Healthy Skepticism Library item: 18633

Warning: This library includes all items relevant to health product marketing that we are aware of regardless of quality. Often we do not agree with all or part of the contents.

Publication type: Report

Open Letter to International Paediatric Association from International Baby Food Action Network
International Baby Food Action Network 2010 July
http://www.ibfan.org/

Notes:

Link to Code Violations
http://www.healthyskepticism.org/global/share/file/ipa_sponsors_and_how_they_violate_the_code/

Full text:

In 2005 when IPA drew up guidelines to govern its relationship with industry, IBFAN (International Baby Food Action Network) saw this as positive support for protecting breastfeeding and adhering to the International Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes and subsequent relevant World Health Assembly resolutions (the Code). IBFAN has upheld the IPA guidelines as an example for other professional associations to emulate and avoid conflicts of interest.
In 2007, the IPA Congress in Athens was heavily sponsored by the baby food industry but IBFAN was led to believe that future conferences would be free of such sponsorship.
However, it has now come to our attention that five baby food companies are appearing as sponsors and exhibitors at the IPA Congress due to be held in Johannesburg (4-9 August 2010). In its Congress materials IPA has stated that it abides by the International Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes but will allow “special formulas” to be promoted. This is incongruent as the Code makes no distinction between different types of breastmilk substitutes. All breastmilk substitutes, including infant formula, fall within the scope and may not be advertised or promoted in any way.
Baby food companies have billions of dollars (current value of the baby food market is US$ 31 billion) to compete with the promotion of breastmilk. Breastfeeding advocates work on a shoe string and only have the power of the pen. Hence this letter. We know that you are aware of the undeniable scientific evidence for the benefits of 6 months exclusive breastfeeding and continued breastfeeding to 2 years or beyond. We write for the health and well-being of infants and young children whom the International Paediatric Association has a duty to protect.
It is distressing that this sponsorship is allowed despite IPA’s Guidelines and despite IPA’s presidential commitment of 2008. The President then said and we quote: “Companies that produce breastmilk substitutes are strictly banned, since their activities conflict with our goals on exclusive breastfeeding for babies.” and “…our dedication to children does not allow IPA to accept financial support from companies whose area of practice conflicts with the promotion of child health.” IPA’s leadership guides half a million paediatricians worldwide and yet, all participants will receive Congress materials emblazoned with logos of Abbott, Aspen, Danone, Nestlé and Pfizer (Wyeth).
.
No doubt all these companies claim to comply with the Code. But independent evidence shows this is not true. We attach a page with just one recent example for each company promoting products in ways which not only undermine breastfeeding but violate the International Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes and many national laws.
•
We realise that it is too late to turn this sponsorship around.
•
It is not too late, however, to openly denounce this conflict of interest and we will be calling on participants in Jo-burg to add their concern and demand that this be the very last time. The integrity of IPA is at stake.
•
We acknowledge that considerable efforts have been made by IPA to reduce the promotional impact of sponsors and exhibitors (no product brands or logos, only factual, evidence-based educational information, not product promotion).
•
It is well known, however, that sponsorship in whatever form influences attitudes, creates a sense of obligation and a need to reciprocate. If this were not so, companies would not bother. The World Health Assembly has recognised this and has twice adopted a resolution on sponsorship and conflict of interest.
•
We also know from experience that companies such as Abbott, Aspen, Danone, Nestlé and Pfizer can easily find loopholes which will allow them to put a promotional spin on ingredients in their products, especially special formulas. Such claims and misleading assertions may surface at the Congress and IPA and its membership will be seen as endorsing them. The World Health Assembly has adopted a resolution prohibiting claims on breastmilk substitutes unless specifically allowed by national law.
IBFAN monitors will be in Jo-burg, watching, recording and if necessary, denouncing any conflicts of interest. IPA has made the commitment to comply with the full intent and extent of the Code and its resolutions, all that is required is to keep it. We believe it is possible for IPA Congresses to remain true to its ethics in the future and for IPA to be a true leader in the protection of all infants, all children, in all countries.
Annelies Allain
Director
IBFAN-International Code Documentation Centre on behalf of the following:
Arun Gupta
IBFAN Regional Coordinator for South Asia
Lida Lhotska
IBFAN Regional Coordinator for Europe
Marta Trejos
IBFAN Regional Coordinator for LAC
Joyce Chanetsa
IBFAN Regional Coordinator for Africa
André Nikiema
IBFAN Regional Coordinator for Afrique
Louise James
Acting IBFAN Regional Coordinator for Oceania
Betty Sterken
IBFAN Regional Coordinator for North America
Nahed Ismail
Regional Coordinator for IBFAN Arab World
Patti Rundall
Policy Director, Baby Milk Action