I don't know enough about the subject to know whether the author of this post (who is much more politically connected than I) is correct, but at least he lays out more facts about what happened.
Most of the articles I'd previously read had one sentence of facts and the remainder was outrage. The outrage may be deserved, but one sentence of facts doesn't justify it.
Agenda item 12.6 :
Maternal, infant and young child nutrition
Safeguarding against possible conflicts of interest in nutrition programmes
Draft approach for the prevention and management of conflicts of interest in the policy development and implementation of nutrition programmes at country level
Here are the resolutions:
I mean I hate to sound judgmental, but
"that fewer than one in five infants are breastfed for 12 months in high-income
I've tried to encourage people to breastfeed, it isn't well received though.
"Acknowledging that achievement of the WHO global target to increase to at least 50% the
proportion of infants under 6 months of age who are exclusively breastfed by 2025 requires sustainable and adequate technical and financial resources, and supportive and protective policy and
regulatory interventions as well as political will, and that this needs to be part of broader efforts to
strengthen health systems;"
Yah, definitely an attack on the "formula" industry, along with the conflict of interest verbiage, but the mothers I've talked to don't care or can't breastfeed anyway, get mad at them? We are gonna start telling women what to do with their bodies now?!?
I mean I get it, the benefits are very real to the kid, just wondering what politician has the cajones to tell women to start breastfeeding more.
But when you think about it, what you give to the baby is pretty much a private thing. The main people who can "stigmatize" you will be your family, and they can do so for a variety of reasons, not just breastfeeding. I can't imagine a stranger on a street telling a woman she should breastfeed instead of giving the baby a bottle (which may contain her own milk btw). I can't imagine a husband telling such things to his wife. But the mother's mother, or mother-in-law - they could easily say so. So it essentially boils down to whether your family is supportive or not. Preventing Nestle from spreading misinformation is a completely different thing.
You would be surprised at how many people suddenly have an opinion when you have a baby.
Basically, they say that this code is not a law so they don't follow it, but they have a different code, an internal one, and they stick to it.