Nestle Still Kills Babies: An Examination of the Formula Industry and its Impact on the World from 1974 to Today

INTRO/BACKGROUND

In the 1974 War on Want (a British civil rights group) report evocatively titled The Baby Killer, author Mike Muller revealed the truth of the effect Nestle’s baby formula was having on babies in LDCs (less developed countries), the formula was potentially fatal, leads into a cycle of malnutrition and disease, and leaves those babies physically and intellectually disabled for life. The formula was able to gain widespread popularity in these LDCs through underhanded marketing efforts that cost the lives of several hundred thousand children.

The marketing methods Nestle (and other companies) used to promote their baby food were underhanded, horrible, and incredibly effective. There was a sharpened, aggressive multi-pronged strategy that skewered so many mothers who only wanted the best for their babies.

Method 1

Arguably, the first domino in the line was not one that was set into motion by Nestle, but rather one they capitalized upon and chose to wield as a sword. Urbanization and Westernization were (and in many ways- still are) seen as the gold standard of being. Colonial and missionary efforts have been made for centuries to reshape the countries they invaded, strip them of their ‘backward practices’ and culture, and convert them to a more ‘enlightened’ and ‘civilized’ way of being. A Western way of being. As The Baby Killer (1974) puts it, “but the alluring bright city lights which hold so much promise are merely advertising hoardings and neon signs. In the cultural maelstrom of the new city where traditional cultures face up to the cut-throat materialism of the “modern” way of life, new attitudes are easily moulded even by this crude commercialism.”

Nestle and the formula industry used these attitudes to their benefit and actively and intentionally cultivated the image that benefitted them the most. Massive disinformation and propaganda efforts were made to portray breastfeeding as antiquated and poor. Obviously, the best option was infant formula, and those who didn’t use it were shamed. Formula was seen as a status symbol and an indicator that one had embraced the enlightened Western way. Women were willing to spend to make sure their babies had the best available. Unfortunately, the actual best available was something they already had, and for free. 

In a perfect bubble, infant formula is actually a totally fine substitute for those who cannot produce milk for their children, so the question is: why was it so bad in these circumstances?

The living conditions in many of these LDCs are much lower than those in MDCs (more developed countries). Many do not have access to clean water, which is imperative in the preparation of powdered formula. As one Reddit user put it in their post [1970-?] Nestle’s Infant Formula Scandal on the r/actualconspiracies subreddit “Breast milk is safe, having been processed by the mother (often containing helpful antibodies to promote immunity). Formula is as dirty as the water it's made with.” It was not the formula itself that was specifically bad for the infants, but the water it was made of (Krasny, n.d.). Due to the low literacy rates in these LDCs, a lack of adequate product information, and/or the labels being printed in English or removed altogether to prevent reselling, these mothers were not aware of the necessary sanitation methods that are needed to properly prepare the bottles for their babies. An issue that is notably not present with breast milk, “Breast milk is the original convenience food. No mixing, warming, or sterilizing needed; no dirty pots and bottles to wash up afterward; always on tap from its specially designed unbreakable containers,” (Muller, 1974). Even if the women are made aware of the directions, they may not even have access to clean water or the capability to sterilize it themselves. 

Method 2

How kind and generous of this 55 billion dollar industry to provide a free supply of formula to the maternity wards in the hospitals of these LDCs. If only they knew in advance that a mother’s body only produces milk as needed, and stops producing if there is no feeding occurring. If only they knew in advance that by giving a free supply of formula to these parents, telling them to try it for a few days would cause the mother’s body to stop producing, meaning that they would be entirely dependent on formula for the next six months to two years. If only they knew that breastfeeding could cause women to not menstruate for up to two years after having a baby, an effective form of natural birth control, meaning that there might be more babies and more demand for formula in a perpetual cycle. (Muller, 1974) Only, this information not only was known but was intentionally obscured (Wattana, 2016).

Method 3

These women were not stupid, they were intentionally and strategically misled in so many ways, that it would be very difficult in their circumstances to avoid any of the potential pitfalls. Another way they were misled was by the hospital doctors who were sent tons of free samples, as well as free merchandise such as branded pens and notepads the doctors would use (Kritz, 2022). This would give the impression the doctors were promoting the product even if they weren’t. This was another distribution channel for Nestle, one that capitalized on the trust these women felt for their medical professionals. What a great trade for Nestle, a steady stream of free supplies to the hospitals, including discharge packs for new mothers, equipment, literature and other services for access to the consumer as soon as they are out of the womb (Anttila-Hughes et, al. 2023). In what is probably the most vulnerable moment in any mother and baby's life, they are ripe to be preyed upon.

Method 4

In this author’s opinion, method 4 is the creepiest of all. According to The Baby Killer (1974), saleswomen dressed as nurses infiltrated these hospitals. Making nice with the staff, giving formula to the mothers, and offering even more wonderful services as “milk nurses.” Women would come into the mother’s houses to ‘help’ giving advice and education to these mothers. They painted a picture of breastfeeding being more hassle than it was worth, with supplementary food sources needed in order to make sure their baby was healthy. Fear not though, infant formula was the perfect answer to these problems. It could be started from birth and would avoid all those messy issues breastfeeding causes. As mentioned previously, infant formula isn’t bad in a vacuum, if one can afford it. Unfortunately in a lot of these LDCs, these mothers cannot do so, but still want the ‘best’ and have no other options if they have stopped producing themselves (Anttila-Hughes et, al. 2023). This means that mothers stretch the formula as far as it will last, meaning the babies are not actually getting enough formula from their diluted solutions.

Method 5

Beginning in around the 1970s, though it was (likely intentionally) difficult to find information, the formula industry began to lobby against paid maternity leave (Fortune). Duration of maternity leave is directly correlated to breastfeeding rates (see graph, KellyMom, 2023). These lobbies aren’t afraid to get aggressive either if they feel their bottom line is threatened. From Propublica (Vogell, 2024a), “Thai health experts tried to stop aggressive advertising for all formula — including that made for toddlers. Officials feared company promotions could mislead parents and even persuade mothers to forgo breastfeeding, depriving their children of the vital health benefits that come with it. At the time, Thailand’s breastfeeding rate was already among the lowest in the world. But the $55+ billion formula industry fought back, enlisting the help of a rich and powerful ally: the United States government. Over 15 months, U.S. trade officials worked closely with formula makers to wage a diplomatic and political pressure campaign to weaken Thailand’s proposed ban on formula marketing, a ProPublica investigation found.” 

If that paragraph isn’t bone-chilling enough in and of itself, there are two points I want to hone in on. The first is the mention of toddler formula.

Method 6

Toddler formula, something legally distinct and different from infant formula, is marketed to children between the ages of one and three. It is also called toddler milk, follow-up formula, transition formula, weaning formula, or growing-up milk (Vogell, 2024b). It’s an industry worth 20 billion, and it’s completely unnecessary. From the American Academy of Pediatricians, “Products that are advertised as ‘follow-up formulas,’ ‘weaning formulas’ or ‘toddler milks and formulas’ are misleadingly promoted as a necessary part of a healthy child’s diet,” said Dr. George Fuchs III, a lead author of the study. The drinks are worse than infant formula for babies under 1 year, he said, and “offer no benefit over much less expensive cow’s milk in most children older than age 12 months.”  This formula is often packaged nearly identically to infant formula, and is touted to “improve brain development” and “improve immune function.” Often these infant formulas contain large doses of sugar and sodium and can cause obesity (Vogell, 2024a). As mentioned above, infant formula and toddler formula are legally distinct. Infant formula is subject to advertising regulations and must meet FDA standards. Toddler formula is the Wild West, seemingly anything goes. 

Method 7

It would be nice to believe that these issues have been completely solved at this point in history. Why, the Nestle thing was fifty years ago, of course, we’re better now. Sure, the US was the only country that voted against the World Health Organization’s 1981 resolution WHA34.22 which included the International Code of Marketing Breast-Milk Substitutes, but times have changed, right? 

“The meddling broke into public view in 2018, when officials from the Trump administration were accused of threatening to withhold military aid from Ecuador if the country didn’t drop its proposed resolution in support of breastfeeding at the World Health Organization; the U.S. ambassador later denied making threats. But ProPublica’s investigation found that the scope of the interference far exceeded that incident and continues today under the Biden administration. In fact, Ecuador and Thailand were just two stops on a worldwide crusade against regulation that has spanned Republican and Democratic presidential administrations and touched more than a dozen countries, including South Africa, Guatemala and Kenya, as well as Southeast Asian nations such as the Philippines, Malaysia and Vietnam.” (Vogell, 2024a) The formula industry has the backing of the biggest, meanest, most uncaring attack dog in the world, the US government, which is willing to threaten and leverage to get whatever will make the most money. Unfortunately, the cost is human life. 

Section 3

When I was younger, I was horrified by all the injustice in the world. I got into arguments online, I was loud and proud about my shock and horror at the world we live in. I still am horrified but I am no longer shocked, I’m just tired now. I wish I could say I was surprised by anything I found, but I’m not.

This multitude of reasons why it would be an inarguably bad idea to make women in these areas reliant on formula was either not considered or ignored in favor of profit, these companies are propped up upon the backs of thousands and thousands of gravestones. That’s the standard though, isn’t it? Billion-dollar organizations are always built on someone’s graveyard, Apple and other tech on the backs of dead children in the cobalt mines in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Chiquita standing over the bodies killed by the death squad they financed, if we listed them all it would never end. 

There’s no conclusion I can give to this paper that will make things better, there’s no silver lining. A lot of people have forgotten the Nestle incident, if an ongoing 50-year problem can be called an incident, I wouldn’t have been aware of it at all if a friend hadn’t sent me a TikTok a few months ago. They say some things are too big to fail, and in the world we live in, the formula industry and its crimes are solidly in that bubble. There is an intense, impotent rage within me that I feel every time I hear a story like this. I want to rail against the system and kick down the door, but there’s no door to kick. And if someone does find a door to kick in, they’ll pay the $100,000 to $10 million fine and things will be business as usual. Systemic change is the only way, but it’s hard to change the system when they’re standing on your neck.

Bibliography

Afanasieva , D., & Meghjani-Bloomberg, T. (2023, February 8). Baby Formula Industry Misleads People With Its Marketing, World Health Organization Says. Time. https://time.com/6254106/baby-formula-marketing-world-health-organization/

Anttila-Hughes, J., Fernald, L., Gertler, P., Krause, P., Tsai, E., & Wydick, B. (2023, October 31). The deadly toll of marketing infant formula in low- and middle-income countries. VoxDev. https://voxdev.org/topic/health/deadly-toll-marketing-infant-formula-low-and-middle-income-countries

De Shay, L. (2024, August 22). The big issue with “big formula:” Americans want paid parental leave, the formula industry says it’s bad for business. Stacker. https://stacker.com/health/big-issue-big-formula-americans-want-paid-parental-leave-formula-industry-says-its-bad

How the marketing of Formula Milk influences our decisions ... UNICEF. (2022). https://www.unicef.org/media/115916/file/Multi-country study examining the impact of BMS marketing on infant feeding decisions and practices,UNICEF,WHO2022.pdf

KellyMom. (2023, August 2). Maternity leave and breastfeeding rates. Breastfeeding and Parenting. https://kellymom.com/blog-post/maternity-leave-bf-rates/

Krasny, J. (n.d.). Every parent should know the scandalous history of infant formula. Business Insider. https://www.businessinsider.com/nestles-infant-formula-scandal-2012-6

Kritz, F. (2022, March 1). Infant formula promoted in “aggressive” and “misleading” ways, says New Global Report. NPR. https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2022/03/01/1082775961/infant-formula-promoted-in-aggressive-and-misleading-ways-says-new-global-report

Lay, K. (2024, April 17). Nestlé adds sugar to infant milk sold in poorer countries, report finds. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2024/apr/17/nestle-adds-sugar-to-infant-milk-sold-in-poorer-countries-report-finds

Muller, M. (1974, March). The baby killer. War on Want.

Neslen, A. (2018, February 1). Nestlé under fire for marketing claims on baby milk formulas. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/feb/01/nestle-under-fire-for-marketing-claims-on-baby-milk-formulas

Nwoko, H. (2024, April 29). Nestle’s Sugar Scandal sends a troubling message to black and Brown parents. Parents. https://www.parents.com/nestle-s-sugar-scandal-troubles-black-and-brown-parents-8637024#citation-1

Prater, E. (2023, February 8). Big formula’s “exploitative” marketing tactics prey on new parents’ fears, experts say. Fortune Well. https://fortune.com/well/2023/02/07/big-formulas-exploitative-marketing-tactics-prey-parents-fears/

Unveiling the predatory tactics of the formula milk industry. (2023). The Lancet, 401(10375), 409. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(23)00118-6

Vogell, H. (2024a, March 21). The U.S. government defended the overseas business interests of Baby Formula Makers. kids paid the price. ProPublica. https://www.propublica.org/article/how-america-waged-global-campaign-against-baby-formula-regulation-thailand

Vogell, H. (2024b, April 2). What is toddler milk? what parents should know about the companies that market it. ProPublica. https://www.propublica.org/article/what-is-toddler-milk-marketing-to-parents#:~:text=If%20you’re%20a%20parent,or%20%E2%80%9Cimproved%20immune%20function.%E2%80%9D

Wattana, M. (2016). The Baby Bottle and the Bottom Line: Corporate Strategies and the Infant Formula Controversy in the 1970s. Yale University. https://hshm.yale.edu/sites/default/files/files/Wattana senior essay 2016.pdf

World Health Organization. (1981). Wayback Machine. International Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes. https://web.archive.org/web/20060324165724/http:/www.who.int/nutrition/publications/code_english.pdf