Saya baca susuibu.com

dah lama saya nampak banner ni..

Dan saya pun klik laa

saya terpandang sesuatu yang saya rasa saya sakit mata

apa pandangan anda???

adakah masih nak kata FM tetap bagus??

ke apa??

Ohh itu pilihan masing-masing ya

kalau tak setuju sila jangan komen sini bleh komen kat blog sendiri dan sila link ke sini…hahahahahahahah

btw

email yang aku dapat..maaf la ya berjela tapi baca la kalau malas nak taip email kat web boycott tu heheheheh

Dear Fid,

Many thanks for visiting Baby Milk Action’s website. Here is the briefing you requested and news of a great membership offer.

One of the most boycotted companies on the planet

According to an independent survey, Nestlé is one of the four most boycotted companies on the planet. We target Nestlé over its aggressive marketing of baby foods, which undermines breastfeeding and puts babies at risk.

According to the World Health Organisation and UNICEF, 1.5 million infants die around the world every year because they are not breastfed. This is why there is a marketing code baby food companies are expected to abide by. We monitor the industry against this code with partners in the International Baby Food Action Network (IBFAN), consisting of more than 200 groups in over 100 countries. Nestlé is found to be the worst, which is why it is the target of the boycott. This has helped to bring about some changes in policies and practices by Nestlé.

This is a long-running campaign, with several phases. Nestlé attempts to suggest the issues were resolved long ago, but unfortunately this is untrue.

30 years on from the first Nestlé boycott

2007 marks the 30th anniversary of the launch of the first Nestlé boycott in 1977. There are several publications in our on-line Virtual Shop which tell you more about the history – some of which are available as free pdf files for viewing on line. Click here to access the Virtual Shop.

The Baby Killer Trial

The boycott was launched in 1977 following the publicity around the Baby Killer trial – where Nestlé took campaigners in Switzerland to court over a booklet exposing its practices, which had originally been published by War on Want in English in the UK. The trial had run for two years and Nestlé finally dropped all charges but one against the booklet as experts trouped into court substantiating the allegations of aggressive marketing practices and the effect on breastfeeding patterns and infant health.

Nestlé won only against the title, which had been translated to read ‘Nestlé kills babies’ in German. As Nestlé was not guilty of deliberate murder it won on this one point. The defendants received token fines and Nestlé was warned to change its practices by the Judge if it didn’t want further criticism.

Its aggressive marketing of formula included idealizing claims about the benefits of formula and providing free supplies to encourage babies to be bottle fed in hospital. This interrupts a mothers lactation, and when she leaves hospital the formula is no longer free. Breastfeeding provides protection against short and long-term illness and in settings without access to safe water or good health care it saves lives.

The International Code

The first boycott campaign was instrumental in bringing about the marketing requirements for baby foods adopted by the World Health Assembly in 1981. This aims to protect breastfeeding and to ensure breastmilk substitutes are used safely if needed. It basically bans promotion by companies and limits them to providing scientific and factual information on products to health workers who have responsibility for advising parents. Free supplies are prohibited. It also has important provisions about information and warnings on labels.

The International Code and subsequent, relevant Resolutions of the World Health Assembly are the principal tools we use in our campaigning today. We monitor companies against them and call on governments to implement them in legislation.

The boycott was suspended in 1984 after Nestlé gave undertakings to abide by the International Code, but it failed to do so.

Monitoring conducted by the International Baby Food Action Network (IBFAN) found – and still finds – Nestlé to be responsible for more violations of the Code and Resolutions than any other company. Hence Nestlé was given an ultimatum in 1988 to comply and when it did not the boycott was relaunched. In the UK this was in 1989.

Today the boycott has been launched by groups in 20 countries and is supported by people in many more. Independent analysis has found Nestlé is one of the four most boycotted companies on the planet. Even Nestlé’s Global Public Affairs Manager admitted in April 2007 that Nestlé is ‘widely boycotted’.

Action remains vital. According to UNICEF: “Improved breastfeeding practices and reduction of artificial feeding could save an estimated 1.5 million children a year.” (You can find references to much of the information in this briefing in the ‘Your Questions Answered’ section of our website:
http://www.babymilkaction.org

Stopping Nestlé malpractice

Some of the victories achieved by the boycott in the more recent past include compelling Nestlé to stop promoting complementary foods from too early an age. Although the Assembly set out that complementary feeding should be fostered from about 6 months in 1994 it took 9 years of campaigning to prompt Nestlé to change its policy – which it announced during a week of demonstrations at Nestlé sites in the UK in 2003. Promoting complementary foods too early undermines breastfeeding and puts infants at risk.

We target specific cases of malpractice with our Campaign for Ethical Marketing letter-writing campaign, which has persuaded Nestlé to stop practices such as advertising infant formula on the vans of distributors in Armenia and to withdraw misleading leaflets from health centres in Botswana. You can find the campaign actions in the ‘codewatch’ section of our site.

The long haul

Nestlé does continue to grow, of course, swallowing other companies and entering new fields, such as bottled water, pet food and cosmetics. Nestlé is not the world’s largest food company by accident. It is through its aggressive approach to business which prompts it to see the boycott as another inconvenience to be countered – like laws it has tried to strike down or official orders it has ignored. In a similar way, campaigners have to be prepared for the long haul.

For the past decade this has been the attitude of Chief Executive Officer and Chairman, Peter Brabeck-Letmathé, acknowledged to be obstinate not only when it comes to the boycott, but to every other aspect of business, including corporate governance. He became Chairman in the face of an unprecedented shareholder rebellion, exposing the futility of those who believe investing in Nestlé will have influence, other than from standing up at the shareholder meeting each year to raise questions about corporate malpractice.

The situation today

Aside from the changes in policy forced on Nestlé and the success in tackling specific cases of malpractice, the scene 30 years after the first boycott is radically different. For a start, the baby milk issue is well known and the body of evidence of the dangers of artificial feeding and advantages of breastfeeding has grown considerably. Breastfeeding saves millions of lives every year – campaign supporters can claim some of the credit for that.

The biggest change, however, comes from having the International Code and subsequent, relevant Resolutions. We are no longer simply demanding companies stop aggressive marketing practices, we are calling on them to abide by standards adopted by the world’s highest health policy setting body.

It would have been nice if companies had complied with the Code when it was adopted in 1981, but they had opposed it as ‘irrelevant and unworkable’ (to use the words of Nestlé at the time, speaking on behalf of the world’s industry). So it was clear to campaigners that the battle for regulations had to be won again at national level, country after country. We now had important tools to help us.

Today over 70 countries have introduced the Code and Resolutions in legislation to some extent, enforced to varying degrees. In some countries this is making a real difference in stopping malpractice and saving lives.

As IBFAN’s 2004 review of 7 case study countries shows (available in the publications section of the shop to buy or download), achieving regulations has always been a tough call, given the massive resources of the baby food industry and its political influence. Even in countries with exemplary legislation which is helping to reverse the decline in breastfeeding, such as Brazil and India, it took years of hard work and several revisions of the law to achieve the measures in place today. In some countries industry pressure won out and it was voluntary routes that were followed, to little effect.

Where the Code and Resolutions have been implemented and enforced they are having an impact, particularly when coupled with breastfeeding promotion and support. In Brazil breastfeeding rates have recovered from median duration of less than 3 months in the 1970s to 10 months today.

The situation in the UK

For us, legislation is the way forward. We know from our experience at home in the UK, as much as abroad, that achieving legislation is not an easy task. When the UK law regulating the marketing of infant formula and follow-on formula was introduced in 1995 it was opposed by Baby Milk Action and all health worker organisations as being too weak, too partial an implementation of the Code and Resolutions to function effectively. As we are based in the UK, the situation here is important to us. Nestlé only sells specialised formulas at present as its attempts to expand into the wider market have gone disasterously wrong.

We have done our best to make use of the UK law’s provisions to stop aggressive marketing by the other companies here. We do have a lot of success in stopping illegal promotion in supermarkets – only for it to recur. It seems it will take prosecutions before supermarkets get the message. Regulatory authorities are handicapped by the loopholes in the law however.

We have campaigned for and won a commitment from the UK Government to strengthen the law and are working with our partners to ensure the Code and Resolutions are implemented. You can find our submission to the UK Government in the publications section of the Virtual Shop to buy or download. It is called: “Protecting breastfeeding – Protecting babies fed on formula”.

It won’t be easy. Challenging powerful vested interests never is. But we know what works and you can help us to convince the politicians and expose company malpractice and lobbying.

Learning from experience

Thirty years since the launch of the boycott seems a good time to review where we are at. We are not complacent, because, in truth, we and our IBFAN partners repeatedly review the campaign and future strategies in light of past experience. There are always new approaches to be considered. For example, IBFAN was the first to see the potential of the European Parliament public hearings into corporate practices and successfully called for Nestlé to be the first to be investigated.

We denounced Nestlé to the Advertising Standards Authority for untrue claims in an anti-boycott advertisement and won on every complaint.

IBFAN has been very active in using human rights instruments, such as the Convention on the Rights of the Child, to remind governments of their obligation to implement the Code and Resolutions and participates in relevant international meetings, such as the Codex Alimentarius Commission.

We are asking partners to support our call for Nestlé to participate in an independent, expert tribunal into its baby food marketing practices. Nestlé refuses to even discuss terms and conditions.

We must keep up the pressure for the tribunal until such time there is some form of international court where Nestlé and other corporations abusing human rights could be put on trial. Now there is a strategy worth considering. At present it may seem too outlandish, but it is only by discussing the possibility that we can make progress towards a regulatory system capable of holding transnational corporations accountable at the global level. In a world that is rapidly globalising, global governance is not keeping pace.

Making a difference

In this 30th anniversary year there is nothing to celebrate in the fact that the boycott remains necessary.

However, we can and should celebrate the commitment of ordinary people around the world to win justice for mothers and infants wherever they may be.

You can find publications on the campaign and wider issues surrounding infant feeding in our Virtual Shop along with campaign materials for promoting the boycott.

Baby Milk Action is a membership organisation and you are very welcome to join by: clicking here. If you have a UK bank account and sign up to pay by standing order before the end of 2007 you can claim a free gift. Details on the site.

Our website has a great deal of information which is free to access. I write a daily blog and record a weekly podcast if you would like information from behind the scenes of the campaign. Follow the links from
http://www.babymilkaction.org

I will send you further information on other aspects of our work in due course and news of promotions for our merchandise. If you would rather not receive future emails please click here to unsubscribe from our mailing list.

Best wishes,

Mike Brady

–
Mike Brady Campaigns and Networking Coordinator
Baby Milk Action

Tel: 01223 464420
Fax: 01223 464417

Baby Milk Action,
34 Trumpington Street,
Cambridge,
CB2 1QY

We need membership fees, donations and merchandise sales to keep operating. Without your support we wouldn’t be here.

Share on Facebook