life of their infants!
Not all babies can successfully breastfeed, and not all parents can produce milk, or enough milk, for their babies. Or the mother may need to take medication that gets into breastmilk and would harm her baby (eg, chemotherapy, certain anti-convulsants, many painkillers) or the mother may have died. Formula can and does save these babies and their moms and other family.
And, no, I have no ties to the formula industry, other than having had to use one of their products to keep my baby from becoming malnourished.
12
No one is saying to deprive women of formula but rather to give women who want to breast feed the assistance they might need. Breast feeding is best for any amount of time.
In poorer countries women dilute the formula to stretch it out and that results in malnutrition. Do formula companies plan to sell formula for less to help poor women? No they don't.
2
This is already happening and has been for decades. Breastfeeding support has been widely available since at least the 1970s.
1
The baby formula fracus has been going on for decades and still is around our World. but our Congress and Executive branches, along with the electorate's care less attitude show that the will to curb the abuse is not there. If you really care write or call your folks in Congress and Executive branch, and do not whine about how it will not help, a copout for overdosing on reruns. Anne Rand is lose in the streets and all three branches of government where changes are being made which could take decades to mend. It is in your hands.
14
Maybe this isn't about Trump supporting big business. Maybe it's as simple as his early childhood experiences explain his personality disorder. He can't bond with anyone; perhaps not even with his mother.
20
Exactly. She rejected him at birth. Please read
my wordy ditty above.
SDS ps, the APA is the Am. Psych. Assoc., which
by now may resemble a political party in their
rejection of Trump.
This is getting seriously ridiculous. Trump is obviously trying to walk back anything that would be friendly to women and would encourage repealing those 'no breastfeeding in public' laws based on the fact that breast milk is healthiest for children.
10
What are the lives of hundreds of thousands of babies compared to corporate profits? Especially when they are children of a
There really, really is no depth of depravity to which they will not descend.
19
It's not a big step to go from ripping children from their mothers at the border to ripping them from the breasts of their mothers.
The Senate should explore Judge Kavanaugh's attitude toward the Trump Administration's cruel and incompetent Separation of the Innocents from immigrant parents. If approved. a new Justice Kavanaugh will surely have to deal with one or more of the cases levied against the Trump's oppressive immigration practices.
29
Simple. Please name the American companies who lobbied, aka bribed the Republicans and Trump administration. Call for a boycott!
26
It is paradoxical that the US has several of the most preeminent schools of public health in the world, e.g., Harvard and Johns Hopkins, but an administration that denies science and cow-tows to money. This is the same mentality that permitted unfettered operation by tobacco companies decades after it was known that tobacco kills. Disgusting and dishonest!
30
I am ashamed of this country.
29
It's one thing for this "right to life" Republican administration to blather on about the sanctity of unborn life when opposing a woman's right to determine her own reproductive health choices, and then to undermine health care for children after they are born.
The hypocrisy ramps up to pure malice when this same administration browbeats the rest of the world to promote private corporate greed that would actively sabotage children's health. In our names, our government is peddling unvarnished evil to the most vulnerable citizens of the world, and doing so in the most arrogantly ugly way imaginable.
Shame on us!
27
It’s not just that; the anti-choice crowd are capricious in their approach to science.
They have billboards and posters proclaiming that fetal heartbeats start by a specific number of weeks post-conception (science-trusting), but then deny the validity and accuracy of science when it comes to climate change, a plethora of adverse health and safety consequences of excessive deregulation, and so forth.
30
Maybe a 25% tariff on US baby formula imports to encourge more women to breastfeed is in order...
37
Maybe a tariff on bullying would be more to the point.
5
I feel so embarrassed and ashamed for this country. Talk about brazen profiteering.
30
Back in 1986 I met a former Peace Corps volunteer. She had been in Central America and had been provided with free baby formula and instructions to push it.
She and her friends wisely told the natives to mix it with their regular food and to keep on breast feeding.
It's clear that the lobbists don't give up easily.
27
Nutrition is only one aspect. Mother-child bonding is critical as well. Plus breast feeding is good for mom.
19
I understand the distress and social pressure that mothers experience that either cannot or do not want to breastfeed. Due to illness and harmful medications, I too failed to nurse my firstborn fully. Yet it is silly and distracts from your argument to be cautious with judgement to claim that bottle feeding is equal to breast feeding with regards to health benefits and bonding. It is not. Breastfeeding releases the "bonding" hormone in the mother, bottle feeding does not. The WHO recommends to nurse your baby fro 2 years - there is a reason for it. If we cannot follow these guidelines for whatever reason, we make do...but it is not ideal and we should not pretend otherwise.
17
Oh the mythical mother child bond. The only thing thing that defines motherhood and you can only get a strong bond by breastfeeding. There are no bonding hormones, women are intelligent enough to know they need to feed their child. But please feel free to shame and hate women who cannot breastfeed their infants. More importantly, make sure you tell every kid that was not breastfed that they do not have a real connection to their mother and lacking as human beings. Let's heap more hate on people who adopt by telling them they will never properly bond with their precious child because they cannot breastfeed them.
The truth is breastfeeding does not make you a good parent. There is no mother-child bond that exclusively comes from the breast. New research is showing that exclusive breastfeeding for 6 months is contributing to food allergies and recommend introducing foods between 4-6 months. The ideal is to trust women, not hate them, and allow them to make the best choice for their family.
10
Breastfeeding often is good for Mom, especially in the days following birth (I seem to recall an ob/gym saying hormones released during breastfeeding help uterus contract after birth in a way that help reduce hemorrhaging. But there may be other reasons, for a particular woman, why it may actually not be good for her.
And, speaking from personal experience and that of friends and family who exclusively formula fed their babies, it does not harm the mother-baby bond to use a bottle! For one thing, ask mom’s who adopted or all-male couples who parent a newborn. Or ask the 10s of millions be of American adults who were exclusively formula fed (as was very popular 40 years ago.
7
My dad put an extra spoonful in our formula "for luck" mid 1950's scotland. Mothers in developing countries water down texpensive formula to make it last longer as cited in your own newspaper by in stephen Solomon December 6 1981 article the Controversy over Infant Formula when World health Organization voted 118 to 1, USA the lone dissenting vote, to encourage breastfeeding. Infant malnutrition, sickness and death to enrich American companies cannot be tolerated again. .
39
Perhaps the terrible maternal/infant mortality rates (lower than all Western nations) reflects this preference for business over people.
1
I think this is true, but overlooks the psychology of it. Mr Trump doesn't like women, and he really doesn't like women's bodily functions. Recall all the remarks made about women's menstrual cycles, etc. He seems truly disgusted by women, except when they are objects of his sexual lust. And he fears and loathes women in positions of power.
Freud would have a field day with him.
71
I trust the reporting, but would like to see more details regarding the "United Stated delegates" and "American officials" that seem empowered to threaten punishing trade measures. Are these people elected officials? Do they receive funding directly / indirectly from the nutritional drink industry? Are they really lobbyists disguised as industry experts? Please report the names and employers of the delegates.
39
When Trump is finally impeached and removed from office (hurry up Mr. Mueller!), not only will the decent people of this country celebrate but the whole world will rejoice.
33
The House might impeach, but the Senate won't remove him. We need to wake the country up. I want to see a serious movement in the Northeast to separate from the rest of the "united" states.
2
Too bad even well-intentioned, well-informed, caring people think this is all about Trump, when it's actually a movement of many corporations, organizations, people and vast funds. Trump can come and go. It's a shame how celebrity culture has become confused with actual reality. The theocracy movement behind Trump will still be in power when Pence becomes president if he is impeached. I wish people would wake up. It's not about Trump. It's about the evangelical fascist movement.
I am glad you are covering these horrendous practices and wish you had been covering them before. We throw our weight around in the most heinous ways when there is no spotlight on us. I was red with anger reading that we were doing this, but even angrier and sadder when I saw that we were always doing some version of this.
Power and money really does take a toll on your humanity.
39
Yes, promoting baby formula for profits even where there is no clean water and the babies died is an old story. Nestle baby formula was the subject of global scandals about this way back in the 80's.
8
and a worse toll on our planet and the biosphere.
Of course the US is supporting business. We have a Republican president and congress. Republicans care about businesses above all other things.
27
Why take anything trump says as remotely truthful, especially when it's on Twitter?
This position on breastfeeding and the threats against Ecuador demonstrate that this administration has been bought and paid for by multi-national corporations.
It doesn't matter that regulations might harm children or mothers. It doesn't matter that deregulation may be based on bad science or no science at all.
All that matter is that some company is making money and if they are doing so off the misery of others, so what?
We no longer have a government. The United States has been turned into an extortion racket with Donald Trump as the major crime boss.
39
"But, while they might not have gone so far when it comes to baby formula, previous administrations are just as guilty as the current one when it comes to drugs." Thank you for that balanced statement. When it comes to Big Pharma, all American administrations and Congress have bent over. That's why we can't bargain for lower drug prices for Americans, but they can in Europe and elsewhere. We have got to get money (private and dark) out of politics. It's literally killing us.
27
This is one of the reasons why we need more women in power.
21
I don't know about that. The bullying of Ecuador sure sounds like it has Nikki Haley's manicured little talons all over it.
6
The Trump administration is doing this in our name. We are really going to get this guy elect a supreme court judge? Its time for we the people to stand up and put an end to this non-sense, by whatever means possible.
19
He hasn't figured out a way to monetize it... yet. That's it. The end.
13
Aw, Donnie doesn't want to share...
7
So does this mean that the Trump administration could also look into changing the CDC's policy on promoting breastfeeding in this country to Increase the proportion of infants who are breastfed? I believe this is one of goals of the Healthy People 2020 agenda. Hard to believe the US has a government (President) supported by so many people that is in general antiscience and against evidence based policies.
15
One factor missing in all of this is that commercial formula is mixed with water. Not all developing countries have clean water. Consequently, babies of the developing world fed formula instead of being breast fed often develop diarrhea and other gastric problems which can cause infant mortality.
40
I was speechless. Then I realized that I needed to formulate some thoughts on this particular human assault on “other” humans. First, it is shocking , but not unpredictable that this administration would take this stance. Second, it is shocking, but glaring, that big Pharma has the gall to publicly state its policy of profit over common good.Third, it is another assault on all people of lesser means, regardless of location in the world who are denied quality, science based information, regarding family health and care. That being the basis for societal stability. This should be the focus for government. All else is short sighted. I have yet to see a world leader taking the long view.
20
And let's not forget that breastfeeding delays the return of ovulation/fertility, helping families without easy access to contraceptives a nature-made assistance to spacing children so that their parents have the time and energy needed to care for their children.
Every child a wanted child, every child well cared for.
39
It can help to delay ovulation absolutely, but often it does not suppress the hypothalamus completely. It is 98% effective within the first 6 months and if breastfeed exclusively and if there are no periods or spotting and if mothers' nutritional status is adequate. All of these conditions have to be met. If not met, average return of ovulation can be as early as 39 days. Breast feeding has been shown to be protective against breast cancer.
11
I think the protective aspect of
breastfeeding in terms of breast cancer risk is due to suppressing ovulation/menstruation, for as long as that lasts (as you point out), but women should check with their personal doctors about this.
2
Actually, not having ones period during pregnancy is probably the greater influencer in terms of breast cancer
2
Another lurking reason come to light that unbridled capitalism is bad for the species in general. Money and Power will always Trump any ethical concerns regarding the well being of others. I guess this is just the way we sapiens are.
22
With all due respect to your editorial board, the scientific data, once all variables are controlled for show pretty margnal benefits to breastfeeding over formula; the benefits are vastly overstated. That's not to say that the Trump administration policy isn't idiotic for other reasons.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/everybody-calm-down-about-breastfee...
3
I believe you are not understanding the risks of formula feeding in the developing world. If you are giving your baby formula, where does the water come from? The water that you mix with the powder? How does one refrigerate the formula after mixing? How does one clean the bottles? How do you heat the formula to body temperature on a wood fire? What happens when you run out of wood? Can you boil the water without fuel?
These are not hypothetical what-if problems. This is daily life life in the Transkei.
Any study that claims that the benefits of breastfeeding are "overstated" is ignoring the reality of third world existence. I worked there for 3 years, and we celebrated any month in which we had no deaths in the malnutrition ward. We did not celebrate often.
And if you get past your first year, and are taking complimentary foods, tell me what are the sources of high protein, high calcium foods. Automobile travel is a luxury. People cannot afford store-bought food. A diet of flour, cornmeal, sugar?
63
In the real world, all variables are not controlled. Promoting formula to mothers that don't have access to safe water or the means to sterilize water creates huge health risks. That variable is not easy to control in the developing world.
33
Marginal benefits? First off, the author of that buzz worthy, hashtag ready piece was written by Emily Oster an economist on faculty at Brown U. She's probably heavily encouraged to publish. And, from reading her piece there seemed to be a greater theme of income inequality than hard science in the studies she cherry picked to write an oppositional piece. A properly designed double blind study to evaluate breastfeeding vs formula would be highly unethical. So studies beside, what do we know about the evidence? A lot. Not only are there immunoglobulins for infection, but growth hormones for intestinal development and neuronal development not in formula, to name a few. Data shows breast milk is superior in premies specifically. It also has psychosocial benefits. If we begin to degrade the importance of breastfeeding, I foresee a slippery slope and a roll back on FLSA laws which are marginal at best.
15
The American healthcare system is an extortion racket, designed to take advantage of illness to rob people blind and give all their money to rich shareholders. That's the entire reason prices for healthcare products of all kinds are so high. And it's not enough that they've corrupted our government into looking the other way while they steal from Americans, they have to use it to help them steal from foreigners too.
44
This sentence should read, “In fact, it’s just one of several recent examples of the administration’s zeal for badgering weaker countries into tossing public health concerns aside to serve powerful business interests [at the expense of women and children].
This administration hates women and children. It wants women and children to be dependent on male largess, it wants women to defer to and be subservient to men.
39
Trump isn't afraid of breast feeding, he just prefers that brown people in the developing world fail to survive to adulthood. It's a health policy that works in tandem with his immigration policies.
30
Humans are mammals. Mammals breastfeed. Period.
36
Thank you!
Another example of Donald's (and this administration's) misogyny. Given a chance to disparage women or give them less power, he will jump on it every time. Of course, the bullying and pandering to wealthy corporations goes without saying.
39
Another reader wrote that Trump reacted, overreacted, to a lawyer requesting a break in a 2011 deposition, that Trump called her "'disgusting' for requesting to pump breast milk."
It's also interesting that, in an article titled "19 Things Ivanka Trump wants you to know" that Ivanka writes about breastfeeding, that "one of the hardest things about returning to work is trying to continue breastfeeding and watching your milk supply plummet."
Where is Ivanka now?
Way back, it seemed that Trump's comments about John McCain, that McCain was not a hero because he was captured, or his insults to a Gold Star Family, that a grieving mother was essentially told to be quiet, or ... the next outrageous lie or the next or the next would mean that we had reached the bottom. With Trump, there is no bottom, just a continued spiral downward, now to children and to babies. He is polluting the world.
So many Americans want to apologize to the world.
55
I'm surprised that Donald Trump would be so opposed to breastfeeding. He's so interested in women's private parts. He'd probably like to breastfeed himself if he could. That balloon in England isn't so farfetched as it seems.
24
Amazing, Trump baby denies children their mothers and breastfeeding, although he is in constant need of succor himself.
19
Virtually everything Trump and his GOP enablers do defies science, logic, and common sense. There is nothing new under the Trumpublican sun—vanity and bullying, all is vanity and bullying.
25
I remember a time... I think... when reading the morning paper was a relaxing and pleasurable activity. Now every day brings outrage and embarrassment . That the US would oppose a resolution supporting breast feeding is bad enough, but the manner of opposition is pure gangsterism; threats, intimidation, blackmail: "Ecuador, which had planned to introduce the measure, was the first to find itself in the cross hairs. The Americans were blunt: If Ecuador refused to drop the resolution, Washington would unleash punishing trade measures and withdraw crucial military aid. The Ecuadorean government quickly acquiesced." This is the unmasked face of capitalism: nothing matters more than profit, with mafia enforcement.
This is what happens when you have a bully and and abuser as your president, a man who thinks belligerence is the same as strength. I know many say this is who the US has always been and Trump has just ended the pretense. I think there is some truth to this, but that is even more reason to fight his xenophobia, racism and misogyny whenever it appears.
I just got to think that we are better than this as a people and that we will get rid of this incompetent egomaniac and all those who enable him.
46
The US as the only superpower has become a force of evil under the Trump regime, bullying most poor and developing countries, while at the same time making it virtually impossible for people from those same countries weakened by the US, from emigrating to the US to better their lives. At the same time, the Trump regime is striving to deny food and healthcare to its own poor and middle class citizens. The US behemoth influence must be weakened and contained.
39
I think Trump doesn't like weak:
old people
babies and children
poor
women
3rd world countries
workers
immigrants
I think he enjoys hurting them.
He likes cruelity beause it makes him feel powerful.
91
Isn’t there a psychiatric condition name for that? Could it be considered “incapacitating” enough to invoke the 25th and save the country and the planet?
11
To 25th: Would that be "megalomania with misogynistic and sadistic impulses"?
1
Exactly! But probably there are about 10 co-morbid conditions as well.
The 4th season of “Madam Secretary” has an episode that I’m sure the writers hope will inspire certain people in DC.
2
Very disappointed that the NYT is misrepresenting the state of evidence on breastfeeding vs formula so emphatically. Randomized controlled studies and sibling studies - which if this were a debate about any other scientific topic you would no doubt acknowledge as superior to observational studies - show only two modest benefits in the developed world for breastfeeding: lower chance of gastrointestinal issues during the time breastfeeding is going on, and lower chance of eczema during the baby's first 12 months. No benefit for IQ, allergies, asthma, obesity, chest/ear infections and other alleged benefits. For the developed world, it's cool enough that humans can breastfeed and that often mothers and babies enjoy it - no need to misrepresent and moralize against formula feeding. Why didn't the WHO limit the resolution to a statement about the merits of breastfeeding vs formula in developing countries, which there is great support for? Then the US could have signed. That would allow honesty with respect to the science as well as promotion of health.
10
Because the issue for the formula companies is that sales have leveled off in the U.S. because of declining birth rates plus increased breastfeeding, so they want to be able to hawk formula in developing countries even though, as you noted, formula feeding is problematic because of low incomes, low education levels, lack of clean water, etc., etc. Having it apply only to developing countries would not have solved the companies’ problem, and they were the ones driving the train.
34
I would still say then they should limit the resolution to a statement condemning misleading advertising, or require formula in developing companies to be sold bundled with purified water. Women in many developing countries are even less likely than middle class American women to have the available time to breastfeed for extended periods - women in developing countries have to get back to work after a baby, and are maybe under even more pressure to do so. Misleading advertising is bad, but formula isn't a billion dollar industry principally because women are "misled" by advertising, women choose formula because they face real constraints in the developing world to breastfeed while working, just as women do here. And formula is probably more within their financial grasp then the hundred-dollar breastpumps relied upon by American women with more accommodating employers.
Do these randomized controlled studies account for the reality that many mothers in developing countries don't have access to safe water for mixing infant formula?
The problem is that formula is heavily marketed in developing countries and there is generally little mention of the risks involved. Comparing outcomes when formula is used under ideal conditions simply doesn't address the problem. In developing countries mothers are persuaded to use formula by heavy advertising. After they've stopped lactating they realize how expensive a continuous supply of formula is. They resort to overdilution, or they substitute adult powdered milk products to save money. The water used to dilute the product is often not clean. Babies die as a result.
Formula may be almost as good as breast mik under ideal conditions with the formula used exactly as specified. That's not relevant to the real world problem of promoting formula without adequate warnings to mothers who are not in a position to use the formula as it's meant to be used.
15
I'm not sure that's the reason. Please, this is a president who thinks women going to the bathroom is disgusting.
24
exactly. he is either afraid of women or (not-so-secretly) repulsed by them
13
And, according to what he said to Howard Stern, that women can choose not to go to the bathroom.
Please tells us the corporations who own these formula subsidiaries. A consumer boycott and negative press worked in the past,remember the Nestles fiasco. It can work again. If our corporate controlled government is too debased to do the right thing, we can shame formula makers into doing it. Maybe it is time we take the attack to the American and foreign corporations that feed the Trump Beast.
42
Abbott Laboratories.
2
I confess I strongly suspect another factor at work as well as the commercial one: Donald Trump very likely thinks breastfeeding is icky.
Except for its specific function of stimulating and satisfying a male partner, the female body and its functions plainly fill this man with disgust. He is a self-professed germophobe. He probably thinks breast milk is unsanitary, and that anyway, the female breast belongs to the woman's sexual partner and should not be shared with the baby.
39
He’s being paid under the table to let these corporations run wild. Everything in America is for sale. When capitalism is the state religion, what do you expect?
19
Let's face it. Trump is an evil man. He is supported by the increasingly evil republican party. Boycott republican owned businesses, don't vacation in states that supported Trump. And VOTE in November.
63
I am shocked - shocked I tell you - that the malignant narcissist in the oval office (the poster man-child for unethical marketing practices) would favor unethical marketing practices over the health and well-being of children.
36
it's nice to know that trump and american industry are no longer in the closet. bully, threaten and pay homage to those companies. it's just too sick-making.
17
Donald Trump's response to Michelle Obama, circa mid-2016:
"When they go high, we go low."
Donald Trump, July 2018:
"You think you've seen low? You ain't seen nothin' yet!"
18
As I commented in the original Times story, The administration is EVIL!
11
A $ to be made.
Unsurprising.
We could make $ privatizing: Public schools, military weapons, soldiers, pharmacy, healthcare, weapons, failed defaulted loans from desperately poor countries. you know what I mean- the Trump cabinet.
2
This administration and the GOP want to force women to have babies by denying them the option of choice, but not to allow women to provide their own breastmilk for their babies?
Way to go Ivanka and Melania - another complete failure for your "families NOT first" platforms. The Trumps never wanted the job of public service; they think it literally means the public should serve them - at any cost. They are playing the long game, deconstructing public protections so that they can reap corporate benefits later.
We need to stop them dead in their tracks come November.
17
That the U.S. did try to bully it's way to discourage breast-feeding and favor 'formula' is a shameful chapter in world affairs, as it is intuitive that breastfeeding is the way to go, always, unless circumstances are present that prevent it, which ought to be rare indeed. Given that this a capitalistic system, where capital always trumps labor, and where inequality remains a big problem in maintaining poverty, we must be vigilant so 'greed' wont affect common sense and nature's wisdom.
7
A monstrous assault on decency that will haunt the US, as the country that pushed its baby formulas over breast milk. Might as well as start to put opium in it.
14
The old adage of Cow's milk is for baby cows and human milk is for baby humans is still appropriate. Formula of any type should not be used except in cases where the mother can't provide her own milk
34
How many children have you breastfed, David?
Yes, it’s the ideal choice. But many women find themselves in positions where they can’t for medical, professional, or personal reasons. Please remember that almost every mother is doing the best for her child and her own health, because both are important. We all need to be sensitive to that.
14
We aren’t talking about women in the US. This is about bullying other countries into buying our junk. It could be anything. Formula or fighter planes. There’s no difference.
2
Oh I see - we all need to be as "sensitive" as the US was to Ecuador. You're rationalizing the pure greed of lobbyists and the administration that only cares about profit motive.
This shows how far down the libertarian christian right wing will go to thwart *any* measure that smacks of government involvement. It has little or nothing to do with the issue, it's only knee-jerk, vicious anti-government militancy. No one anywhere can escape from their sights. Nothing is too small or too remote to destroy.
15
No, it’s about making money. That’s what America is all about. Profit at any cost.
7
- Follow the money baby.
trite but true.
24
When trump supporters/anti immigrant people state that immigrants should stay and improve their own countries, they rarely consider the US role in making those countries un-liveable.
14
You sound so pure and sweet to yourselves, NY Times-ers, but Americans already know how the United Nations throws its weight around in the third world.
The UN grand poobahs don't just recommend breat-feeding but take steps to deny women the CHOICE of using formula. Many women go into giving birth with the idea of only breast-feeding to find out very soon that there are problems with that.
Leave it to the cavemen working for international agencies to tell women that they have to stick with breast-feeding anyway. Sorry, progressive barricade-soldiers, but President Trump is exactly right on this one.
7
....just like all those millions of imaginary illegal aliens that voted for Hillary in 2016, L'osservatore.....there's an international conspiracy to withhold formula from women who are unable to breastfeed their child ?
May I recommend a good therapist to treat your hallucinations ?
35
"Many women go into giving birth with the idea of only breast-feeding to find out very soon that there are problems with that." --> Please explain what the problems of only breast-feeding are. Doctors actually recommend sticking with either a breast milk or formula diet to avoid digestion problems in babies.
9
When is the last time you have given birth in a baby-friendly hospital? They literally keep formula under lock and key. I know of women, who suffered from primary lactation failure, meaning they did not produce enough breast milk to sustain an infant, had to sit and be told of all the risks of formula and the benefits of breastfeeding, sign a form acknowledging this, all while their babies scream with hunger after many hours of not being fed.
The female body scares a lot of men. It always did. Once upon a time, human civilization favored matriarchy and women were revered because their bodies created new life. Now the men who fear their return to power (as technology moves men and women toward more equal status), call themselves conservatives, and they wield their closed minds and the religions they favor as weaponry to keep women in their place. The old crane knows this to be true, but young women are too busy seducing, complying, submitting, and conceding. They will wake too late.
15
From the people who brought you "pro-life (except for black people, protestors, and liberals)" it's the new movement in protecting babies: extorting poor countries to buy American infant formula even though it's dangerous!
So much winning!
14
You don't understand. For Trump money is what is most nutritious - for Trump. Nothing else really matters.
7
First Russia is trying to control us now Big Business. How about "We the People, Has this been thrown out?
1
Time for the rest of the World to politely turn a deaf ear to the US on so many fronts.
13
The Trump administration said they were opposing the promotion of the proven advantages of breast feeding to "protect the choice" of women to bottle feed.
How cynical and hypocritical when they are doing everything they can possibly do to destroy women's right to choose to give birth, and to use contraception.
38
Didn't we already go through this abomination in the 70's-80's with Nestle doing this nonsense in Africa and other developing countries? I remember a big boycott of Nestle products back then.
I do not know if they are still behind this.
20
Is there a special office in the West Wing dedicated to demeaning and harming the most innocent and vulnerable among us? The White House Office of Daily Outrages? Little wonder 70 percent of American women disapprove of the bully in chief. But lots of wonder about the Republican and male majorities that continue to support him. What a despicable society they are fostering.
36
Thank you for pointing out (for a change) that the Obama administration was also frequently doing the bidding of Big Pharma as well as other global corporations, to the detriment of people in low income countries and to the detriment of his own soul (I would think). Yet, when it came time to nominate a Presidential candidate you choose to pick HRC, Obama's handpicked successor who, unlike Bernie Sanders, would have continued these despicable practices. So, frankly, shame on you, NYTimes because we didn't even get HRC because she was too dumb and lazy to bother campaigning in the Midwest, we got Trump.
1
I have come to the conclusion that the Trump administration does not understand reproduction in mammals. Supporting manufactured infant milk raises the troubling thought that Trump et. al. assume that mammary glands are intended for men to ogle, not to feed babies. Remember his revulsion when a woman attending a meeting with him excused herself to pump breast milk? Similar to 5 year olds who first hear the kindergarten version of sexual intercourse -- eeeeeuw! Also the inhuman policies separating toddlers and younger from their mommies and the heart- breaking behavior of these little victims. I can't handle reading about these state-sponsored cruelties.
Jill Nash
12
Trump views women's bodies to be leered at. Let us remember that he only agreed to let Melania have Barron as long as she got her figure back. (Wapo and others.) Breast feeding is believe to affect bust shape ... So why would women want to nurse when there is perfectly good formula to be sold.
Win win situation for Trump. More women to leer at and he will have gained another big contributor for his campaign.
9
Abbott, Nestle (not even a US company), Mead Johnson
7
1984 or 2018, kind of hard to tell anymore; the kind of dichotomy that makes you yearn for this to all be some kind of horrible dream.
18
Thank goodness that Ivanka and Melania ( or Melanie to her husband ) have had such a powerful influence on the Apprentice in the Oval Office when it comes to women’s health and reproductive issues. I presume that the Apprentice just as he likes heroes who weren’t captured, likes women who don’t breastfeed.
7
Nah, the donald appears to hate all women. Just some more than others.
7
The last thing big corporations need is more help. Or should I say welfare? Weren't the tax cuts enough? And all the other subsidies that happen in the "normal" course of business?
C'mon. Knock it off. Your [corporations'] acquisitiveness is turning all of our stomachs.
7
As healthy, back-to-nature habits spread and are adopted by growing numbers of people all over the world, American manufacturers of cigarettes, baby formulae, fat- and sugar-laden gpodies, guns, ammunition, tasers and weapons of all sizes and shapes, not to mention weapons of cyber warfare are feeling glum these days. These businesses are looking to a friendly face in the oval office to restore America to its former greatness measured by the number of unfriendly regimes we could replace with corrupt local politicians of our choosing. Those of us who feel outraged that Putin would interfere in our elections should remember that successive American administrations have been writing the definitive tome on regime change.
4
How much profit is enough? Can't these industries adapt to the needs of the consumer? Do they really need to manipulate markets and governments to eke every last dollar out of obsolete industries? What happens then? This avarice is destroying what little humanity is left.
8
"Should American officials prevail in the current case, the outcome will be easy enough to guess: People will suffer. "
Actually, babies will die.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/breastfeeding-could-save-lives-babies-mothers/
"If virtually every new mother breastfed her baby, more than 800,000 children's lives would be saved every year and thousands of future breast cancer deaths could be avoided."
And, as the article correctly points out, this is just a case of the Trump administration pushing to extremes the malfeasance carried out under previous Democratic administrations.
Deportations are another such case.
9
Excellent column, Editorial Board. I know that I can count on the Times to keep me abreast of the Trump administration's never-ending outrageous policies.
12
Jay,
In these dark days of never-ending bad news, thanks for a little chuckle.
Tom
My pleasure
There are some sad, uninformed people here! Pornographic photo? Some renown Renaissance works of art, or Fox news broadcasters show more breast than this beautiful, natural photo.
Even some businesses acknowledge the importance of providing space for mothers- if they choose- to pump milk to refrigerate for their children. No mother should let herself be intimidated, and is free to choose what works best for her family, whether in the US or overseas! Educating women in the face of rampant, commercial promotion of formula (often mixed with unsanitary water) should not be thwarted by this bullying administration!
17
Leave it to the prudish and uninformed to make this about the photo, I wanted to see how many simpletons would complain about the breast. If society would forgo it's asinine preoccupation with women's bodies, perhaps we could concentrate on the bigger picture like healthy outcomes for everyone.
8
I guess citizens of developing nations don't matter as much. Either they or their health, or both, are expendable!
5
In addition to the many health benefits of breast feeding, it has the added benefit of decreasing, at least for a time, fertility which can only be helpful to a woman already struggling to provide for her family. It is not 100%, but for most women it has that effect. I am not suprised the Trump administration is looking for yet another way to keep women poor and overburdened with mothering. Their hatred of women is laid bare every day.
14
A bizarre hubris propels the Republicans forward regardless of national consensus at home or our actual strength abroad. They were going to reshape the geopolitical planet when George W. Bush mistook his razor-thin election for a divine mandate. Now Trump seems to think that what serves a handful of American interests is compulsory for the rest of the universe. My country used to be great because it was good. Now it's acting like a bully in the schoolyard, with its weakness on display.
7
Once again, we are exporting American's problems to third world countries.
7
The names and contact particulars of those involved in this travesty need to be made public so they can be shunned, scorned and demeaned. It would be wonderful if a web site were established so this information could be disseminated widely and rapidly. Time to make Trump foot soldiers pay.
28
Yes, of course some mothers cannot breastfeed for a variety of reasons (15% according to one poster) and many of the remaining 85% will use a combination of breast milk and formula for their babies.
However, if breast feeding is not encouraged at the beginning, it's really hard to go back and change that choice. Formula and breast milk are not interchangeable in that sense and formula should be Plan B.
33
The poster who said that 15% of women cannot breastfeed also claimed WHO breastfeeding recommendations are injuring and killing babies, and that there’s no evidence that breastfeeding lowers infant mortality rate, neither of which is true. The real statistic on the percentage of women who cannot physically produce enough milk to breastfeed is around 2% (at most 5%). And the Lancet (medical journal) reported earlier this year that near universal levels of breastfeeding could save 823,000 annual deaths for children under 5, and also that, globally, nearly 2 out of 3 children under 6 months are not exclusively breast-fed, a rate that hasn’t improved in 2 decades. So the claim that WHO recommendations are “injuring and killing babies” is ludicrous, if only because breastfeeding rates haven’t changed much in two decades (so clearly the recommendations haven’t had a significant impact). But also because there is evidence to show that breastfeeding does lower infant mortality. That’s how they’re able to project how much more it would drop if more women breast-fed. The evidence shows that, overall, the risk-reward ratio favors breastfeeding, meaning that there are far more children who would benefit (lower infant mortality, less immune disorders, less food and other allergies, less chronic health issues) than those who would suffer harm. Even animal studies of orphaned animals show that breast milk, colostrum in particular, offers benefits that formula simply cannot.
8
...and if the Trump administration's position had "won", and thus a big win for makers of formula, what would be next? Well, formula doesn't have all of the nutritional benefits of breast milk, so the next step would be formula upgrades, supplements, antibiotics, etc.
More stuff to buy, for our own benefit. It's a market-based solution, which are generally presumed to be wonderful in their own right. Let the consumer "decide" what is best.
So like everything else, we start with one manufactured health option, followed by additional assembly-line options to compensate for the shortcomings in the first option.
The manufacturer will "own" the marketing space, and the studies, so they'll be secure in their place in most people's minds of the "right thing to do." When it comes to your baby, who would ever want to risk doing the wrong thing?
Whereas those who advocate for the original "natural" solution (which seems to have worked pretty well for the past several millennia), whose resources are smaller and voices scattered, will be dismissed as some fringe, hippie types.
21
It’s the fantasy that breastfeeding is perfect that defies both science and common sense.
Approximately 12% of women are infertile. Approximately 20% of pregnancies end in miscarriage. Breastfeeding also has a significant failure rate; up to 15% of first time mothers are unable to produce enough breastmilk to fully nourish an infant.
Make no mistake; Trump was only thinking about the welfare of formula manufacturers. But WHO breastfeeding recommendations are actually injuring and killing babies.
Since 2014 numerous peer reviewed scientific papers have shown: breastfeeding doubles risk of neonatal hospital readmission, insufficient breastmilk is common, formula supplementation makes successful breastfeeding more likely, pacifiers prevent SIDS and extended skin to skin contact leads to babies falling from mothers’ hospital beds or suffocating while in them.
The claim that breastfeeding saves lives is based on mathematical models extrapolated from small studies riddled with confounders. There is NO CORRELATION between breastfeeding rates and infant mortality rates. Countries with the lowest breastfeeding rates have the lowest rates of infant mortality and the countries with the highest infant mortality have breastfeeding rates approaching 100%. There is NO EVIDENCE that increasing breastfeeding rates within a country has any impact on the mortality rates of term babies.
In truth babies are dying because lactivists are lying. That’s what science shows.
17
As a doctor, I am sure you know that statistics can be used to show anything you want. You suggest there is no correlation between breast feeding rates and infant mortality. Then go on to say that "Countries with the lowest breastfeeding rates have the lowest rates of infant mortality and the countries with the highest infant mortality have breastfeeding rates approaching 100%." So you are suggesting a correlation. Perhaps you meant that correlation doesn't mean causation? Isn't it possible countries with the lowest breastfeeding rates are the richest countries, where mothers can afford formula? Those countries would have better health care, which would lead to less infant mortality, no?
45
I am making three points:
1. EVERY reproductive process including breastfeeding has a substantial failure rate.
2. The purported benefits of breastfeeding are based on mathematical models. After nearly 3 decades of aggressive breastfeeding promotion by the WHO, there is no evidence that these benefits occur in the real world.
3. The scientific evidence shows that aggressive breastfeeding promotion as advocated by the WHO harms babies.
This editorial reflects the conventional wisdom about breastfeeding but the scientific evidence shows that the conventional wisdom is wrong.
Appreciate your commenting on how unsettled the science is. Would like to hear other authorities on this. It may seem the UN resolution needs some revision, after that then would you agree the motivator behind the opposition is not due to seeking medical clarity but only corporate profit? Add in the threats and it all becomes suspicious and reprehensible. Add in too the polluted water of poor nations and I suspect formulas are a recipe for cholera.
2
I doubt that Trump is aware that in developing countries many mothers do not have access to safe water with which to mix formula.Mothers for whom formula is too expensive sometimes over-dilute. Of course some mothers need formula, for a variety of reasons. The US,for one, does not give families paid maternity leave. But formula companies need to advertise honestly. (What would the Supreme Court say about a doctor refusing to tell parents about formula because it is against their beliefs?)
And" diplomacy" by threat is not acceptable.
34
Medicine is too important to be left subject to market forces.
The NIH and universities do most of the research, and the government pays for that research. Small biotech startups turn basic research into drugs. The NIH and the FDA should conduct clinical trials and regulate drug prices (as well as drugs and supplements), giving fair shares to universities startups, cutting out Big Pharma.
8
The US just needs to leave the World Health Organization.
This will be a good test of the perseverance of their opponents' beliefs.
1
Yes America should run away from all its responsibilities. America should elevate Corporations and oligarchs above everyone else. That is exactly what Putin wants.
4
The crude Trump team threats to countries supporting breast-feeding rang a bell -- didn't Reagan try something similar? According to Google, yes he did, in 1981, where after the US had developed a UN code promoting breast-feeding worldwide, corporations got to Reagan and he ordered a reversal. In opposition to 118 countries, the US delegate reversed his vote and then resigned immediately after.
How many generations does it take us to do the right thing? Apologies for ending with a rhetorical question.
26
The problem with breast feeding in Third World countries:
(1) There is often no supply of safe water. Formula made with unsafe water causes diarrhea, and many infants die from this.
(2) When the money for formula runs out, breast feeding may not be successfully reinitiated, and infants starve. Or they get mixtures of flour and water, and become malnourished, and die.
(3) There are no ready and reliable sources of high protein, high calcium foods.
Discussions about mother's choice are hopelessly naive. Poverty leaves no better options than breast milk.
The death rate in the malnutrition ward . . . worked 3 years there, BTDT.
The mind reels with sarcastic replies.
29
Just when you thought the Trump Administration had exhausted their repertoire of regressive, unhealthy, capitulations to some industry; they come out against breast-feeding. Will they start promoting tobacco, in moderation as healthy next. Nothing would be surprising now.
22
Trump and his cronies in industry do not care that women in poorer countries may not have access to clean water needed to mix up formula, thus endangering their babies, and also have been known to use less formula in proportion to water in order to stretch out the supply of formula because it costs plenty of money (thus starving the infants). That's in addition to the benefit of nutrients and antibodies in mother's milk. Unbelievable that this is still going on.
14
I’m so disappointed in your healthcare providers, my sister. For what it’s worth, my own team was very understanding and supportive when my baby needed supplemental formula. (Except, that is, for the nurse who pressed formula on us before we even knew there was an issue.)
For me, it was the other moms I met, and even those who were friends, who looked down on me every time I took out a bottle — until I explained why we were using it. Still, it was tiresome always to have to do so, imposed on our privacy, and there wasn’t a way to address the shaking-heads strangers along the way.
Maybe part of the message readers can take away from this is that, as with the so-called mommy wars, no one way fits all people in all situations and we’d all be better off if we gave one another more of the benefit of the doubt (assuming no criminal behavior, of course).
Perhaps we should all remember to treat each other first and foremost with kindness, for we are all having a hard time...
5
The message is geared to women in 3rd world countries, where clean water isn't always available.
It's not about mommy wars and social stigma.
Formula is also sold, ready to use, in bottles. Some even in small, pre-measured bottles that all you need do is screw on your own bottle nipple.
I’m not claiming formula isn’t costly, and for babies using it for health reasons, it should be deeply discounted by the companies that make it. But worries about safe and adequate amounts of water perhaps can be put to rest.
1
So much of what defines America depends on how and where money is made.
Money, lovely and delicious, solving and creating problems at the same time. Money, horrible and brutal, the ruin of nations for having too much or too little of it.
America has more of it than anyone else in history, the grand winner that gets to dictate the rules of engagement.
That’s great, if you have responsibilities that match your ethics, and not so great if you’re going to use money selfishly. Something eventually gives.
You can stay powerful for a long time if you have money, and longer if you know how to use it. The word for the successful use of money is profit. Profit wants infant formula used in in ALL situations. Is there any doubt that profit would replace all breastfeeding if it could? Profit has no feelings, it just is original money with more money on top.
Which is where the law comes in, it manages the ethical use of profit. Unethical marketing by US corporations contributed to the decline of breastfeeding in low-income countries, so those laws didn’t work, weren’t there or weren’t applied.
It’s hard to grasp the level of greed and arrogance required to strong-arm other countries when profit is the real reason against supporting breastfeeding by using anti-public health, pro-industry and anti-science lobbying by the President if the United States. In other words, the lack of ethics is profitable and justice is meaningless.
14
What percentage of Trump voters would take their infants to him if he were a pediatrician or pediatric surgeon? No vaccinations, now no breast milk for infants.
12
Thank you for making this issue more visible. Perhaps the moral outrage that Trump and his administration so easily generates through their blatant disregard for others will help to address this long-standing bias and injustice.
3
I worked on U.S. global AIDS efforts from 2006-2008, and by then the U.S. had already incorporated generic drugs, most made in India, into our programs. Not sure why this article puts blame on Obama for a reluctance to use generics that (after a lot of contention) was lifted before he took office.
5
Trump's tweet is the first time I've seen him citing malnutrition or poverty as a concern--what a joke that he should bring them up in this context.
28
Why is everyone pretending this bullying of economically weaker nations by the USA to protect the economic interests of the few is something new? It did not start with Trump and for sure it will not end when he leaves office. Wake up, people.
7
https://www.nytimes.com/1981/12/06/magazine/the-controversy-over-infant-...
Would refer readers to this excellent article in the archive. Big difference in our fat, dumb and happy lifestyle in America where infant formula is affordable and access to potable water abundant v. someone scratching out a living in a third world country. Funny that given our infant mortality rates we have the audacity to not only give others advice on infant nutrition but also disallow (via withdrawing economic support) other countries to provide guidance to own. Just when I think that we cannot act more shamefully, the bar gets lowered. I no longer ask how low we can go.
For any worried about stigmatization of mothers who choose formula over breast feeding, try to find any stigmatized folks waiting at the bakery counter for donuts and you will be assured that this is not a thing to worry about.
6
I am astonished to the extent Trump will go to support the profits of American companies. The WHO for years as presented common sense interventions in maternal and child health, as well as, the use/price of medications. The image of American has change to being one of the biggest bully in the world.
6
Every time I think that this administration can't go down another rung on the moral and ethical ladder, it does. This issue puts America and Americans in a particularly egregious situation. Our objection to this recommendation is based on profits for baby formula corporations, not for the good of the world's babies. Every time I think that I can't get more ashamed and embarrassed by what we've become under Trump and the GOP--I do.
32
Well put, Meg. One can't call it a race to the bottom, when it the pit is actually bottomless.
7
I know everyone sees this and thinks this is just outrageous and new to and American administration. I am so sorry to break it to everyone, this is how American foreign policy is and has been for at least the last 60 years. The problem with this administration is that it is doing it in the open without the diplomatic jargon of the past. LEARN YOUR HISTORY, may be then you won't repeat it. Or even worst, allow it i your back yard, in your own home!
5
Yes, Elba- 'without diplomatic jargon' is absolutely spot on. Bare, naked Bullying is now the order of the day, but for many, many decades it was cloaked in patronizing trickery, bait and switch tactics, and bribery.
However, we, as a nation, are waking up to all the terrible and terrifying actions and statements being done with the US Congress' and SCOTUS' seal of approval (thanks to social media and citizen journalists). Are we in time to do anything about it?
1
Right on!
This is yet another example of where a woman's body is a political battleground. How to nourish a child is between the mother and the child's pedatrician. We should not demonize formula as many mothers and babies depend on it. I had to breast and formula feed my first child and expect to do the same for my second. Mothers are not stupid, given a "free" choice, most will choose the obvious natural path of breastfeeding and likely supplement with formula as and when needed.
Big corporations should back off and not misinform the public, particularly in poor countries where water quality is not good, and can be dangerous to the infant's life to mix formula in potentially contaminated water.
Breastmilk offers what formula cannot, but unlike formula, breastmilk is not regulated for contaminants either. For example, breastmilk, just like the rest of our polluted bodies, host bioaccumulative levels of indistrial toxins (Link: http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/94/1/122).
What we need is regulating the price of formula, and scientific research on how to truly fortify formula, so poor mothers can have easier access/education to more options. While it is technically true that exclusive breastfeeding is best, that assumes the mother is healthy enough to make enough milk and has no other issues with her milk.
For many women, particularly from poor minority communities, as well as in developing nations, formula is the only way to keep their job and feed their baby.
22
IllinoisGirlGeek - please look at Robert Solomon's comment for a more accurate depiction of the real world of infant formula and developing countries. Babies that are fed formula with toxic water die. That same baby given breast milk, with its built in immunities - regardless of the mother's health - may have a chance of survival.
This is about profit at the expense of baby's lives, nothing else. Period.
10
I don't know why so many people don't read more carefully.
All they're saying is that formula companies shouldn't be allowed to make false statements.
Nothing in what you wrote, Ms. Geek Girl, even addresses that.
Thimk! (sic)
6
You say that mothers are “not stupid” and would therefore choose the natural path where possible. However, in the US, for a while women were actively discouraged from breastfeeding and told that the scientific marvel of formula would free them from that burden.
My husband was born in 1969, and to this day my mother-in-law regrets that she did not have the opportunity to breastfeed her children. In fact, she was given a shot to make her milk dry up. This is in the United States, and she and many of her generation did not challenge the recommendations of the professionals, nor did it even cross their mind to do so. It’s not a matter of being stupid or smart.
How can you expect women in under-developed countries to behave any differently in the face of pressure and seeming medical endorsement to use formula?
6
It’s not surprising that a group of misogynists, racists, bigots, and white supremacists would prefer to prevent women, particularly non-white women, from doing something that their bodies naturally do as a routine part of raising children. According to WHO statistics, 13% of under five mortality is averted globally each year by breast feeding, especially in developing nations. We’ve all heard the word that Trump uses to refer to these countries, and one can’t help but make a connection between that and the fact that this recommendation would, if followed, likely increase the mortality rate in these countries. It’s unsettling and deeply anti-humanist, as are all of the decisions and actions undertaken by this administration.
31
What's next? No more drinkable water from the tap? Only soda? The folks at Coca-Cola and the like have probably approached the administration. Trump will soon announce that tap water is unsafe. He only drinks Coke, n'est-ce pas?
10
What is sad to me is that persons at WHO felt/thought a resolution was even necessary to encourage nations to do what is the most natural, EON tested method of feeding infants. Our evolution for thousands of years has been completely dependent on the success of mother's milk. The state of the world is such that "up is down, black is white, yes is no" because of greed. Large producers of infant formula have "educated" the public and corrupt governments to go against nature only to make a buck. Things become so twisted when the powerful have the means and will to present "science" as they wish, by the propaganda that breast milk is inferior food for infants. These corporations need a conscience, and we the public must become their conscience by rising up, insisting on what is right and speaking out against this greed that endangers innocent children. Resolution? Let's resolve to become the conscience Big Business lacks!
12
The wall that Trump keeps pushing should be built around the White House with his advisors and cabinet members locked within and they should never deal with the public and other countries to save us from further embarrassment.
The benefits of breast feeding have been scientifically proven for years, yet, all it takes is a call from the grifters corporate grifter buddies to sidetrack any science from being considered in policy.
We knew there would be more insane policy given that Trump told us that coal could be washed to make it clean for burning.
6
The flagrant sacrifice of public health at the alter of greed should is appalling and one of the principal reasons corporate Democrats like Clinton and Obama need to step aside for the progressive wing of the party that mirrors many beliefs held dear by FDR. Only in America or dictatorships would Bernie-bros be considered radical.
2
The GOP is anti pro life. If so, they would push breast feeding and healthcare for all. I am sure Trump will get a cut of the higher prices Americans are paying in the form of lobby $.
11
It's been a tough 18 months but this story just takes the cake. Immoral. Reprehensible. Cruel. Next we'll learn that Don Jr. is on the board of Nestle and it will all make sense.
30
No doubt our up-tight male "conservative" majority politicians in robes called the Supreme Court will soon rule that all American mothers must use baby formula and be prohibited from breast-feeding...that is, after they and their Republican friends in Congress buy a lot of stock in the formula companies.
6
When I read the title of this editorial, I thought the editorial would comment on the fact that Trump and Pence, as males, are scared to death of the fact that there really is a reason why women exist and are irreplaceble: to carry a child and feed it at the first period of it’s life. Something men aren’t able to do. Companies’ profits are just a smoke screen to cover up the real anxiety that is behind this shameful bullying of the US, trying to scrap a common sense and simple resolution.
11
Trump, the GOP and or American businesses have to stop their He Man Woman Haters Club. From the right to vote to the right to make decisions regarding our own health, they have waged a war against women intent upon keeping a second class of citizen.
And of course this then affects the children borne of women.
Since the first cavewoman gave birth, we have figured out breastfeeding and sought alternatives if that did not work. This is not rocket science for any woman who has given birth. We happen to deal in the day to day reality. And so too the women around the world.
And if anyone thinks that Trump gives a hoot about women or children from 'S' countries, think again. This is about money for businesses period. Profit. That our delegation used the Trump bully model just shows that Trump has filled his administration with staff that have little regard for facts and every regard for the money to be made. This is not a shocker. Corrupt Bullies just like him.
10
Imagine that! Trump and the Republicans defying science and common sense.
And in more old news, the world is flat and earth is the center of the universe.
12
In developing countries mixing baby formula with local water is a virtual death sentence. Are the American delegates to the WHO not aware of this or is this policy a deeply perverted extension of Trump’s anti-immigration policy?
25
D. Knight. Exactly. My first thought, as well, was wondering if this is an endorsement for reducing the population in countries that Trump considers undesirable (he uses a word for them that I could not bring myself to say under any circumstance), and therefore potential future immigrants to the US.
11
Pro-life ends where pharma profit and infant mortality begin.
11
"It comes down to public health abroad could hurt American companies’ profits."
This sentence seems to be missing a conjunction or clause.
3
I'd be more inclined to think that Trump's endorsement of formula over breast-milk has more to do with his misogyny. Females are the only ones who can naturally manufacture milk, which is what mammary glands and breasts are there for. Although breasts can serve to titillate men, that's not their primary function. Their primary function is to feed babies. But any man can hold an infant and a bottle of formula, thereby rending the mother unnecessary after having given birth. This attitude is entirely in keeping with their "woman as vessel" thing.
13
The NYTimes should out the specific infant formula companies that were pushing the US to vote against the UN resolution and put the pressure on Ecuador. The World deserves to know who these companies are. Nestle's reputation never fully recovered after their debacle of promoting infant formula in the 3rd World that resulted in so many infant deaths because of unclean and contaminated water.
10
Kim is correct in his assessment of American foreign policy. We are indeed a bunch of gangsters making demands for protection payments on countries that have no choice but to knuckle under or face the consequence of our economic sanctions.
5
Just when I thought he couldn't go any lower, he does.
9
Please watch Orson Welles's 1949 film "The Third Man" for the best description of a child-poisoner posing as a pharmaceutical businessman. Trump couldn't find a better model for his snake oil sales pitch than Harry Lime.
5
I share everyone's rejection of these actions and reject every policy taken by this administration. However, what I get from this column is that this is not new in U.S. foreign policy. Both Republican and Democratic administrations have put the interest of U.S. corporations above public health initiatives abroad, and have used threats to withdraw aid to developing countries for this purpose. From pharmaceuticals to oil drilling and everything in between (tobacco, sodas, pesticides, etc). I bet even with formula, if we go back in history we would find that the U.S. government had some role in promoting the industry's equivocal and devastating claim that it was a better alternative to breast milk, which led to countless problems worldwide.
2
Sixty years ago (late 50's and early 60's), one of my close friends was a Peace Corps volunteer in an east African country. As a Home Ec teacher, her task was to teach village women healthy child care and good nutrition practices. She had a constant battle to help the women understand that breast feeding was not only no cost, but healthier for them and their babies. The village women wanted to be like wealthy embassy women who used wet nurses and formula for their babies. But village women could not afford formula so they diluted it with local (often unsafe) water to make it last longer. Unhealthy for the babies and possible sources of infection.
We have been battling this greedy practice for over 60 years and each new generation tries to prolong this unhealthy practice.
36
Also breast feeding has a significant contraceptive effect in most women, leading to wider spacing of babies which is helpful to the health of all concerned.
9
Improperly and cruelly weaned?
5
There is not even a pretense with this administration to do the right thing by its citizenry. Allowing an industry to increase its profits. through the promulgation of misinformation that marginalizes the health of children, is even swampier than Pruitt, et al.
Not all women find it easy to breastfeed, and it's important to have a back-up. Those women experiencing difficulty should absolutely be supported - but, for the health of a child, it should be recommended after breastfeeding.
Without their mother's antibodies, babies that aren't breastfed are, for starters, much more likely to get ear infections. If nothing else, you would think, at least on a cost basis, that this administration, would consider the increases in insurance that occur due to just this type of office visit alone.
Many American hospitals push formula over breastfeeding so that women do not have the information to make an informed choice.
There is no end to the diminishment of our country by this greedy administration.
17
It's not all about the economics of breastfeeding. Mothers make antibodies to the bacteria their children are exposed to. They kiss the babies and incidentally sample the bacteria in the baby's bodies. The mother's tonsils then make antibodies to the harmful bacteria and those antibodies are included in the breast milk. The mothers also create special sugars that feed the commensual bacteria that babies require to prevent their interestines being taken over by harmful bacteria. Breastfeeding mothers also manufacture DHA, a lot which is used to build the brains and nerves of the infant body.
17
Hey, what is it that Trump has against children? From breast-feeding to snatching them from their parents! Was he not given love when he was a child (I wouldn't blame his mother for that)? Going to Russia regarding "adoption"? Leave the kids alone, Donald. Even though they're easy to bully, they just might blame you all their lives for what you have done.
5
Quite one-sided. If anyone is curious about Donald Trump's true opinion on breast-feeding, they should ask Stormy Daniels.
7
This editorial and the NYT article that preceded it seem to have rattled Trump. He has already tweeted about it, saying that the NYT deliberately misrepresented the WHO resolution, which of course it did not.
He may have stumbled more than he anticipated. Many people of all stripes are offended by the bullying of Equador at the behest of corporate interests. And even more people are uncomfortable with the idea that any mother should be dissuaded from breastfeeding her baby.
7
Brought to you by the party for family values.
30
The biggest marketer of baby formula is Nestle, a Swiss company. Why the Trump administration is shilling for a Swiss company is anyone's guess.
However, another major marketer of baby formula is Heinz. Maybe someone should ask John Kerry why his wife's company is putting profits over the health of children.
1
Maybe the immigrant children can advise the deportation judges as to the benefits of breast milk. After all, they’re on their own and presumably get to make a statement.
2
"Both the Obama and Clinton administrations....."
But not the Bush administration that came in between?
Really? Unless the Bush administration did not have the same policy, then this sentence is a flagrant abuse of "both-siderism".
8
This shows once again the lack of care or concern for babies once they are born.
15
We already fought and won this fight back in the 70s, when it was exposed that the NESTLE corporation was basically spreading fake news and brainwashing mothers in developing countries to give their kids formula instead of breast milk.
Moms with no money would water down the formula to make it stretch, and the kids suffered from malnourishment.
Looks like a LOT of the public health and civil rights fights the good people of USA thought were behind us are being dusted off for a rematch.
The words I want to use to describe this regressive, white-men-rule administration cannot be printed in a family newspaper, so suffice it to say I am beyond disgusted.
(PS- non sequitur here - where the heck are those tax returns Donald, and WHAT are you hiding?)
12
The very thought that women's breasts are functional and can serve purposes other than being containment systems for silicone bags must keep Trump up at night.
8
“Ecuador was set to introduce this uncontroversial measure when the United States threatened “punishing trade measures” and a withdrawal of crucial military aid unless the country dropped it.”
What kind of a miserably money-grubbing country would do this??? Corporate Profits Uber Alles! Trump said in Montana, “Putin’s fine. He’s fine. We’re all fine.” He could have added, “Russia’s oligarchs are fine, ours are fine, we’re all fine, the babies are fine, the tariffs are fine, it’s a beautiful thing, you’ll be very pleased, that I can tell you, especially when Mueller ends his phony witch hunt and my Supreme Court (yes, mine) adjudicates my will.”
3
We all know it's "all about the money". We are definitely a pathetic society and government. It's not about the people, only the corporations or whom ever those in power have in their pockets. Greed! Plain old greed and it's so prevalent.
4
Shame on my country. Where will it end?
9
Why is this editorial so timid? This is nothing less than Trump pushing products that will kill hundreds of thousalnds of babies in order to give money to his rich cronies.
That's what it is and that is the way it should be put.
12
Trump, the republican party and cronies are anti-science? Who knew....
4
To anyone who has paid attention in the last several decades (if not since 1776), American business always attempts and usually succeeds in influencing our foreign policy. Where do you think the term “Banana Republic” came from? Or “the Ugly American?” I am not at all surprised that we allow corporate interests to drive government policy. What else are all those campaign contributions for? That said, I am at a loss on this exemplar. Picking such a highly public a fight over breast feeding in the face of clear scientific support for it is simply stupid. Anyone other than an idiot could accurately predict the global reaction. Oh, I forgot… my apologies.
9
Republicans seem obsessed with women's bodies (at least the ones that aren't like Denny Hastert or Larry Craig). They used to be satisfied with telling women what to do with their womb. Now they progressed upward to their breasts.
That is NOT progress.
I'd recommend that they start a program of Pro-Mind-Your-Own-Business.
8
To Trump the Womanizer, perhaps he just doesn't understand that the primary function of the breast is to supply mother's milk to an infant. Hey, Donald!, it works for other mammals, why not for humans?
Long before we had processed infant formula and corporate profiteering, we had mothers giving birth and nourishing and nurturing young ones. Is Trump just plain dumb or is this something he just can't grasp?
4
trump's list of ideas/people to disparage:
1) War Veterans
2) Democrats
3) Immigrants
…
45) breast feeding
…
?) Military pensions
5
And the other issue is Donald Trump's unfettered ignorance!
10
Trump is disgusting, yet somehow we elected him. This is a time of reckoning for our country.
4
http://www.who.int/nutrition/en/ from WHO
1
Was “Don the Con” breastfed by his mom? Probably not.
That Explains Everything!!!!!
6
I'm aghast that this is STILL an issue, nearly 40 years after I participated in a boycott of Nestle for this very same reason. https://www.google.com/search?q=nestle+boycott+1970s&oq=nestle+boyco....
When will non-lactants keep their body parts and minds off of womens' breasts?
17
Killing nature, the natural scheme of things seems to be the MO to destroy every developing or poor countries. A baby is delivered and the mother and her body responds to protect and nourish her baby. No sterilization of bottles, no synthetic artificially fortified smelly formula, no excess sugar, fat, no stinky baby poop and just right for the infant's digestion, full of necessary anti-bodies and most important - Free! I'm tired of Western Countries' consumerism, the greed to enrich themselves by literally snatching suckling babies from their mothers - trauma to both, mother and child. But who cares about babies in the Third World. Fake science, unwanted education and destroying the mother-baby bond being inconsequential. Bottom line of corporations are more important. Our ugly capitalism at work!
14
As a mom whose infant needed formula because of health issues, I disagree with your assertion that the use of formula disrupts or harms the mother-child bond and that formula use traumatizes babies or parents.
My baby’s life and health were improved, even saved, by using formula. It did not disrupt our bond or traumatize either of us.
What would have been disruptive to our bond and traumatizing to us and our whole family is if my baby had to be hospitalized or even died because of malnutrition.
5
Individual anecdotes cannot hold sway over a misbegotten policy intended to increase profits for greedy companies. And I assume you had access to clean water for your formula?
Business before babies is so Trump.
4
These people are so evil. Is there no stopping them? How can any decent human support an administration that can separate a child from her/his parent? They are fine with killing babies by selling formula as long as they make money.
6
Opposition to breast feeding does appeal to greedy chemical companies. However, the US government's recent behavior at the WHO went beyond that. We knew that the resolution if introduced would pass. We threatened a large number of countries with cutting off military and domestic aid and placing big tariffs on their exports if they introduced the motion, and succeeded in scaring off countries such as Ecuador . Russia introduced the resolution and Trump's minions immediately backed off. What do we know? What can we reasonably infer?
1. We can, as Churchill used to say, "discern the hand of the master". Only Trump could cut aid and impose tariffs like this, and the operation is his style. And Trump is on twitter trying to gaslight everyone about breastfeeding.
2. When Russia acts, Trump folds. This is so unusual that it surely must have a significant cause.
3. It may not be just greed and bullying, though Trump loves both of them. Trump is also very breast oriented. He brags about his daughter's large breasts and more than once has publicly stated his lust for her. All the women he surrounds himself with (all the wives, the mistresses and whores we know about, press secretaries and Ivanka and other west wing women) are more largely endowed than average. Based on Trump's words and choices, it's not impossible that he personally finds breast feeding abhorrent, and that this is one of the reasons he opposes breastfeeding world-wide.
11
No lofty United Nations ideals for Niki Haley, too busy shilling for corporate interests.
Trump, as always, is either totally ignorant or lying. Infant formula powder, mixed with unclean water, is dangerous as well as less nutritious, especially in parts of the world where many infants die from diarrhea. And infants are more susceptible to disease when they don't share the mother's protective antibodies.
Fortunately, the foul efforts of the US delegation were stuffed by Russia sponsoring the bill. But the GOP will get their campaign checks anyway for the effort.
5
I breastfed both my kids because it was much simpler and more pleasurable than the complicated routine of preparing a bottle. But when I had to go back to work, I switched to formula. I was perfectly aware that breastmilk is better for the child but I had my own career factors and they had to be taken into account. I have seen mothers shamed and bullied into breastfeeding when they found the procedure uncomfortable or simply did not produce enough milk. Women don’t lose their identity when the become mothers and the interests of children have to be balanced against the interests of their parents. I am, of course, against deceptive marketing of formula when not needed. But I’m equally opposed to the self-righteous policing of women’s private choices and denigrating mothers because they refuse to willingly enslave themselves to their offspring.
4
I think you are missing the point due to too much identification with your own situation, which is, I would argue, completely different. You made an informed choice, rather than the uninformed one that concerned mothers are making in less developed countries, spending money they can ill afford because they have been tricked into thinking they are giving their child a better start in life, and instead putting their child more at risk from the childhood diseases that are more prevalent there.
13
I doubt Russia was expressing its Maternal Instincts when it reintroduced the no-brainer resolution that set America's wrath upon tiny Ecuador. What Mother-Russia did- was gave a wink & nod to the Trump administration that it does not call the shots on the international stage; without permission.
As expected; the U.S. delegation acquiesced and the world took note .
7
And why did the US acquiesce to Russia? Because Putin has dirt on Donny.
6
“Common sense ultimately triumphed in this round of bullying, and the measure passed without much alteration — thanks, oddly enough, to Russia”. Common sense definitely not a hallmark of the Trump administration. However, Bullying is a huge hallmark.
11
Mr. Trump's callous disregard even for children was documented by his remark in support of separating young ones from their migrant parents - keep doing it, because "my people love it!" - but jeez, this takes the cake. A simple statement - one that undoubtedly would help encourage many mothers in developing countries to adopt a practice that they're capable of and that would make their babies healthier than otherwise - is quashed by him in his simplistic view of every situation as a binary deal in dollars.
Back in April 2017 Mr. Trump professed to caring about babies who are harmed: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/apr/05/syria-chemical-gas-attac...
Since the harm from skipping breastfeeding doesn't make for such dramatic TV images, I guess we can't expect him to get his head (and heart) around it.
20
What also comes to mind is the event of Assad in Syria gassing his own people, and Ivanka crying about to her Daddy. His solution was to start dropping bombs on an empty Syrian airfield (empty because Trump et.al. warned the Russians about what he was about to do.)
Donald Trump is attacking the entire world, except for Vladimir Putin. It’s already become obvious that Russia actually owns Trump, and has for many years. We should stop beating around the bush and just say it: Trump has been and still is a Russian asset for a long time before he sought the Presidency. Scariest times I can remember for this country.resist, every day, in every way, Americans!
6
This administration’s recommendation against breastfeeding exemplifies how deeply hostile it is towards women. Breastfeeding is a feminist issue that cannot be separated from larger feminist issues, because it’s about working to ensure that women and their bodies are considered as important – and as legitimate – as men and their bodies. Aside from the fact that it’s the most natural and healthy way to feed infants, breastfeeding makes a statement that women belong, that women’s bodies belong, that women are here.
Furthermore (though this doesn’t apply to women in developing nations for whom day-to-day survival is a struggle), breastfeeding is an anti-capitalist sentiment in that it’s an excellent argument for longer maternity leaves, and lactation breaks in the workplace. Women who do not breastfeed are back at work sooner than those who do, and de facto capitalists prioritise solutions for this work-life conflict that suit a model of workplaces – and societies – built only around men’s lives.
28
Women should not be shamed and bullied into breastfeeding and/or staying home longer than they want to.
1
Mr. Trump entered politics as a businessman. He has remained very much so after his entry. He is now the leader providing the GOP with all the ideas, good or bad, about the economy, defense, foreign policy, immigration, environment, education, the supreme court, breastfeeding and, by extension, almost everything. The GOP is faithfully following him like sheep, with 90 percent approval. If his policies succeed, about which there is much skepticism, he is bound to become the chilling pied piper.
The Democrats can smugly keep dismissing him. They will have to become very persuasive, especially for middle America, to buy the notion that the GOP and its 'conservative' philosophy is, in the long run, not in the best interest of the American people, and that, under conservatism, the nation is rapidly sliding down into a second tear position.
It is no wonder that CERN, the prime research facility in Physics, is located not in America but in Europe. Clean energy is being rapidly developed outside the United States. Better education, better healthcare, and better infrastructure are also slowly taking root abroad. Finland, not America, has the best schools. Manufacturing is in China, not in America. We are unable or unwilling to make even the products that we invented in our research labs. It is unlikely that Trumpism is going to reverse this trend.
18
"Mr. Trump entered politics as a businessman." ALM, if I may I would add: "...with a severely limited managerial acumen, an unwillingness to learn and, consequently, a career strewn with failures."
As for the Democrats' objective, I think it should focus on turning out Democrats to vote, because among the people who were able to vote for Mr. Trump, the number who now would vote Democrat is essentially zero. The problem in 2016 was that too many Democrats bought the "she's got it in the bag" line and/or the "she's evil" myth and so stayed home. This time around it's a steeper climb - midterm elections always have lower participation. Somehow, though, this one has to break all records and make a statement for the ages: "Enough already!"
3
"President Trump’s contention on Twitter Monday, that women need access to formula"
As usual Trump distorts the issue.
Of course the mother should have the choice as how to feed her baby.
But to threaten economically countries that just want to point out the advantages of breast feeding especially in countries with unsafe water supplies is totally despicable.
This article states that hundreds of thousands of lives could be saved if mothers breast fed in third world countries.
But the baby formula industry is a 70 B industry and profits are more important than babies' lives.
How low can Donald sink.
What do the pro life evangelicals think about putting profits ahead of babies' lives.
34
If Trump is so concerned about a mother's access to formula, maybe he should pressure the corporations that provide the formula to supply it at prices that are affordable to the millions of women who need it and cannot afford it. Instead, he would probably ensure the rights of the corporations to raise prices and push to deregulate any laws that specify that the formula should not jeopardize the lives of the mother and child.
14
SL:
I agree with everything you say but the premise in your first sentence is wrong.
Trump does not give an expletive about a mother's access to formula.
He ONLY cares about the profits of the formula manufacturing companies.
"Common sense ultimately triumphed in this round of bullying, and the measure passed without much alteration — thanks, oddly enough, to Russia."
I am thankful this passed, but it's unsettling to see that not only has the US actively opposed a sensible effort to protect babies, but that our pigheadedness gave Russia the opportunity to step into the role of hero. Somebody's increasing their power by building international friendships, and it sure isn't the US.
18
Selfish immorality. Profit over children's health and well-being. This breast-feeding issue is Trump in a nutshell, and I emphasize the first syllable although it wrongly de-emphasizes his venality.
18
Baby formula is a godsend for babies with certain allergies or other dispositions where mother's milk is not ideal. Those situations are rare.
Dialysis is terrific too, if your kidneys are malfunctioning...not so great if kidney function is normal. Open heart surgery, a lifesaver for many, is not recommended for people with normally functioning hearts and no blockages.
And so on. Mother's milk is the coin of the realm for parents who want the best possible nourishment for their infants, period. Any effort by any organization or nation interested in child health would do everything possible to disseminate the facts about this and promote breastfeeding. There is no humane alternative.
There are, of course, non-humane alternatives, and here, as in so many cases recently, those are the alternatives favored by our government.
18
A mother who qualifies for WIC benefits (from our own government) is inundated with messages as to how breast milk is vastly superior to formula. Yet the government doesn't want that message going to women in other countries.
18
More and more, we are truly coming across as a gangster nation.
25
It's no surprise that Republican leaders don't support breast feeding; Lizard people don't produce milk.
16
I really can’t wait for the day when the United States rids itself of this bully.
20
He is the most ANTI-LIFE president we have ever had to live through. His disdain for humans, animals, the natural world comes through in everything he says and does.
19
This probably started with a huge secret payment to Cohen.
7
As always, with this crowd: Follow the money.
2
I don’t know about you, but sound to me like another score for Russia PR, at the cost of US reputation and regard, and by Putin’s favorite puppetrump!
19
What makes the EdBoard-a buncha bored old Eds--think that a gross or two stockholders and millionaires with tech or medical stocks are going to both profit from sick and hungry, fatty and diabetic kids in the future- as well as laugh all the way to the bank?
The idea that wealthy and 1% 'ers somehow are subhuman in their responses to ill children and the poor is an idea out of the 19th century-along with Scrooge, who curses beggars and all the greedy men poking babies eyes out with pins by accident, and cursing them and their mothers for being in the way.
Sorry, even the rich, even the merely millionaires,(a million won't buy what my dad could get for $40,000 50 years ago). My family were comfortable, once, and not rich-and we were Democrats since FDR,(earlier greats didn't leave voter evidence like buttons or posters).
But I do know many people who tip the doormen and take cabs and who still vote blue , and don't get special dividends from their medical stocks. The MD's among them now wish they had become welders in Canada, or boatbuilders in New England, anything but the dreary paper form filled drear & mecahnistic life of medicine. Most would trade half their income to be able to practice the way they believe MDs did in 1958-the money was peripheral-only NYTimes writer-editors seem to think medicine is solid gold cadillacs and golf afternoons-plus evenings with the nurse.
Oi!
@meloop: The Editorial Board was quite specific in pointing out the size of the companies with billion dollar vested interests in the continued marketing and sale of baby formula, especially to women in developing nations. The stigma attached to breast-feeding was a marketing ploy that has been mitigated (somewhat) in the U.S. and other countries are now seeking to do the same.
And you raise a straw man argument regarding these corporate interests. A company like Nestle has no more malicious DESIRE to cause nutritional harm to children than, say, McDonald's or Coca-Cola/Pepsi. Rather, the harms are simply not part of their calculations. They only change when public outcry or regulations force them to change. See also the opioid, tobacco, fossil fuel, asbestos, social media, financial, agricultural, textile or insurance industries. Do they, as a specific goal, "want" overdoses, lung cancer, climate change, mesothelioma, Russian bots, economic collapses, dangerous pesticides, sweatshops and people dying from treatable conditions? No. They just don't CARE about such things when balanced against their balance sheet. If they DID care, consumers would not need protection from them and labor laws would be unnecessary.
So please... it's not about which stockholders or CEOs tip the doorman or know their drivers' names. Big business has proven... repeatedly... that it cannot be trusted to act in anyone's best interests but its own. Thus governments must rein them in.
5
Wait, didn't Ivanka breastfeed? She wrote about it in her book. BAD MOTHER?!?
The sheer greed that this administration espouses is disgusting. Corporate profits ever public health and the environment.
38
HRH The Princess of Complicit, Fecklesscount[1] of the Middle East, Defender of the Faith-Based Unscientific Decisions, etc., is not subject to such trivial matters as "law", "human rights", "best health practices", or "ethics".
Only the Little People pay those taxes. She and her commander-in-creep get to hide their tax returns.
[1] Her husband, HRH The Duke of Kushner, tried the usual Viscount, but "covfefe" kept wondering if that was like a Vicks Vaporub or something.
1
Wow, this is a really deep psychoanalytic subject of Trump and his ties the Industrial-Political Complex. Is anything known about his attitudes to breast-feeding at the times when each one of his five children was still a suckling?
3
We do know that when a female lawyer took a break during a deposition to express milk, Trump called her "disgusting."
3
Child sacrifice redux. The God is Mammon. The high priest is Trump.
7
Much of the drug industry has become a cash cow for the disgustingly rich. Maybe it is time to put some "communist" scare into them and nationalize their companies.
8
Trump was probably a "Pouncer" as a baby. Oh wait, he's still a baby. Nice tweet, or tantrum, on taking away another infant right.
2
It’s a nauseating concept in the first place; that the dehydrated milk of a beast of burden is somehow preferable to what nature granted us *AND* that an uninformed buffoon like Donald Trump thinks he knows better. It’s time to stand up to the total assault on women and babies. This is beyond unacceptable.
10
Why does breast feeding scare him? It's also about women and breasts not as sex objects.
15
Up until I read this story, I believed Donald Trump was just a tragic, misguided numbskull with a low IQ, very poor judgement, and unruly hair. Now I am fairly convinced that he is downright evil. Of all the issues facing humankind and this country, he targets breastfeeding women and infants? I am now officially embarrassed for the entire human race. If there is a God, I'm sure He/She is equally disappointed.
13
Trump should pray that there is no just God, because if there is, he and his minions are in for a long, painful eternity.
3
The GOP's war on women and children now stretches across the globe.
28
Putin probably told Trump to take this position so that Russia could come across as the good white knight.
10
Is there a Pulitzer for Fake Headlines?
After reading this gem, there ought to be.
6
What's fake about it?
5
What is your platform and concrete reasoning for your statement?
4
Well, since you and I both read it, "Why Breast-Feeding Scares Donald Trump" is a real headline.
If you look very closely, above the headline in gray type is a single word: "Opinion."
If the writers' opinion is that breast-feeding scares The Donald, then the headline accurately reflects that opinion and is, again, a Real Headline (love your Trumpian use of uppercase letters, BTW).
5
You didn't answer your own headline, "Why Breastfeeding Scares Donald Trump"
- Trump is repelled by human relationship, interdependency, empathy, tenderness, and especially anything female (ie, he told a lawyer at a deposition who needed a break to pump breast milk that she was "disgusting.")
- Trump has demonstrated that he thinks breasts exist for men to grab.
- Trump rejects scientific expertise -- Trump knows all (see his Tweet about formula and malnutrition).
- Trump abhors weakness -- babies are weak.
- He is misinformed about the relationship between babies and breasts. When asked on a talk show about his infant daughter, his only speculation about her adulthood was his hope that she would have big breasts.
Lastly -- Trump is not the problem. It the party that elevated him to power that is the problem, the so-called Republican leaders who continue to enable him, and those reflected in this article and in every horrifying daily episode who cravenly carry out his bidding -- they are the problem. The people who roar at his rallies, are emboldened by his misogyny, racism, and radicalism, and mimic his selfishness and meanness -- they are what scare me, more than breast feeding scares Donald Trump.
21
Broken record time again, boys and girls and children of all ages. Republicans, and especially La Base Trumpista, hate children.
8
Proof positive we have a misogynist President.
His disrespect for women makes him side with profiteer and junk science over mothers and babies.
9
Donald Trump thinks breasts are toys.
And children are nuisances.
And 'big business' is his friend.
8
These greed driven measures should be considered as crimes against humanity and the companies, lobbyists and politicians behind them should all be judged in the court of public opinion and exposed for the hypocrites and slim balls that they are.
6
Where is proud daughter (and mother) Ivanka? How about Melania?
So far: (crickets)
"Be best!"
NOT my president
23
I think it is fundamentally anti-human. The rise of sociopathy and many medical conditions corresponds with the decline of breastfeeding. This is the way of the machine. Humans are on the decline anyway. Well and the rest of the planet's mammals also. The Anthropocene may be short lived and then the borg. So enjoy being human while we can is what I say.
6
Are mothers really more likely to breast feed because the UN passed a resolution urging them to? Hm.
I was allergic to my mother's milk. Probably to something she was eating but there was not time to figure that out. Was raised on formula. In 1960 there wasn't much available but they found something that my insides could tolerate. She told me that there was a baby like me in the family in a previous generation and they had to identify someone with a "clean mouth" who could chew up table food and spit it into the baby's mouth.
Point is, some babies can't nurse. And some mothers can't breast feed. Formula isn't the devil. Rip on DJT by all means but there are other issues that are more immediate. Reunite families trying to immigrate, for instance, and loosen up and streamline the procedures for them to seek asylum and/or citizenship.
6
Laura....everyone understands there are always exceptions to the rule, and then formula makes perfect sense.
The point is, the Trump Administration is bullying other countries to shut up about the mother's milk, the gold standard for newborns and infants.
Just another disturbing demonstration of Grand Old Psychopaths on the loose.
21
Laura, you forget the impact of advertising, for a woman with low access to doctors, TV and Internet are her experts. Limiting marketing and making programs that encourage breastfeeding can save life’s and improve the quality of life of children, and yes this starts with countries making agreements in the UN.
13
I think the point of the article is that 40 years of various studies have shown that breast milk is healthier for babies (who become adults), and that reduces healthcare costs for poor countries. However, breast feeding is at the expense of profits for American companies. This is yet another example (that should be generalized) of this administration trampling on science and facts for the sake or profits. It is another example of big business steering decision making in this country for their own profits (welfare legislation) at the expense of public health in this country and abroad (taxation on the health of people for private welfare/profits). This is yet another example of re-distribution by elites to the top at the PRE-tax level. The means by which this administration is pushing for greater corporate-welfare paid for by the poor is through the destruction of our alliances and institutions we have built of over decades. Take this breast-feeding example and generalize it to any issue: immigrant detention is boosting profits for pro-profit prisons, "streamlining" EPA regulation is a backdoor to corporate-welfare with the environment picking up the tab (and the health of future generations).
11
On April 10 of this year Goldman Sachs analysts stated that curing illness is "not good for business" obviously referring to the pharmaceutical sector and its Wall Street investors. This was reported on CNBC and widely picked up in the media. This is the cynical unvarnished truth of corporate domination of healthcare and anything else associated with it. Need more be said?
49
Ok, so formula may not be the best option when viewed in isolation, but when you consider it's benefits when combined with regular consumption of fine, healthful American tobacco products it all comes together. Smoking plus formula equals a long and happy life for you and your kids. A recent joint study by Nestle and the Tobacco Institute confirmed it and people all over the developing world are seeing the benefits. Who are we to get in the way.
25
RR....don't forget to add the Recommended Republican Daily Allowance of delicious, nutritious, 'beautiful' clean coal as party of a healthy fatal daily diet.
"Drop Dead, America (and everybody else for that matter)"
GOP 2018
17
Let's round this recommendation off by adding in the products of the fast food industry, a Big Mac, say, topped off with a phony baloney chocolate shake.
Meanwhile, this tres obvious behavior from the White House of kowtowing to the wealthy and corporate interests over the needs of regular folks is pushing me ineluctably into socialism. David Brooks's recent essay on the decline of the Republican Party has helped this change.
2
I am tired of consumers being manipulated to spend money on wasteful things that simply further consumerism at the same time that prices of the things that are necessary are manipulated for profit. All while private risk is being subsidized by the rest of us for the 1%. In spite of past administrations taking similar stances, I can think of no one thing that better represents the current president. Baby formula. Both economically, and because of Trump's known aversion to all bodily fluids, much less the idea that he would find breast feeding gross.
17
In 1977, Nestle was under fire for misleading claims about its baby formula. The pressure was great and sales slumped during a boycott in the U.S. and in Europe.
Nestle moved the suspect product to Mexico to sell to less well-informed mothers.
Nobody in a for profit business should be making decisions about food, nutrition, or health care, and yet, these are among the biggest conglomerates in the world.
54
I was just a girl during the Nestle boycott, but nobody in my family would buy anything made by Nestle. My mother described how Nestle would go into a village, offer samples of formula, and then start charging once the mother’s breast milk dried up. Making the formula required clean water, which can be hard to find in some places, and fuel to prepare formula. In places where money, clean water, and fuel were scarce, mothers were forced to use less than the recommended amount of formula and to mix it with dirty water. Lots of babies died. I still can’t bring myself to buy anything from Nestle.
13
Times must really have changed since I retired about 30 years ago. I worked in the international division of one of the more prominent manufacturers and marketers of infant formula. I see saw no evidence of promotion that urged mothers to give up breast feeding. Our promotional message began with a statement that breast milk was the best for feeding infants. We then stated that what we had to sell was the closest substitute for human breast milk (the best we were able to provide) when human breast milk would not be available. It was in fact.
I also saw no effort, accompanied by US government threats, to discourage national health schemes from negotiating the prices that we charged them as suppliers. We negotiated with them as we would with any large scale buyer. I know, because I was party to some of those negotiations. How times must have changed.
13
Times has changed but not in advertising. We still say whatever we have to say for the product we want to sell. Unless there are specific rules to stop us.
BTW the impact of advertising is measurable and adding digital to the equation means that now we can distribute editorial content, pay doctors and hire influencers without saying is a brand. You can also rigg elections through digital. Welcome to the XXI Century.
3
Sorry, third sentence should have begun just with the words:" I saw no evidence...
1
Everything Trump and his Congressional supporters do is to help big business.
Everything.
These people are bought and paid for.
21
Only humans feed their infants the milk of another species. When you think of it that way, why would we ever allow anyone to give their children milk or formula?
7
Why would we give something other than breast milk to our children? Because soemtimes formula and even other animal milk saves our babies’ lives, that’s why.
Have you ever had an underweight infant who can’t or won’t latch properly and for whatever reason(s) pumping breastmilk doesn’t work or doesn’t produce enough to feed the infant? Have you ever stayed awake 22 hours a day for weeks trying to breastfeed your infant only to find that the baby is getting sick from your milk but doctors and alternative health
Providers can’t figure out why? Have you ever suddenly come down with mastitis and been caught short on frozen breast milk? Have you ever, like a friend of mine, been diagnosed with stage-3 breast cancer before you’re baby is ready for solid food and you don’t have access to thoroughly-screened human milk from a milk bank?
Once you’ve walked in those shoes, then offer a comment.
5
Because even in America, some women are uncomfortable breast feeding and prefer formula. All babies should be entitled to formula. If a mother choses to breast feed that is also good. But the Editorial incorrectly asserts that the US is trying to discourage breastfeeding and I see no proof of that.
Because sometimes it saves lives.
1
Please note that in the 1970s a group in Minneapolis, the Third World Institute created the Infant Formula Action Coalition that started the Nestle Boycott that brought Nestle to its knees and a settlement. It is important not to forget about the deep roots of action in the US on this issue!
https://nyti.ms/2GrvpcQ
53
Knee jerk reaction is "this is not who we are." The apparently correct reaction would be, "I didn't know that this is who we are." I remember reading about a couple of countries (India? South Africa?) defying US pressure to make generics available at very low prices.. How can you possibly be proud of your country?
10
Seriously, this is the lead Opinion article today? Industry has been influencing foreign policy since we became a country. Spend some time reading "The Prize" then take a long look at a list of the lobbying groups of all industries and unions. Every conversation about trade has industries and other groups trying to influence foreign policy. To try and portray this influence is suddenly new under Trump is about as far off as you can get.
5
This isn’t an article about the current administration being pro-business. It is an article about the current administration using strong-arm tactics to make poorer countries bow to our preference for industry vs people. The article specifically stated that prior administrations also stong-armed poorer nations, favoring industry over people, particularly with regard to drugs.
The difference here is that infants are THE most vulnerable and vital subgroup: they are extra-sensitive to environmental hazards, including those found in the food supply, and we can’t survive as a species without them.
Besides, it’s slam-dunk obvious that mother’s milk is best for babies, and the only curtailment sought in the U.N. resolution, was to put pressure on formula manufacturers not to make false claims for their products.
23
I wonder if some of the migrants captured and imprisoned at our border are from Ecuador. This imperialist pro-industry go-round is just a small example showing how the US carries some blame for the violence in Central and South America. Trump threatened withdrawing military aid to Ecuador and "punishing trade measures" if they supported a simple resolution saying breastfeeding is healthiest.
I also read that Trump considered invading Venezuela. The current president of Venezuela already blames the US for Venezuela's problems. We seem to be interfering with and destabilizing other countries and then acting surprised and angry when people fleeing incredible violence come to our borders.
Trump and the Republicans can claim no moral high ground on any issue, including immigration.
11
We are mammals. Or have we forgotten?
9
Wow. The Trump administration has cut all funding to all international organizations that provide any kind of health care in the third world, if those organizations promote or perform abortions. (And, yes, public health in some third world countries has begun to suffer because of it.)
But the Trump administration won’t endorse breast-feeding, even though thousands of infants in the third world die because their mothers don’t have clean water to mix the infant formula with.
Right to life? No; that’s right to death.
15
This is late-stage capitalism, pure and simple. There is no end to the avarice; it will devour everything in its path without regard to human suffering. I am ashamed to be an American today.
22
@nick schleppend: is it of any consolation to you if i remind you that the predators are not just in america? i'm a bit ashamed to see that democratic forces are rather clueless [or unwilling?] as to reigning in the greediest among them. ex-chancellor schroeder of germany, formerly a social democrat, now works for russia's gazprom, among others. the german finance minister, who also considers himself a social democrat, just appointed a former goldman-sachs CEO to be his advisor. germany's first-ever "green" foreign minister, joschka fischer, has long become a [grey-suited] multi-millionaire, who teamed up with yours truly madeleine albright, then founded his own consultancy - for the top brass only, of course. and far away from the grassroots-level ideas which brought him to power way back when ...
Where are the "pro-life" folks in all of this? I find it difficult to believe that this is a difficult choice for anyone who truly is interested in preserving life...unless, perhaps, the only concern for pro-lifers is abortion and any other attempt to create and nourish human life is some kind of waste of time.
18
Maybe, Donald Trump can't get past the belief that breast are only to be used as playthings for him and his friends. He is again, making sure he can provide every opportunity for himself and his friends. To Donald, breast are also something he wants control over. If he can't give these businesses more of our tax money, then he will help stifle competition and make sure mothers don't use their breast for what they were designed for. If mother's breast feed, how are formula companies going to make money? Is he testing this market approach overseas? Soon to be coming to the US. Or maybe, he just doesn't think poor babies world wide should be fed. After all, this is the guy that slashed food programs for kids in this country and now he is working on denying them breast milk, overseas. What a meddler. What a guy? Still trying to bully the world to benefit himself and his friends. Never mind, what is best for the child.
5
It is sad that this has been turned into an argument about which form of feeding is better, often with the idea that only one is acceptable. Yes, sometimes breast feeding is not possible and sometimes formula is adulterated. What tRump and his minions did was to bully nations into not adopting a resolution saying breast feeding is preferable and should be done if possible. It was never intended to deprive women unable to breastfeed from getting formula. His ability to twist and distort is endless.
17
Less abortions - Higher sales of Formula. (Probable increase in Trump family portfolios)
And the Evangelicals still think Pro-Life is some sort of religious belief.
6
Everything this administration does is cynical: everything. How ironic that the first lady claims she is trying to stop bullying while her husband has become the globes number one bully.
6
I heard this morning on NPR an estimated 800'000 children would live if they where breastfeed.
I am so tired of hearing pro-life arguments against a woman's right to choose by self-righteous hypocrites but this is even worse. What industry is proclaiming is they are choosing profits over life and they don't want anyone to have a choice.
Greed is the disease that comes from contact with unregulated capitalism and there are no limits to the main symptom, cruelty.
8
What a silly premise for this article, that industries might try to affect foreign policy.
Actually, I have it on good authority that prior to Trump no American industry ever tried to affect US foreign policy. Nor did US industries ever profit under policies they persuaded Obama and Congress to adopt. Nor were such influences ever exerted and responded to under Bush, Clinton, Carter, pick your year, political party and President.
1
He couldn't care less about children and babies. They don't vote or contribute. This stance on breast feeding is abominable as well as his plucking infants and children from their parent's arms. Picking on children is quite the thing for him. Wonder what his holding are in the baby formula business!
4
Breast-feeding puts women at a disadvantage. While the benefits to babies are minimal the inconvenience to mothers and the set back to women's careers is significant. Women are being encouraged to take extended childcare leave to establish breast-feeding, which is of negligible significance to babies and which puts them at a disadvantage on the job. And on the job they're being pushed to pump milk do any amount of hassle work to give their babies marvelous breast milk when the advantage to babies is minimal while the hassle to mothers is significant.
All this is part of the ideology of self-sacrificial motherhood--no self-sacrifice too great to proved any benefit to the child however small. This is ridiculous, bigoted, sexist baloney and about time for women to stop buying it.
6
Thank you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
2
Yes, pumping is a pain (both literally and figuratively sometimes). And it can be disadvantageous for a woman and her career.
But it's irrelevant to many women living in developing or third world countries where many women don't work outside the home, and a reliable source of electricity to power said pump might not exist. Access to clean water for mixing the formula might not exist either.
Also, as much of a pain that pumping was, formula would have been just as much of one. My husband and I were fortunate to be able to afford the occasional emergency canister, but we would not have been able to have purchased it on a regular basis. Breast milk is free if you can provide it. It's important to remember that.
3
Formula is not a pain or an overwhelming expense—not even if you're relatively poor, as I was, in the US. It’s easy, cheap, and convenient. You get the powder, put it in the bottle, shake it up and that’s it. Admittedly it may be more difficult in the Global South, but that’s just another good reason why women in the Global South should have access to clean water and good jobs outside the home.
So thank goodness for Russia once and that the WHO prevailed over this bully. Trump intimidates and threatens smaller, weaker countries like Ecuador. But when Papa Bear stood up, Trump rolled over. Trump is Russia's Ecuador.
I wonder why?
17
In the developing world, a poor, malnourished mother may provide antibodies in her milk to the baby but not the nutrients that she does not consume herself.
So, the campaign to have mothers to focus on not just the antibodies but also on the nutrients that their own diets lack is not all that hideous and undesirable as you would want your readers to believe.
Educate and inform, not propagandize.
8
It's much cheaper and safer to supplement the breastfeeding mother's diet, than to buy and feed the formula.
1
Not sure if I have ever been more embarrassed to be from the USA.
Yes! Public shaming and boycotting! I am in!
23
Traveling abroad soon, & when asked where I'm from, will be telling people, "Near Canada".
3
That Trump would utter something that defies both science and common sense is no surprise. It would be truly newsworthy if he said something thoughtful and intelligent.
Trump sees women's breasts as something to grope not as a source of nutrition for infants. He simply does not grasp the concept and seems utterly incapable of actual human empathy. Money, however, he gets. The more the better, regardless of consequences. When billionaires come whining to him about how shabbily they are treated Trump is all ears. He has already amply demonstrated that he has no concern whatsoever for the welfare of children, especially if they are not white. So, let's protect wealth at the expense of infants. Just another day in the good old USA.
61
War on science and logic, systematic destruction of quality public education and health care are all linked to rise of crony capitalism and growing influence of religion and (white) racial supremacy by a tiny but highly influential section of American society.
17
“Water down” ...so apt. That is what poor women who have American Advertising telling them formula is best, resort to when funds run out.
More babies die from malnutrition but profits are the first responsibility of the corporation!
SAD!
4
Breast is best, plus it's free and readily available if mother is near child. No hassle with bottles, temperature etc.
Feeding a baby is the first function women's breasts have. Perfectly natural, except for deranged minds who can't bear the sight of a mother feeding her baby.
If a mother is unable to breast feed, then there's the bottle, of course.
4
In this case, the United States is quite literally stealing candy (mothers milk) from a baby. Does it get any more 'Snidely Whiplash'-ian than that? Threatening trade sanctions against tiny Ecuador for helping babies grow up healthy? Americans need to understand that any country that could foist overpriced prescription drugs on developing nations isn't going to limit its predatory behavior to mere foreigners: which does much to explain why America pays twice as much per person as the rest of the World, for no better health outcomes.
4
The key issue is that in developing countries there may not be reliable access to clean water and the means of sterilising bottles and teats. In addition, the cost of formula, bottles and sterilisation may strain a family's budget which is so unnecessary when mothers' milk is free.
4
Donald Trump hates women and babies and the evangelical right thinks he was sent by god.
This is how far we’ve sunk.
13
We are losing all moral authority. The rest of the world is no as succeptable to propaganda. They understand the health of their baby is more important than profits. It is sad that corporate profits trump health. Is it any surprise that we have the most expensive health care system in the world, but produce substandard results? Corporations gone wild.
3
Three cheers for not allowing our capitalism to be fettered by so-called concerns about public health. After all, the right to make a profit is sacred.
15
You need to add some sort of sarcasm alert. There are some who will take this at face value and believe it.
3
Anyone that doesn't realize it's satire believes it anyway.
Yes, both Obama and Clinton were on the side of the drug manufacturers. But so were Reagan and George H. W. Bush. And, we should not forget that it was George W. Bush and his administration, with full GOP support that introduced the restriction that forbids the federal government from using its economy of scale to negotiate lower drug prices as is done in the VA and some private insurance plans. Bush made sure that Medicare would have to pay full price. Drug companies are already charging Americans far, far more than they do to people in other countries. None of them will sell at a loss, so, even with the drastically lower prices the companies get from abroad, they still make a satisfactory profit. Since Big Pharma owns our Representatives, Senators, and Presidents, they can get away with murder when it comes to what they (over)charge Americans - in some cases, literally murder by putting the prices of lifesaving new drugs beyond the reach of most Americans.
8
I did not realize that the baby formula industry was still so big. Why in the world would anyone use an inferior product to human milk. I am sure there are some mothers that must for good reason use these substitutes, but why would anyone volunteer to do without good cause.
6
Convenience
1
whose decision is it?
This problem has been around for decades. While our government has sought to shore up the baby formula industry and promote its sales in Africa and other lesser developed areas of the world, the constant problem facing users of any kind of baby formula is safe drinking water and access to it. Of course, the cost of buying formula is an impediment to its use in lesser developed economies. Another impediment is more sinister: adulterated formula found on open markets in lesser developed countries. Not good for babies.
We are so glad that my wife breast-fed all of our children. They benefitted from it neurologically and nutritionally in infancy, something that baby formula does not offer. Smart mothers breast feed if they can and our president has not yet called for them to cease doing so in our society. Other mothers in other countries have less flexibility and choice and seek the best for their infants in situations that are mostly resource poor and often dangerous. Too bad the president is a man and cannot feel as millions of new mothers do the close physical bond that breast feeding establishes between them and their newborns.
Too bad he has little empathy for the plight of such mothers. His heart is with the infant formula industry and the wealthy people who prosper by it.
15
This is a perfect example of how our government has FOR DECADES pushed threatened and worked the will of American business at home and abroad. Extracting money for business from consumers through the assistance of the Department of Commerce and other government agencies PLUS "elected" representatives has become an automatic process. I cannot recall a significant ruling FOR consumers that hasn't come under attack by the so-called president and his gang of 'servers'.
8
I remember my family boycotting Nestle products when I was a kid because of the company's pushing formula into developing countries. The book "Milk, Money and Madness" is a fascinating read about the formula industry and it's ties to big business.
27
But, but, but how could this exist before Trump?
1
A US-led campaign against breast-feeding? I've never heard of anything so unbelievable since Trump won the 2016 election. Trump's ambassadors in his cause, i.e., the ones who haven't resigned yet, sure have chutzpah. How can anyone argue against the most wholesome and nutritious way to feed newborns? One word: Trump.
And many people in this country wonder why we need business regulations. Here is proof: to keep them from acting like gangsters. Altogether too many businesses have taken advantage of consumers, unsuspecting or otherwise, longer than cash registers have been around. That American trade representatives threaten to break legs is nothing new. US leaders have helped overthrow governments, solely in the interests of propping up American business interests: Iran in the 1950s, Central American banana republics before and after that, and Chile in the 1970s. Trumpism establishes a new low, and doesn't resort to clandestine intrigue: it expresses its mafia-like tactics overtly. Nothing to see here? think again. There's everything to see here, and worse. "Caveat Emptor" will once again be the polestar of business if we don't derail Trump's Dystopia Express.
17
Another blind person who can only see through their disdain for Trump that anything being done has only been done since Trump got into office when even the article speaks to one of many examples of it happening with all presidents. The only difference that most people seem to struggle with is that Trump does not play the "smile to your face, stab you in the back" game that past presidents, including the beloved Obama, have done. Trump does not play by the old political rules but ultimately his actions and the results are no different than what both sides have done in the past. He does it directly to your face and for some reason the left in particular cannot seem to handle it even though that is the exact tactic they use when confronting members of this administration. Quit acting with this "holier than thou" attitude. Politics has been and always will be a dirty game of working to get favor to keep oneself in office. Stop acting like this is suddenly a new thing.
When the first Mrs Trump revealed her manner of raising her wonderful (!)children, not only did she not spare the rod, she was very proud that she had never breast fed any of them.
Formula does not work well in many developing countries because of lack of access to clean water, and frequently, to save money, the mothers dilute the formula with water.
Many mothers here give up because they have to return to work to help support their families, among other reasons, and it becomes too difficult to continue nursing.
8
Please tell us the names of these companies that are trying to control our government, and whether some of their competitors are doing a better job of serving the public good.
39
I think may backfire on these companies as they really got caught bad.. I think this will be a campaign issue in many areas.
6
If there is anything that is readily apparent from this Administration, its that corporate profits trump health. This is just one more example, and a particularly galling one at that.
28
One feature of the landscape worth highlighting: three of the seven largest dairy-producing states are Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. Without the Rust Belt, Mr. Trump has almost no chance at winning an election.
Dairy is unhealthy for both human consumption and the environment, but we will never hear this from the current administration, and perhaps not from any as long as these states remain both tightly contested and pivotal to presidential elections.
9
If nothing else, breastfeeding is free, which for many families both in the US and elsewhere is a major consideration. Next month, the trump administration will begin distributing white papers proving that smoking saves lives.
61
With all that is going on in the world, do people really think that President Trump was involved in this issue over breast feeding? As for the rest of us, we should be more concerned will all the kids in the underdeveloped countries that are starving to death. I had one child that was breast fed and one that was fed formula. They both turned out equally healthy.
I assume by your statement that you had access to clean water, which is needed to reconstitute dried formula, during the time you children were infants. Most people in developing countries do not.
21
Doubtful he was personally involved. But he appoints people who do these kinds of things, so he has responsibility. And his tweets after the fact indicate he favors industries over babies. And actually, this has a lot to do with "all the kids in the underdeveloped countries that are starving to death" because breastfeeding is a cheaper and healthier way to feed little ones. This policy is not directed at developed countries and has nothing to do with your personal breastfeeding choices.
9
Breastfeeding is free. In areas of extreme poverty, it can help babies survive. The more babies that can be expected to survive, the fewer babies women will have. The fewer they have, the better those children can be educated, including girls (aka future mothers). This is what lifts people out of poverty. Infant nutrition in poor countries is perhaps one of the most important things we could be paying attention to.
8
According to CDC report, about 8 in 10 mothers start breastfeeding their babies at birth but only 5 in 10 continue to be breastfed at 6 months and only 3 in 10 at 12 months. ( https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2016/p0822-breastfeeding-rates.html )
So, inevitably and invariably, mothers stop breastfeeding and switch to formula stuff in as little as 6 months.
Also, 2 in 10 mothers DO NOT BREASTFEED their babies at birth according to the same study for a variety of reasons. Any campaign that insists that breastfeeding is the best way to raise and nourish babies will stigmatize those who do not or cannot lactate and breastfeed.
So, you cannot wish away formula milk substitutes.
The resolution was meaningless in that it was not enough to assert breast milk is the best food for babies without "regulating" how long a child ought to be breastfed.
Do we want out governments micromanaging issues like how long mothers should breastfeed their babies?
Get real and get a life.
6
No--not what the resolution was about. It's about misleading mothers in undeveloped countries into thinking that formula is more nutritious than breastmilk."the resolution in question stated, simply, that breast milk is the healthiest option for infants, and that steps should be taken to minimize inaccurate marketing of substitutes....it has the potential to ward off diarrheal diseases and respiratory infections, both of which are prevalent in low-income countries."
7
If all that's true, why twist their arms? No we don't need to be micro managed, we also don't need to have the facts for such a personal decision twisted by cooperate greed.
5
We pay a lot for scientific research - all those smart people doing studies could be working at companies making better products instead. If we have no intention of publicizing or using the results from all this work, we should probably stop supporting it.
1
Polluting the air, the water, the earth....and the bodies of newborn babies for Grand Old Profit.
You can't dig any lower in the bottom of the American political barrel than the Trump Administration and his Republican Robber Baron Caucus.
These are unusually sick GOPeople.
November 6 2018
VOTE
312
Honeybee....here's the scientific research from the American Academy of Pediatrics.
When a woman has a practical choice, mother's milk is the best choice.
Epidemiologic research shows that human milk and breastfeeding of infants provide advantages with regard to general health, growth, and development, while significantly decreasing risk for a large number of acute and chronic diseases. Research in the USA, Canada, Europe, and other developed countries, among predominantly middle-class populations, provides strong evidence that human milk feeding decreases the incidence and/or severity of diarrhea, lower respiratory infection, otitis media, bacteremia, bacterial meningitis, botulism, urinary tract infection, and necrotizing entero colitis.
There are a number of studies that show a possible protective effect of human milk feeding against sudden infant death syndrome, insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus, Crohn’s disease, ulcerative colitis, lymphoma, allergic diseases, and other chronic digestive diseases.
Breastfeeding has also been related to possible enhancement of cognitive development.
It has long been acknowledged that breastfeeding increases levels ofoxytocin, resulting in less postpartum bleeding and more rapid uterine involution.
Research demonstrates that lactating women have an earlier return to prepregnant weight, and reduced risk of ovarian cancer and premenopausal breast cancer.
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/pediatrics/100/6/1035.full...
Formula certainly can pollute the bodies of babies, if it is mixed under unsanitary conditions and/or with contaminated water. Breastfeeding is undeniably best for babies. The WHO resolution has nothing to do with “guilting or shaming” women who choose not to breastfeed, so put your chip back on your shoulder, Honeybee. The resolution is about counteracting aggressive marketing campaigns by formula manufacturers, especially to women in countries where safe handling of formulas may be difficult. The resolution is about providing women with facts so they can make an informed decision. If the facts offend you, that is a shame. By the way, although I breastfed all my children and am intimately familiar with the effects of nursing on the female body, this is irrelevant to the veracity of the WHO resolution. Breast milk is better for babies no matter what my personal experience was.
It does seem that in this administration the suffering of babies doesn't really matter. Whether on the issue of breastfeeding or on separating babies from parents on the border. 'Corporations are people' remember and they seem to be the only ones that count today, especially in this administration.
43
Anything that is pro business is something which Trump supports. For Trump, through his deluded lens of perception, pure capitalism without restriction is the best capitalism.
I found it beyond ironic that when the massive, unnecessary $1.5 trillion tax cut was pushed through, which has been reported by the Times that 83% of that tax cut benefited the most wealthy and big corporations, that Paul Ryan exclaimed that Trump had done an 'exquisite' job. Then following within days was an announcement by Ryan that the next thing on their agenda was to take a hatchet to social programs, from food stamps to Medicaid, assistance to poor families, and Obamacare.
Ryan stated that as calmly as if he had announced a change in weather from a sunny day to an overcast one without the slightest hint of irony.
Trump has said that when he was in 2nd grade, he punched his music teacher in the nose. And he has continued punching noses throughout his business career by stiffing contractors and investors. Now that he literally has the bully pulpit, he is in his element, and there is no depth to which that man will not descend.
For him and his Republican cohorts, it is all about the money, and the power that comes with money. If they punch noses and blacken eyes along the way, well for them, it is all part of the game.
40
I presume the music teacher was a woman. Perhaps Milani's anti-bullying campaign (lol) might start at home?
2
In Trump's world breasts are for porn stars and nude models, not organs for feeding infants. The care of infants and children is at the bottom of the list of anything Trump cares about. At the top of his list is money and power.
286
One of the worst facts about our law makers is- none, absolutely none, of them represent the 2nd largest (non) religious group (only after Christianity as a whole) of American people- the atheists and agnostic people, who constitute about 25 percent of Americans now. That percentage is even higher among millennials (about 40 percent). It would the largest groups if we consider different clans/sects of Christianity. Trump's core vote bank and the largest Christian sect of evangelicals constitute about 23 percent.
The systematic rigging of American economy and growing socioeconomic inequality was and still is deeply linked to similar attack on public education infusing more religious superstitions that inherently promote ignorance and feudal society with unquestionable or blind trust on 'higher power/authority' (God or otherwise). War on science and logic is part of that.
All these issues are essential to promote and sustain such unequal society and political system that is totally self-destructive to vast majority of working class voters and future generations. That's why late 1970s and early 1980s (mainly Reagan era) is so important and indicate the start of the current rot in American economy and political system that ultimately led to the rise of a person like Trump and his cabinet colleagues. That's another fact why slave holding southern red states are so religious and so backward in almost every parameter of socioeconomic development.
20
The Times piles its list of many things: “bullying, anti-science, pro-industry, anti-public health and shortsighted,” but one word sums up its motive force: hate. Trump hates everyone but the Nigerian “hard man,” corrupt, narcissistic, above the law, misogynistic, a messenger of evil and deception.
His hate has its own hierarchy, clued by his actions, witnessed in his silence: no grief or compassion for the urban victims killed unarmed across the country, not a word of sorrow for Claudia Patricia Gomez Gonzalez, shot in the head by a border agent; silence first greeted crying children Trump exploited to blame Democrats without cause.
What hospitals do routinely, put wristbands on individuals, read with hand scanners, has been as lost as the children deliberately hurt by the abuse of separation.
The center mass of Trump's hate is focused on infants again, their global feeding: for “choice” HHS opposed a World Health Organization resolution in support of breastfeeding, citing the consensus research that breast milk gives human infants the best chance of healthy development and disease resistance. The US delegation forced Ecuador by threats (to military aid and trade) to withdraw the resolution before the assembly. After scrambles and nations saying no, Russia agreed to sponsor the resolution. Without US objections nor White House-directed, diplomatic threats. The corporations had lost to the Russians.
Everyone watched and knew the US backed down.
30
Breast feeding scares Trump because it forces him to do two things that he can't: Care and Think.
Caring takes compassion and courage. He has to stand up to big profit 'Merica Inc.
Thinking means that there is a long-term gain, even in his beloved dollars, that far outweighs any shorter-term profits. But there's another term that terrifies resident Trump: Long-term.
23
"thanks, oddly enough, to Russia."
Why would you find this odd? Russia - or Putin, at least - wants to be recognized as a premier world power. It wants to be the country other countries turn to, now that they clearly cannot rely on the US. The Trump-engineered collapse of the US will leave several vacuums in world affairs. China is likely to become the economic powerhouse; Putin would like to be everything else.
37
Breast is totally the best as my wife nursed our children for 3 years (give or take) to fantastic sustained health even through their mid twenties today.
Unregulated rampant market driven "profit before people" neoliberal capitalism is an unsustainable system for both business and civilization. Its marketing tactics prey on our ignorance and vulnerabilities too often to our detriment.
14
Pediatric people before profits.
8
Glad i saved my t shirt from the 1970s and will have to dig it out/wear it agin:
Boycott Nestles-
Crunch Nestles Quick!
21
Corporate oligarchy dictating public health policies.
22
Gerry, “Corporate oligarchy dictating public health policies “
Nothing new to see here people - move along.
1
Notice that NYT wanted to level the field by adding Obama and Clinton as transgressors. However, you forgot to mention other administrations , Reagan, Bush 1 and 11,Nixon, etc. The difference is that bullying, and blackmail were not what was used in the past. None of these previous administrations buddied up to Russia, our adversary, nor did they attack our allies. All things are not equal!
127
Please. Stop. With the False Equivalency.
Sure....every child in the world needs a $50 a week Similac habit.
34
Nursing is also free. Who can argue with that?
28
Down with breast milk. Let them eat delicious taco bowls.
8
The greatest threat to our national security are Trump’s astonishing ignorance and shameful attentiveness to business profitability over humankind’s needs.
76
United States delegation to the United Nations-affiliated World Health Assembly embraces the interests of formula manufacturers in spite of all evidence that supports breast-feeding. Who is heading this delegation? Scott Pruitt? What does formula made with contaminated water do for babies? Build immunity and character? Can a few more pennies in the coffers be worth the health and future of babies in all parts of the world? I guess the US delegation thinks so. The question I have is who are these people, in this delegation? Are they appointees of this administration? Lobbyists for the formula makers? Who would hold in private that formula is better than breast milk? Who would fly halfway around the world to declare so publicly? To what end would anyone take such a ridiculous stand?
51
Much like China's obsession with maps and names with respect to Taiwan, the Trump administration has a pattern of making science subservient to industry. In both cases, paranoia leads to threats over the smallest public acknowledgement that Taiwan is a separate state or that science, not the myopic self-interest of a favored group, should drive policy.
This is usually where a lot of people who know better will make the "knife fight" analogy, claiming these are tough strategic maneuvers that make sense because they achieved the desired immediate result. But the losers - unlike losers in a knife fight - are just as strong as before and will merely look to minimize ties with or dependence on the erratic bully. Before long, the Trump administration will have transitioned itself from a leadership role in international bodies to being ignored as often as possible.
Mr. Trump may have a long history of dodging his bills, but the American people he is obligated to represent have no such luxury.
2
Obviously the order came straight from Trump. The fact that he tried to justify the American action proves that he is complicit. Now the NY Times should investigate the links between baby formula manufacturers and Trump.
65
I am trying to think back. When did America become so wicked? Were we always this way or was it just masked so we weren't aware? I am ashamed of my country.
81
Bella, your comment is particularly important in this age of the grand political shell game. Has it always been thus, but with better manners?
All we know is that the standard of lying, insulting, and bullying has never been higher or more expensive.
One good thing about the Trump administration: Exposure of late stage US capitalism as shortsighted, exploitive and just plain evil.
24
You are over complicating an absurdly stupid person. Breasts are NOT for Babies. They are for disgusting, grotesque, leering, drooling, grabbing old men. Seriously.
143
We have reached the tipping point at which this administration no longer ever pretends that its policies are motivated by anything other than corporate profits.
37
Because you respond to a need and carve out a market (in this case replace wet nurses with a breastmilk substitute for the times it is needed or desired) does that entitle you to the entire market as if the original (in this case breastmilk) did not exist.
For example, I invented agribusiness so that people would not have to grow and hunt their own food. Does that entitle me to the rights to deny the benefits of growing or raising one's own food?
3
You have not seen anything yet. Pretty soon the US military will be used to bully other countries in favor of US business interests. We have put together a huge military as a part of our postwar global alliance. Trump, while pressuring our allies to raise their military spending, is not showing any sign of not increasing our military spending. With no alliances to talk about what will it be used for other than nefarious pursuit of business interest?
17
or will be turned on resisting Americans....that is ultimately how fascist states work
2
We’re just the greatest country in th world, according to some myth. Our corporate and lobbying practices seem unconscionable.
13
Can you offer literally any comprehensive science that proves better outcomes for breastfed babies? Because I've seen the evidence and it seems slim.
That being said, what Trump did is disgusting and absolutely was not some principled stand against La Leche League. I just worry that in (rightly) condemning his domineering, imperialist tendencies, we jump to champion a method of feeding babies that is not without detriments.
6
You do realized that for millions of years, human children have been reared on breast milk, and the species has continued just fine? You know that every other mammal on the planet breast-feeds their infants, and they also survive?
Mammals (even humans!) evolved to be nurtured by their mother's milk. As has been stated, in addition to providing nutrients, it provides antibodies to protect the infant against infection, and no supplement invented can do that.
Formula can also be an actual threat to infants, if it is made with unclean water - as it must be, in many poor or undeveloped countries. And it costs money that poor parents may not have, which may lead to them over-diluting the formula. While formula may be necessary in some cases, it is a poor second.
11
Since many of these formulas are in powdered form and have to be mixed with water, the lack of a reliable source of clean water is a problem for many people. Contaminated water = contaminated formula. That alone pushes breast milk to the forefront.
9
I think that part of the issues is that breastfeeding does proved better outcomes for babies in third world countries. This has been documented. Mothers who start using formula and then can't afford it anymore can't feed their babies beacuse their milk dries up. Also familes with no access to clean water use contaminated water which makes the baby ill. The journal Lancet did a study to estimate that ~800k infant deaths could be avoided if breastfeeding was better supported: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(16)00210...
I say this as a mom of two kids, both of whom I supplemented with formula and are both healthy. I think that formula feeding for women in first world countries likely doesn't have that much of a difference, despite what some of the rather vocal breastfeeding groups might say. however, for the majority of the worlds population, who live in poverty, breastfeeding really is best and the WHO recommendations providers, government, and aid organizations in those countries.
11
Name names! Which US officials, which US representatives, which lobbyists (including former members of congress), which companies, which donors to which politicians?
We the people want to know! Who is behind this policy?
203
Has the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) started screaming yet? If not, why not?
30
The editorial mentions that "persistent global protest" is what changed the tide with the cost of H.I.V. medications. I know that we all have outrage fatigue, but the cost of not speaking up means that public health suffers. We must continue to tell our government that putting industry profits over the health of the public is shameful and disgusting.
27
You just made a lot of American mothers feel bad/guilty about not breastfeeding.
2
We typically have access to clean water (aside from Flint, Michigan and elsewhere), so using formula is not a risk as an alternative to breastfeeding. Many of these developing nations don't have that luxury....
3
American moms realize that they have healthy choices either way since they have access to clean water to mix formula and clean sinks to wash bottles and can sterilize everything when necessary. The fact that breastmilk is superior cannot be disputed but we are not plagued by raging epidemics of diarrhea like those experienced in areas of extreme poverty and squalid living conditions. In this country the benefits of breastmilk are not commonly a life or death choice. I have yet to meet a formula feeding mom who felt any remorse over her decision. Some moms use drugs or alcohol and their babies are better off on formula and the ones who have healthy lifestyles and chose formula for a variety of reasons make a point of raising their kids within conditions promoting overall health.
3
They should feel guilty for being mothers, full stop. American children lead the world when it comes to creating pollution, and we're already too rich and overcrowded.
It's time for American women to stop having babies, and start adopting the babies of poor women in other countries, who have had too many to properly care for.
American women who want to breast feed can become wet-nurses in the developing world.
Because here are the facts! Women in some Sub-Saharan, Middle Eastern, and Central American countries are having an average of 4-7 children per. It's our duty to help them take care of their babies, and it's our duty to stop having babies that only pollute the world with their white supremacist privilege, disposable diapers, and insatiable need for more stuff!
This fake milk/real milk controversy is just Trump - as usual - distracting all of us from the real scandal; too many rich white women in America are having babies and spending time obsessing over the quality of milk - while the developing world is full of babies, and these babies desperately need our help!
I’m to the left of middle, but not all the way to the left. Always thought more towards the middle was the right balance. Then I read stuff like this and it makes my stomach churn. Then I think about individuals like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. And I conclude that we need lots, lots more Progressives like Alexandria in Congress.
It’s just pay to play all up and down this Administration. We clearly need a new and younger generation to represent us in Congress.
22
The superiority of breast milk for infants is well established.
That our ''representatives'' (not representing most Americans, surely) served the formula industry instead of maternal and child health, and attempted to defeat international efforts for healthier mothers and babies is despicable.
29
"The measures Colombia is considering have all been sanctioned by the World Trade Organization, but pharmaceutical companies have pressured countries not to employ them, often by acting through American trade representatives. "Ecuador was set to introduce this uncontroversial measure when the United States threatened “punishing trade measures” and a withdrawal of crucial military aid unless the country dropped it".
USA! USA! USA! Not going to let Ecuador push us around.
Trump and the GOP will always chose money and business over the interests of actual human beings. It’s nauseating.
13
The United States has a long history of using these sorts of tactics (and worse) to promote the interests of a few wealthy corporations. This is well known to the rest of the world, but most US citizens seem totally (or willfully) ignorant.
13
The U. S. is not unique in its history of myopic pro-industry tactics - why are we the ones who figured out the VW diesel fraud? We are, however, unique in our power and responsibility. Our world is increasingly connected and open, and science has made great strides in recent years thanks to advances in many fields and our collective investments supporting it.
All we can do is be our best selves today and strive to be better tomorrow, and this stunt at the U. N. is not that.
1
Greed, ignorance and misogeny are a deadly combination, especially for women, mothers and their babies in third world nations and those living in poverty.
15
You state, "it passed, oddly enough, because of Russia." Why is that odd? Surely they want what is best for babies, as well. I'm tired of cold war era comments about Russia that presume they are full of sinister intentions.
4
This was a good move by Russia.
But with Crimea, Ukraine, election meddling in UK, Europe and US, rigging the athletes drug testing, it is easy to assume evil intentions.
3
... Except that Russia meddled in our 2016 election? This isn't Cold War era sentiment.
4
Have you been reading the news lately? It's odd because Russia does actually harbor sinister intentions toward the U.S. It interfered in our last Presidential election with the intention of causing us harm.
3
Might as well replace Miss Liberty's torch with a dollar sign.
16
There is another reason Trump is against breast-feeding. Despite the fact that he doesn't read, he must have heard the phrase, "the milk of human kindness." We know he is 100% against human kindness, so if it associated with milk...
55
There you have it, citizens - the latest ghastly move made in our names. Not only do we look like an petulant bully, but Russia looks good to the developing world.
Lobbyists: how do you sleep at night?
US Delegation: why do you awake in the morning - for This?
11
Trump's anti-breast feeding policy -- aside from evoking the disastrous example of the Nestle Company's hawking of formula in the 1970s -- is of a piece with his general anti-woman, anti-child proclivities. He has previously opined that a professional woman needing to "pump" breast milk during the workday was "disgusting." See https://www.cnn.com/2015/07/29/politics/trump-breast-pump-statement/inde...
74
This policy must be traced back to Trump’s attitude toward women as something to be used and not respected as an equal partner, individual or person.
I wonder how this is being received by the women in his base.
4
Huh? How is this policy not "anti-life"?!!!! (And, not to mention Anti-Christian.)
This is probably too incendiary for a NY Times Post, but it now seems clear to me that the Trump Admin has abandoned Christian principles altogether and is now following a much darker path. Horrifying.
7
It's bad enough that our president is doing everything he can to undermine the health of Americans, especially those at the lower end of the economic spectrum. But bullying other countries to extend that abuse throughout the world? Shameful, amoral, and despicable.
Every time we think he can't possibly go lower, he shows us how wrong we were.
12
oh imagine that.. its all Trump's fault!
The New York Toilet Paper still trying to smear our duly elected and LEGAL POTUS
And these fool's wonder why everyone thinks they are FAKE NEWS
1
Not everyone, Sparky. Just you and the other deplorable human beings.
8
These are actions under his administration, so you bet it is his responsibility. "Our duly elected and LEGAL POTUS" (though a loser in popular vote) was not elected with a unlimited mandate to do anything and everything he wants regardless of how cruel and uninformed.
5
Donald Trump is our "duly elected" . . . . Some would say we deserve him. Perhaps we do. Maybe we did something awful as a nation and this is our punishment. Making someone lie, in order to receive American support, makes the beauty of America a little less so. It cannot be argued that baby formula is an issue of national security. This is simply about selling more stuff. While we may embarrass them by having them in an economic arm-bar, we bring shame upon ourselves for doing it. It makes us bullies. We are Americans. We don't need to bully anyone until we are ready to admit that we are afraid. All bullies are cowards, even when the bully is a president. As president, Trump is a reflection of who we are. So, when he bullies, thus do we. When his minions bully, thus do we. Bullying is just another form of smearing himself, . . . and you, . . . and me . . ..
1
I understand why formula makers and drug companies want to keep the markets for their products large and profitable. But what is the hold that they have over this administration? Is it just the meeting of unscrupulous companies and an unscrupulous administration? It is obvious that Trump himself is frightened and disgusted by real women and children. Has that attitude so infected his trade representatives that they are willing to take a stand against motherhood itself? If they took bribes to say and do these things they must be prosecuted and locked up. If they did it without taking bribes they should be fired immediately for being stupid and evil and they should be shunned by all people until they have demonstrated through words and deeds true remorse, repentance, and change of heart.
14
I have just returned from helping to welcome twin preemie grandchildren home from the hospital. Ella makes an important point about mothers having choices. I support that completely. Sometimes, mothers cannot or choose not to breastfeed. However, the editorial makes an important distinction between the rise of breastfeeding in developed countries and the marketing of formula to low-income countries.
Let's think about mothers in low-income countries: What happens when the formula is expensive? Will companies give formula to families until children are old enough not to need a bottle? Will well intentioned mothers who want to feed their children add extra water to the bottle? Will children get the nutrition that they need? Is there always a source of reliably clean water?
We all want healthy, well nourished children all over the world. Here, we have a example that has to do with profit. It's hard to see this action which has stunned so many as having to do with shaming mothers from making choices for their children.
18
We talk about the struggle between science and religion. But Trump seems essentially godless, and he's anti-science as well. A religious person might argue that the goodness of breast milk is a sign of the intelligence of God. And a scientist would argue that evolution gets the credit there. But still, in this case, the Christian and the scientific arguments both go against Trump. This is just purely about money. No other set of values are being represented in his administration here.
61
The choice is ultimately the mother's, but no formula contains the antibodies found in breast milk. It's the best food for babies and, medical issues aside, should be done whenever possible. Even the paltry six weeks "disability" allowed by most American companies is time enough for a good start in life for babies. More enlightened countries allow new mothers (and, in some cases, new fathers) up to a year of paid leave.
18
Breastfeeding is also a natural form of birth control and although in most cases should not be a substitute for other methods, it can be a helpful adjunct to reduce the chances of pregnancy, especially in the first six months after birth.
7
Thanks for this reminder, there are other health benefits to the mothers from breastfeeding.
2
No mother should be shamed for her choices, but women should be encouraged to breast feed. Besides that in impoverished countries breast feeding is free, given the lack of medical care in many places breastfeeding gives the kid an advantage with immunity to diseases it otherwise might not have.
Yes, children raised on formula do fine, my son is a healthy 23 year old and he was raised on formula, but that doesn't mean it should be the first thing used either. One of the problems things like this law are trying to rectify is the influence the industry has had, a lot of hospitals because of their ties to the formula makers, push formula on moms if they are having trouble lactating, and they also promote myths like "if the child starts on formula they can't breastfeed' (and that was at a major NYC teaching hospital folks), I called la leche league about that later and they were absolutely shocked we were told that.
In the end parents have to make decisions they think are best, and no one should be shamed if they choose formula, it is not like feeding a kid a diet of potato chips and coca cola, despite what the radical breast feed advocates can say, but they need encouragement to think strongly about their options and benefits and make it based on that, not what Nestle third quarter profits are.
16
Yes, parents should make the decisions they think best, BUT -- just as in voting for president -- they should have access to all relevant information. Formula is milk not from a human but from a cow. The curd is larger (and harder for the baby to digest), it has no antibodies as mother's milk does, and it does not vary in response to the baby's needs. If a woman cannot breast feed, she can avail herself of donated breast milk.
9
The issue in developing countries is little or no access to clean water to mix formula or clean bottles and nipples. Parents sometimes dilute formula to stretch it, thereby malnourishing their infant. Diarrheal diseases kill more infants in the developing world than anything else. Breast feeding is cheaper and healthier for the baby and the mom.
Formula can make sense in a country with clean water, modern health care and families able to afford it, but this is exactly what is lacking in the developing world.
142
Agreed, but I wonder why the focus is not on providing access to clean water, especially when so many mothers are unable to breastfeed for a variety of reasons? Though probably not a vulnerable as newborn babies, people of all ages die of diarrheal diseases.
I am not defending Trump at all, but again, I wonder why there is not more of an international push to provide clean drinking water. Is not as trendy a cause? Is breastfeeding (despite requiring so much support and again, sometimes just not being an option) considered an easy fix?
2
Clean water is a different issue and a straw man argument here.
Not a bigger push for clean water? Because Nestle wants to bottle and sell it.
Editor’s note: This comment has been anonymized in accordance with applicable law(s).
7
"People will suffer. Industry will not."
Should be the Trump administration's official motto and replace E Pluribus Unum on all money issued during his one term in office so we never forget what he and they proudly stood for.
And of all people, babies will suffer the most.
60
Can we now totally dispense with the canard that the United States of America is the greatest country in the world? If wealth is the criteria, the US has the most. If military power is the basis on which to judge greatness, it's America again. It was a flawed country before Trump, guilty of indefensible behaviour by the CIA going back 70 years, responsible for the deaths of nearly 4 million people in a neo-colonialist war in Vietnam, the unlawful invasion of Iraq, etc. Before Trump is was at least clearly better than its enemies. Today, it has become a ruthless, heartless bully that the world has begun to despise, creating a new kind of negative American Exceptionalism. Do something about it Americans. Get out and vote for human decency. Say with your vote that Trump's America is not your America and encourage everyone you know to do the same. The stakes have never been higher.
265
We got out the vote... 3 million more voted for Clinton and he is is “president”. We’ve marched, called senators, sent money, resisted. The GOP is enabling him, Fox News is spreading propaganda. The majority of Americans are anti trump but we still don’t understand the extent Russia played in putting this dolt in power.
1
I have been largely successful in keeping my rage in check, a significant accomplishment these days, until I learned about this.
How do these people sleep at night? This is criminal, seriously, people need be removed from office and locked up.
363
Sleeping on piles of money seems to work quite well.
2
The big 3 companies in the field are Mead Johnson, Abbot, and Gerber, according to one report I read. Knowing which support the lobbyists would be good to know.
12
I thought Nestle's was in there too, although I think they may technically be a Swiss company. Still ok to boycott.
7
Gerber is owned by Nestle's.
Hey! Maybe we can also force those babies to smoke American made cigarettes! Or mix that formula with water from Flint. Don't worry, if you make a mess, we'll throw some paper towels at you. You'll love it!
473
And, as usual, the right-wingers are playing dangerous games with women and children's health.
They're all for individual and states' rights - except when it comes to a woman's choices about her body and her children.
109
"Unethical marketing practices on the part of formula makers is a long-standing and well-established problem...."
Being unethical and bullying is now a well-established practice in the White House.
U.S. consumers can voice their disgust of the practices of the formula makers and the White House by boycotting the products of those makers in the US.
84
Has the Trump administration no sense of human decency and compassion? First it separated children from their parents at the border including those under the age of age of 5 and has yet to rectify the situation. Now the target is infants in developing countries. Despite the scientific evidence to support breastfeeding as most beneficial and certainly most economical our government callously disregards what is best for children. The almighty profit making motive reigns supreme in this heartless administration. Shame on them!
69
Corporate profits above human health. It's the Republican way. We cannot let it become the American way. Vote Americans! Vote!
120
Just one more disgusting edict from Trump's morally bankrupt, callous administration.
26
Perhaps Trump just thinks that the Federal Government shouldn't be in the business of telling people how they should take care of their children. That is "progressive" nanny state nonsense.
2
The thing is to keep companies telling mothers breast feeding is not good enougj when the issue in developing countries is little or no access to clean water to mix formula or clean bottles and nipples. Parents sometimes dilute formula to stretch it, thereby malnourishing their infant. Diarrheal diseases kill more infants in the developing world than anything else. Breast feeding is cheaper and healthier for the baby and the mom.
Formula can make sense in a country with clean water, modern health care and families able to afford it, but this is exactly what is lacking in the developing world.
360
40 years of research suggests otherwise. Mothers should be educated so that they can make wise decisions.
Trump is propping up industry profits to the detriment of developing countries.
18
Right, yeah, didn't the stupid nanny state destroy the Tobacco industry, with stupid nonsense about cancer and lung disease. Let everyone take their own chances and keep science away from the masses; it causes anti-trumphitleritis.
27
It's obscene. This country is ill.
582
Yes, this country is ill, but not necessarily because of Trump -- at least not in this case. This is what unchecked capitalism does to people's morality. Capitalism places profits above human life. Most Americans are not aware of what big U.S. corporations have been doing in less developed countries over the decades....
2
And we enable Russia to be the hero. After blasting the small country who first introduced the proposal with threats of tariffs and withdrawal of military support there was not a peep when Russia picked up the standard and championed breastfeeding. We have become utterly despicable.
2
Where in the proposed WHO resolution was there any statement about denying women baby formula or any statement? The baby formula industry's aggressive opposition to breast-feeding is outrageous and needs to be nip-pled in the bud.
44
Jay, the resolution talked about the formula business lying to their customers, saying the lying should be discouraged.
In my view the business(wo)men that lie to their customers should be prosecuted. And their bonuses rescinded and given to the poor.
8
It scares Trump because he's afraid too many future GOP voters will have their thinking abilities damaged by too much silicone in their diets. JK...
Breasts are to be ogled, pinched and played with like toys.
Nobody goes to see David Cop-A-Meal.
5
There is no possible bottom to the disgust that the Trump administration generates.
169
I find this incident one of the lowest of lows and a big red flag that Trump is dangerous and out of control! We need to get rid of him asap. This behavior is a perfect example of one that wd represent the 25th Amendment.
I also hate the Republicans who refuse to acknowledge the danger and disruption they have brought to my country by voting for Trump.
64
Republicans have been going downhill for over 30 years. My Dad, a lifelong republican, sat me down & told me to 1. Never register with a party (particularly the republicans) 2. Never vote a straight ticket (some will be crooks) 3. Do my own research into all candidates (easier since personal computers, believe me). He said he had a bad feeling about the Republican Party, but, couldn’t place a finger on what was going on. WE now KNOW. He said the dems weren’t great either, but, republicans wanted to rule, not govern, which is unAmerican. He was right. Time to ban all political parties. Make everyone run without help & a very small amount of government money, no donations, no using own money. No private funds from people (on any side) like the Koch’s. One term of 2 years for ANY elected office, at minimum wage, audited constantly.
3
Today I am soooo ashamed of being an American.
It is disgusting that these policies are promoted and defended by a guy who says he wants to make America great again.
175
Make money for large corporations - kill third world babies - what’s not to like? This is trump - our president!
19
The Reagan administration also worked against breast feeding vs formula. https://www.nytimes.com/1981/12/06/magazine/the-controversy-over-infant-...
Weird
14
Trump is "scared" of breastfeeding because he has a pathological relationship with all bodily fluids and "disgusting" dirty things like insects and children.
He is a very sick man enabled by those closest to him and the GOP writ large.
End of story.
394
Sorry. I think Trump is all about money. If there were a corporation that manufactured and profited from breast milk and donated to his political campaign, he would be pushing it.
2
YES! Thank you for pointing this out. Trump called a lawyer "disgusting" because she had to take a break from a deposition in order to pump milk. He said things on the Howard Stern show that made it very clear that women's bodily fluids were very offensive to him. Then, there's the remark about Megan Kelly. He is so deeply flawed as a human being that there are not enough words to fully describe his pathology. That the Republicans are fully on board with this hideous man makes me want to weep or scream or both. What have we come to, as a people and as a country?
5
Sadly, he also talked about the desirability of his daughter Ivanka getting breast implants and married three plastic surgery-enhanced trophy wives.
1
The Trump administration is an inhuman abomination. They blatantly put corporate profits ahead of the environment, ahead of the health of poor people and of little babies.
The entire Trump cabinet is stuffed with despicable, corrupt crony capitalists and former lobbyists that have given a new dictionary definition to the phrase “conflict of interest”.
I am beyond disgusted. In November, any ethical, decent and yes, also any Christian person has a moral duty to vote these monsters out of office. We are watching you, fake-Christian holier-than-though Evangelical hypocrites!
644
Yes indeed! But please: you don't have to be Christian to be beyond disgusted.
5
Another example of the contempt the Trump Administration has for children.
29
Come on, it’s simple. As all Donald and the boys have to do is blame it on Obama’s, fake News, global warming. Then tie it into freedom of speech and freedom of religion and the GOP women will believe it. But you need to make sure the Fox talking mouthpieces are on board!
10
Yet one more example of how Trump puts profits above people, and lets corporations take what they can from the American people, the environment and their health and well-being be damned.
Trump may not be the only president interested in promoting the chemical and biochemical industries around the world, but he is unique in doing it with fear of US power behind him.
He may see himself as a tough guy, but he picks his fights carefully. Like with children who cannot fight back.
39
Profits before people? There are only profits. And family. If its not profit or family than it doesn't matter.
1
The opposition to promotion of democracy in breast feeding by Don the Cons regime.....is only a momentary setback for the 1% corporocrats supporting Trump.
They have privately instructed him......that,in this trade policy, on breast milk competition,..........its taking his instructions on "trickle down economics".........too far !
3
Why shouldn't people all around the world suffer more, get sicker, and die faster if it helps the owners and investors of American companies? All the rest of Americans do.
14
And here we see the moral bankruptcy of the so-called "pro-life" movement. They would sacrifice the lives of millions of children in developing countries to corporate profits even as they embrace the politically divisive politics of opposition to abortion.
599
This morning I decided to refer to the "pro-life" movement as the forced-birth movement. That is what they call for. They have no interest in life which would include:
- Healthcare
- Safe water
- Safe air
- Nutrition
- Education
- Living wages
- Family friendly laws
These are the same people who claim "welfare mothers pop them out to collect more welfare" and yet want to deny contraception and abortion services.
17
Very well noted.
The suggestion that they would have any true ethical objection to abortion in light of everything else they do is laughable.
6
This is the crux of the matter. Without the "pro-life" electorate, there would be no Trump in the White House. Conversely, without Trump in the White House, there would not be such hare-brained "pro-life" policies and their potentially devastating consequences for billions of people - not just for Americans, who still can mitigate them or reverse them when this bad dream of a presidency is over.
This is the debate that should be raging now: the Trump administration cannot just invoke the presumed legitimacy conferred by elections, it has to present documented evidence of the benefit such policies would provide for Americans and human beings in general.
1
Trump apparently believes that women's breasts are only intended for display or use by overgrown male children, not the infants that Nature's God created them to nurture.
I would also point out that Trump, to his infinite shame, allowed his country to appear a bully vis-a-vis the developing world in this matter, and for his Russian patron, Putin, to appear a hero - as it was Russia's intervention that eventually broke the US-created log jam.
If this guy is not a deliberate tool of Russia, then he's the next best thing - a useful idiot.
440
Those seeking to hawk formula to developing countries would be well advised to review the disastrous example set by the Nestle Company in the 1970s. After putting the health and safety of countless babies and children at risk, activists organized a multi-year international boycott of Nestle.
Aside from the scientific superiority -- and affordability -- of breast milk, another reason that hawking formula is a recipe to disaster is that, in many developing countries the safety of tap water -- something Americans take for granted -- is inconsistent at best. Feeding infants a mixture of unsafe water and baby formula will -- as it did in the 1970s -- threaten the safety of countless babies and children.
28
Something Americans take for granted? Do you mean like those Americans that live in Flint?
Of the 27 richest nations, the US has the highest rate of infant mortality. Higher than Cuba.
Why is this? Do you think that formula is a factor?
10
"Both the Obama and Clinton administrations also sought to keep drug prices high in low-income countries — the former, by preventing generic markets in India and elsewhere, and the latter by supporting policies that kept the prices of H.I.V. medications much higher than they needed to be."
There are times when I feel as though I am the most naive person. I was ashamed that America under any president could behave so cruelly as in the breastfeeding matter but now I realize this was not a singular occurrence. We now need to look at ourselves anew in relation to our regard or lack of regard for others, and that will take considerable introspection and effort.
16
As a physician, a mom, and a grand mom, I applaud the NY times. First because of the photo. It is past due to allow women to breastfeed in public and to accept that it is natural and that showing the breast during the feeding is not an offense.
But also, and most importantly, because breastfeeding saves lives. True, mostly so in poorer countries. But we do have our share of poverty in the US, and we also have many who are allowed to not vaccinate their children. At least they get some antibodies through the milk.
Regarding the concept that women who choose not to breastfeed are stigmatized I agree it is wrong.
Yet, I feel women should be encouraged and explained the benefits for her, such as weight loss and contraction of the womb after delivery, and for her child.
If women are more comfortable breastfeeding in public and they are educated on the benefits, short and long term, more women will choose to do it.
For those that cannot or will not do it, there is a place for formula, but it should not be corporation vs health.
The biggest beneficiaries will be the children.
246
As an NNP/NICU/OB nurse since the 80s, I'd add that there needs to be much better education and support for breastfeeding for average women in the US. We need to talk about the challenges honestly so they know that it doesn't mean it isn't or won't work but that it's a normal part and does get better. Heck, I'd been helping women breastfeed - quite successfully - for 15 years when I had my own and was surprised that it wasn't just a piece of cake since I knew what to do. And that every woman worries that she isn't making enough milk.
10
Business interests have always played a part in foreign policy and affairs, but baby formula and threatening Ecuador with trade measures and military aid for introducing this to the WHO? Has it really gotten down to this level? I guess the US needs to punish any country (except Russia, of course) it finds threatening to our perceived economic well being. Is this what will make America great again?
26
In our zeal to shame the Trump Administration for another outrage, let's not overstate the value of breastmilk. Yes, it is best, yet it is a wonderfood. But as the mother of preemies who needed formula from day one, it would behoove us to not inadvertently shame women who can't or choose not to breastfeed. All the politics and business interests aside, formula-fed children are also healthy, bright, above-average, etc. As our pediatrician tells his mamas, the most important thing is that babies are fed.
(and I feel the need to add, I also breastfed my first child, so I have seen this from many angles. because I'm sure some will of course question WHY the preemies needed formula - because I was confined to a bed and nearly unconscious from complications from childbirth, and my body did not produce milk for quite some time. At 3 months, it dried up completely, despite teas, Guinness, constant pumping, etc.)
10
I don’t think this article is shaming women who do not breastfeed in any way. Formula needs to be available for those who need it. My second child had such a poor suck that I had to give up breastfeeding at 4 months due to terrible, recurring mastitis. Thank goodness for formula! That being said, it has been proven that breastfeeding is healthier for babies, and the point of the campaign is just to get that word out. In my community, many women don’t breast feed because they think it’s “gross.” We need to change that by encouraging it, just like we encourage stopping smoking for pregnant women.
258
I find this strange. As a neonatal nurse I am surprised to hear that any NICU is not using donated breast milk. As a young nurse 35 years ago I witnessed the beginning of using breast milk and the enormous health benefits to the infants. I haven't worked in the field for 10 years but find it hard to believe that it wasn't offered to your infants. And or course it is every parents choice to not used donated milk. Just as it is every parents choice to not breast feed.
10
Of course we should not shame mothers who choose to bottle feed their infants. The difficulty with formula is that, unlike breast milk, it contains no disease-fighting white cells or antibodies. These factors are especially important in developing countries.
In developing countries, advertisements lead poor mothers to believe that using formula is "modern" and "best" for their babies. Of course, they have to pay for formula. And poor mothers often dilute formula with water which is unsafe and which causes diarrhea (and possibly death) in their infants. Storage of formula is also problematic--lack of refrigeration leads to bacterial growth in formula bottles.
Breast milk is best: it's fresh, it fights diseases, and it's free.
17
Just offering that there is little evidence that the formula manufacturers directly put their thumb on these scales.
What there is circumstantial evidence of is that that the US openly bullied a developing country over a no-brainer public health measure and Russia was able to step in and champion this reasonable public health declaration very resonant in so may countries around the world.
Were my goal to tar the image of the united states and curry favor with the developing world in a hearts and minds campaign, this is a surprisingly effective psy-ops effort.
I wonder what new orders will be offered DT at his upcoming check-in with his handler.
129
@sb: "Just offering that there is little evidence that the formula manufacturers directly put their thumb on these scales."
Abbott Laboratories were large Trump contributors.
Abbott Laboratories are one of the largest infant formula manufacturers.
Any connection?
8
Wonderful. Russia takes the moral high ground while my country panders to the wealthy at the expense of the health of young in other countries,
We should have been the strong advocate for this initiative.
469
Russian religion and culture idealizes motherhood. It's possible that Putin could be as disgusted now with Trump as we are.
3
Maybe all this time Russia as the USSR was containing us, not vice versa. Maybe we are actually the baddies. Maybe Putin is not a ghoul or whatever else he is described as in the Times, but the malignant monster is us, kneeling to our Thug ruling class. Consider this.
1
I understand the WHO guidelines concerning breastfeeding in under developed countries, but I wonder about how the article presents breast feeding as a whole when so many who are bottle fed grow into such healthy adults when done correctly (if I remember correctly, the WHO specifically cited preparation as a major obstacle to cleanliness as access to clean water and a sterile cooking environment is crucial for bottle feeding). While I’m not one to side with big corporations, I also have talked to my mother often about her choice not to breastfeed me, and she often talks about the heavy stigma she faced in her choice. Is this not yet another tempt to try to shame and regulate the female body, when really, woman should be allowed to do what they’re comfortable with?
9
Seriously? Another male (surprise) attempt at constructing moral parity between the mother's "comfort" and evidence-based policy which literally spells the difference between life and death for hundreds of thousands of infants per annum? Talk about a cherry picking cherries: That many American infants in privileged families get by just fine on formula, given that they have every other advantage in growing up in the richest nation in the world, says nothing about the odds against the hundreds of millions of infants world-wide being raised in poverty. For that matter, in this nation of such disparate socioeconomic conditions, looking at outcomes for infants raised in inner-city slums and rural isolation would turn your argument upside down.
Here's a thought: Maybe you'd have more success if you presented yourself as a case study advancing the notion that lack of breast-feeding promotes a paucity of empathy in later life, crocodile tears notwithstanding.
172
You have a strange definition of "healthy" given our obesity & diabetes rates. Babies who are not breastfed also suffer more ear infections & other quality of life issues, and the babies as well as their mothers are at an increased lifelong risk of several cancers from the lack of breastfeeding. These are not "developing country" issues. These are the reasons that so many well-off families who cannot breastfeed (for various reasons from physiological incapability on the part of the parents to adoption & other reasons) are increasingly seeking out human milk sharing arrangements if they have the access to those. Human milk from another woman fed to the baby comes above artificial baby milks (aka formula) in the WHO priority heirarchy. Top priority for YEARS has been breastfeeding from the child's mother or being fed own mother's pumped milk. Additionally, even in relatively wealthy areas, breastfeeding isn't dependant on electricity for safe storage & sanitation. Babies in the US suffer and die because of not being breastfed when things like hurricanes take out the power grid. A breastfed baby who loses access to mother (through injury, death, etc) has more sustaining options such as finding another lactating woman who is willing to breastfeed the baby than a baby who has been formula fed and so does not know how to breastfeed, making that baby dependant on refrigeration & sanitation for adequate nutrition.
22
You are missing many points.
To breast feed or bottle feed is the mother's choice and she should decide this based on her own decisions.
Not every mother can successfully breast fed and formulas are important as full or partial supplements for newborns and babies.
There is abundant scientific evidence that there are additional benefits from breast milk over formula. The differences are know and breast feeding, where possible and chosen. is preferable.
How old are you -- breast feeding is not a "stigma" for most woman today and is supported in the workplace by many companies. Your mother's situation may not prevail today.
33
"Both the Obama and Clinton administrations also sought to keep drug prices high in low-income countries — the former, by preventing generic markets in India and elsewhere, and the latter by supporting policies that kept the prices of H.I.V. medications much higher than they needed to be."
I am aware this is a single, isolated, personal experience and nothing more; but a number of years ago my pharmacy, without notifying me, switched the generic drug I was taking for heart palpitations to another generic made in India. I experienced increased palpitations and general malaise until I investigated and discovered the switch that had been made. On researching I found that this generic from India was making people experience elevated rates of palpitations rather than decreasing them. I had my work cut out for me to get the pharmacy to go back to the previous generic I had been taking.
Low cost versions of medication are not always equal.
51
That's more often true for certain classes of meds, and cardiac meds are possibly the prime (and most safety-critical) example. Even if the active ingredients and dosage are identical, physical characteristics of the pill can matter: rates of dissolution, absorption and distribution affect when and where the drug enters the bloodstream, and ultimately the timing, duration and height of peak blood levels.
My own "single, isolated, personal experience" came several years ago with anti-asthma inhalers. My prescription, filled from a batch of this brand-name med, made and sold in the USA, resulted in 3 canisters completely free of active ingredient! A subsequent recall notice explained that they had been cleaned and rinsed after manufacture, but the sterile rinse water had been left inside, without the addition of the active ingredient. In this age of globalization, I take the word "foreign" with a grain of salt, since some or all of the ingredients could be made or sourced from, well, anywhere.
2
Which companies are behind this lobbying effort? Public shaming is in order!
746
Public shaming and boycotts!
13
Abbott Laboratories and Nestle are the primary manufacturers and promoters of infant formula.
10
Yes, and please name these “representatives “ who are doing the bullying. They need to know that we are watching them.
5
Most countries have banned the advertising of baby formulas or giving mothers samples in the hospital. Of course not the US. Now we also find out that our country is strong-arming other countries to deter them from encouraging breastfeeding as the best way to feed a newborn. In Africa, where there is a lack of clean water, formula meant to be mixed could be a death sentence.
Trump, the self-proclaimed great businessman thinks that threatening other countries with sanctions if they don't agree is just fine. That goes with the tariffs he has slapped on certain products without understanding the true cost to our country. Of course, his daughter's "never made in America" products are exempt. Our country has become a disgrace.
556
Doesn't this seem like a perfect opportunity for our First Lady to speak up? It's ready-made for positive publicity, but the Trumps are striking out, like always.
Imagine Michelle Obama's reaction.
207
As usual for the editorial board of the NY Times everything has to be about Donald Trump. I have seen no statement from Trump that he is scared about breast-feeding or recommends against breast-feeding. Trump administration not supporting a resolution is not the whole story.
There is plenty of scientific evidence that breast feeding by a healthy mother who has not been a drug addict or a carrier of infectious diseases like HIV, HCV, HBV is best for the new born and also for the mother. Research has shown that mothers who breast fed their off springs have a lesser chance of breast cancer in later life.
But there could be times when breast milk could be tainted and breast milk from biological mother may not be advisable. Also in some cases a combination of breast milk and formula milk may work optimally for the new born.
I recently ran into a colleague, a highly respected pediatric infectious disease specialist after a long time. I asked him what which infectious diseases he sees the most nowadays. His response shocked me.
He said HCV. He was not saying that because we had done collaborative research in the 1990s on HCV and I had since moved on to research on Alzheimer's Disease and CNS injury as well as broad spectrum antivirals.
Until recently, I was unaware that HCV has reemerged ferociously among babies due to the adult opioid crisis of which Kentucky and other states are an epicenter even though transmission from mother to child was considered ineffective.
1
The issue of an American mother's milk being tainted is completely different from aggressively marketing baby milk substitute to third world countries under the false premise that it combats malnutrition.
26
JBK007. Marketing baby milk substitute may seem like an unethical practice but there is a need for balanced nutrition for the baby whether it comes from biological mother's breast milk or donor breast milk or baby milk substitute. If one cares about baby's health then open has to be aware that not all mother's milk is infection free, drug free and providing all the nutrient in the right proportion. As I have said in my earlier post there are distinct advantages from breast feeding and should always be preferred to baby milk substitute but there could be distinct disadvantages when the mother has an infection which could be transmitted to the baby or the mother herself is not receiving balanced nutrition or if the mother is on drugs of any kind. One has to be open minded and weigh the pros and cons before shooting off bias and prejudice.
1
What is wrong with presenting all options and letting mothers choose what is best for them? Oh that's right poor women in underdeveloped nations are not smart enough to know how best to feed their infants. Never mind that they have been raising children for thousands of years without the superior Western intellect. So here is a news flash, not every mother infant pair can breast feed for either medical or physical reasons.
I do not have a problem saying breast feeding should be the 1st choice, but women need to know all the options and be free to choose the one that is best for them.
19
Most women know the options. We actually do discuss this matter amongst ourselves, you know. Promoting breast feeding simply encourages women to make the most natural (and most cost-effective) choice, knowing that it is also a best-case scenario for their child. If they cannot breast feed, then they will turn to formula. The US’ position, as usual these days, puts corporate profits and desire for same above all else.
Right, they've been raising children for thousands of years without formula and without Western capitalism.
You're missing an important point: women in underdeveloped nations may not have access to reliably safe water to mix with powdered formula. Similac is available in powdered form and premixed. The premixed ready to go bottles are quite expensive. Ask any parents who have paid for formula for their children. In addition, it is possible--again because of the cost--that mothers may add more water to the bottle to try to "extend" the formula. Nutrition suffers.
Mothers have been "raising children for thousands of years" without Western companies marketing formula to them. They have been breastfeeding.
"It’s tempting to call this approach to public health Trumpian, simply because it has all the key hallmarks: an obvious bow to rich and powerful companies, disregard for the needs of people who are poor or sick or both and zero attention to potential long-term consequences. But, while they might not have gone so far when it comes to baby formula, previous administrations are just as guilty as the current one when it comes to drugs."
Let's call it by what it is: capitalism. Individuals seeking their own financial self interest. And the purveyors of this ideology have convinced many of a magical and mysterious hidden hand that will somehow lead to a common good. Who could buy into such a theory: that the sum of greedy self interest will be goodness. Next thing will be some group will advocate burning heretics at the stake in order to bring universal love to the world. After all, if selfishness can be the road to the common good, then cruelty must be the road to universal love.
Mr. Obama and Mr. Clinton were dedicated capitalists every bit as much as are the members of this crew of Mr. Trump, and capitalism peddles the nonsense that greed is the hidden-hand's path to goodness. Of course babies are of less importance than are profits.
31