I mean, have not the US paediatricians come out as far back as ten years ago stating that breast feeding is the preferred method up to twelve months (iirc)?

At least, which is exactly the point of the argument that accepting sponsor funding from these manufacturers creates a conflict of interest.

Which shows how inconsistent I am because my ears grate whenever I hear tennis commentators talking about Kosnetsover and Sharapover. *shrug*

However, to your piece.

I don’t particularly approve or disapprove of them, however, I was serious in saying that I think their association with the paediatricians is probably an anachronism that really is not much use to them any more in marketing terms. I mean, have not the US paediatricians come out as far back as ten years ago stating that breast feeding is the preferred method up to twelve months (iirc)?

What do the supermarket aisles argue?

The WHO in the Philippines estimates that 16,000 babies die every year because they are not adequately breastfed, with the marketing activities of companies like Wyeth, Abbott, and Mead Johnson contribute to this extreme level of infant mortality.

Bottle-fed babies and those fed foods other than breast milk make up 90% of those that die under the age of six months.

Are so many people here really unaware that there has been a Boycott Nestlé movement for decades now? Not that the International Code is foolproof. There’s a reason that the Boycott Nestlé movement is still active.

SotBO*: yes, there are cases where artificial feeding is truly necessary for infants, and it’s good that there are products which can provide this nutrition when the mother (or a wetnurse or a donor milkbank) is unable to do so.

*SotBo = Statement of the Bleeding Obvious

Best for them to rev up their advertising in the open market as does the Mighty M.

For the infant formula makers getting rid of the paediatrician nexus ‘is the proper thing to do’.

Not that I particularly want to be bombarded by ads for NAN over my evening steak and chips, I hasten to add – perhaps I should cheer their present restraint.

Nothing conspiratorial about it – just a great post.

I’m sure I just heard one of your staffers talking indignantly to a journalist about how someone on the internet is misinforming the electorate about him ceasing and desisting from using his parliamentary printing and stationery allowance to assist corrupt right-wing tickets in student union elections!

How dare that person on the internet misinform the electorate about Joe ceasing and desisting from such things!

Although I don’t post as much at LP as I once did, this level of disapproval of one of my posts is mild, so I’m just fine about this one. Nevertheless, your encouragement is most appreciated. Thank you.

Apologies for not understanding snark.