UNICEF/WHO Statement on Tainted Baby Formula

In the face of the tainted baby formula scandal in China, the World Health Organization (WHO)'s and UNICEF's joint statement unequivocally states the benefits and necessity of breastmilk and breastfeeding.

The joint WHO/UNICEF statement reiterates that "Global health authorities agree that breastmilk is unquestionably better for infant feeding than any infant formula." Furthermore, the statement reminds us that, "ideally, all infants should be fed exclusively with breastmilk for the first six months of life."

Organizations such as the WHO and UNICEF tirelessly repeat this mantra with sound research and statistics and yet, the numbers are still not at the recommended levels [reference]. That a disaster of such devastating proportions should be the catalyst for renewed media and popular interest into the reasons for the decline in Chinese mothers choosing to breastfeed is saddening.

UNICEF's Childinfo, whose mandate is to monitor the situation of children and women, states the following with respect to breastfeeding rates in developing countries:

Current breastfeeding patterns, while improving significantly over the past 10 years, are still far from the recommended levels. Only 38 per cent of all infants born in the developing world are exclusively breastfed for the first six months of life, and less than 60 per cent receive complementary foods when they should. Although global levels of continued breastfeeding are relatively high at one year of age (76 per cent), less than half of infants are still breastfeeding at two years of age (40 per cent). [quote]

An examination of the numbers in China as reported in the International Breastfeeding Journal's 2006, 1:22 issue conclude that breastfeeding rates at one month fell significantly in 2003-2004, when compared to 1994-1996. Furthermore, the national targets for both study periods were not met. [source]

I am in the middle of reading quite a large number of articles and research reports about breastfeeding rates in China and will likely include additional posts on this particular topic. As you can imagine, there is currently a lot of media coverage about the rates of formula use in China and, increasingly, analysis about the reasons for the ongoing drop in infant breastfeeding rates. In the meantime, I felt it was important to share the WHO/UNICEF statement.

Advocacy 101

So, how exactly does one effectively advocate for change?

I work in the non-profit, non-governmental sector where attitudinal change is a significant part of our work. However, many of us run into a familiar and incredibly frustrating predicament of thinking: If only the larger community knew the facts and statistics, they would be shocked and therefore moved to do something about it!

Yeah, it doesn't work that way unless, apparently, you're Oprah. The rest of us just manage to alienate and bore people by quoting research and stats. Doesn't matter if it's about homelessness, economic policies, or breastfeeding.

For example, convincing people about the merits of a safe injection site by quoting the numerous researchers who have proven its harm reduction efficacy is a huge uphill battle. While in Surrey, BC for an economic development conference, former NYC mayor, Rudy Giuliani called Insite, North America's first and only supervised safe injection site a "terrible mistake".

“You should not encourage the use of drugs, that's a terrible mistake,” Mr. Giuliani said. “It's just going to make your drug problem much worse.” [quote] This, of course, is an overly simplified analysis of a safe injection site, but compelling to anyone who does not have a more thorough understanding of just how desperate the levels of addiction and the spread of infectious diseases are in Vancouver's Downtown Eastside.

If you try to convince someone that breastfeeding and extended breastfeeding is the safest, healthiest choice for a baby by quoting respected, non-partisan organizations such as the World Health Organization (WHO), UNICEF or the Centers for Disease Control, you run the risk of being told (as I was) the following head-shaking fallacies. I have to remind you that these are all true arguments that have been made to me against breastfeeding.

Head-Shaker #1:
The WHO promotes breastfeeding simply to avoid having "third world" countries up in arms. That particular argument left me wondering what bargaining chips some of the poorest women in the poorest countries in the world actually had. How exactly would they be up in arms?

Head-Shaker #2:
Breastfeeding proponents are nothing more than propaganda machines, "granola crazies" and "boob-nazis". You know, I always thought those UNICEF people were shady. ;)

Head-Shaker #3:
The rise of anaphylactic allergies in children and the rise in breastfeeding since the '70s are causally linked.

Head-Shaker #4:
Allergies, ADHD, chronic ear infections, and, early breast development in 6-year old girls are all exclusively attributable to breastfeeding.

Wow, eh?

In the face of compelling evidence about breastfeeding from countless reliable sources - whose primary role and areas of expertise are the health of children and preventive societal health, I must add - I simply can not understand how one can still argue that breastmilk is bad for infants. It is truly mind-boggling...not to mention upsetting.

I spend a considerable amount of time carefully (and belligerently) outlining facts and stats that are evidence-based and peer-reviewed only to get crazy in response. So, what's the point?? All I've managed to do is get pissed off and seriously discouraged at the level of misinformation and ignorance out there.

So, any suggestions on effective advocacy...that actually works? ;)

What is the Breastfeeding Chronicles?

Well, well, well....my very first post on my very first blog.

I'll start by telling you what prompted me to jump into the blogging world. It's actually the apparently contentious issue of breastfeeding and the slogan, "Breast is Best" that landed me here. When news of the tainted Chinese baby formula first broke, I included the "Breast is Best" slogan in a Facebook status update and was surprised to soon find myself in an incredibly heated e-argument with a friend of over 20 years. What were we arguing about?

Breastfeeding versus formula feeding.

I was accused of calling formula "poison". I was also accused of being insensitive to women who are unable to breastfeed. And, finally, I was told that formula was actually safer than breastmilk. With unreferenced quotes and stats and "facts" flying about, we shot barbs back and forth. Of course, I thought I was quite eloquent and unemotional in my argument...heh heh. But our discussion quickly devolved and soon became quite a symbolic indicator of the fact that the stigma and misinformation surrounding breastfeeding is still living large. That the conversation devolved so quickly also reminds me just how personal and emotional this topic can be.

Now that I'm a mother - a breastfeeding mother - I seem to have become a rather staunch supporter of breastfeeding and extended breastfeeding. In trying to come to terms with the fact that my relationship with said friend could very well be over, I am committed to (re)learning how to advocate for breastfeeding in a supportive, respectful, and informed manner.

So, here I am!

Welcome to the Breastfeeding Chronicles. I hope you find something that resonates for you!

Peace,
Blakpurl