Keyword
in
Collection
Date
to
Houston Breakthrough, May 1979
Page 16
Citation
MLA
APA
Chicago/Turabian
Houston Breakthrough, May 1979 - Page 16. May 1979. Special Collections, University of Houston Libraries. University of Houston Digital Library. Web. January 22, 2021. https://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/feminist/item/630/show/617.

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

(May 1979). Houston Breakthrough, May 1979 - Page 16. Houston and Texas Feminist and Lesbian Newsletters. Special Collections, University of Houston Libraries. Retrieved from https://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/feminist/item/630/show/617

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

Houston Breakthrough, May 1979 - Page 16, May 1979, Houston and Texas Feminist and Lesbian Newsletters, Special Collections, University of Houston Libraries, accessed January 22, 2021, https://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/feminist/item/630/show/617.

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

URL
Embed Image
Compound Item Description
Title Houston Breakthrough, May 1979
Publisher Breakthrough Publishing Co.
Date May 1979
Subject.Topical (LCSH)
  • Women
  • Periodicals
  • Feminism--United States--Periodicals
  • Newsletters
Subject.Geographic (TGN)
  • Houston, Texas
Genre (AAT)
  • periodicals
Language English
Type (DCMI)
  • Text
  • Image
Original Item Location HQ1101 .B74
Original Item URL http://library.uh.edu/record=b2332724~S11
Digital Collection Houston and Texas Feminist and Lesbian Newsletters
Digital Collection URL http://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/feminist
Repository Special Collections, University of Houston Libraries
Repository URL http://info.lib.uh.edu/about/campus-libraries-collections/special-collections
Use and Reproduction Educational use only, no other permissions given. Copyright to this resource is held by the content creator, author, artist or other entity, and is provided here for educational purposes only. It may not be reproduced or distributed in any format without written permission of the copyright owner. For more information please see UH Digital Library Fair Use policy on the UH Digital Library About page.
File Name index.cpd
Item Description
Title Page 16
Format (IMT)
  • image/jpeg
File Name femin_201109_550ao.jpg
Transcript Nestle boycott comes to Texas ** A report compiled by Judy Hopkinson and Karen Spearman Why should there be any issue whether or not the Nestle Company of Vevey, Switzerland, is responsible for the illness and death of many Third World babies? Certainly there is no question of intention; no one has found strychnine or arsenic in their baby formula, Lactogen, and naturally it is to their advantage to have more rather than fewer hungry mouths to consume their product. But a cause-and-effect relation is hard to deny. The situation, in brief, is this: Birthrates are declining in many developed countries; there is a tendency to return to breast-feeding. Partly for these reasons, no doubt, the makers of baby formula have been promoting their products widely and aggressively in the Third World, where birthrates are still increasing. —Gracia Fay Ellwood The Reformed Journal Advertising campaigns by large western companies are trying to convince mothers in Third World countries to substitute powdered formula for their own milk. The mothers getting the message are not undernourished, unhealthy women in famine areas, but mothers in big city slums and in villages throughout Africa, Asia and Latin America. Representatives from western corporations like Bristol-Myers, Borden's, and Nestle pose as health authorities to persuade women that the best diet for their child is powdered formula, not breast-feeding. The seriousness of this problem was recognized as early as 1969, although it gained widespread attention in the United States only in the mid-70's. Only now has the issue reached Texas. Joining their counterparts coast to coast Texas women are organizing groups and communities to fight this threat to the health and lives of the world's infants. More information against bottle feeding of Third World infants is being produced daily. "My interpretation of the scientific evidence leaves absolutely no doubt in my mind that bottle feeding is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in developing countries," states Dr. Michael Latham of Cornell University's Division of Nutritional Science. From data collected in seven Punjab villages, Drs. D. B. and E. F. P. Jelliffe (Human Milk in the Modern World) showed that the infant mortality rate in the artificially fed was 950 per 1000 live births compared with 120 in the breastfed. Scientific evidence demonstrates that even under optimal conditions the bottle- fed baby is two-to-three times more likely to encounter significant diseases than its breast-fed counterpart. This difference is far more dramatic in the impoverished environments of the Third World. A 1978 World Health Organization report explains why: (tThe probability of mothers having access to clean water is low . . . and preparation of formulas will almost inevitably lend itself to contamination, . . . Mothers who become dependent upon breast milk substitutes are often unable to purchase the quantity of commercially-prepared products that would be needed . . . Over-dilution of what little can be afforded is a well-known solution turned to by many mothers . . . Its results are disastrous for the health of the child Twenty years ago, 95 percent of Chilean mothers breast-fed their children beyond the first year of life; by 1969 only 6 percent did so, and only 20 percent of the babies were nursed for as long as two months. In Singapore breast-feeding rates among poor families plummeted from 71 percent in 1951 to 5 percent in 1971. Trends are similar throughout the developing world, and so the cost in lives is enormous. Studies in Chile, for example, show that death rates are significantly higher for bottle-fed infants than for breast-fed babies. And as formula feeding rises, the average age for the onset of infant malnutrition has dropped from 18 months to eight. Why then, is breast-feeding declining, in some cases precipitously? Among the most commonly cited explanations are: urbanization and the increasing number of women in the organized workforce, modernization which seems to have glorified the feeding bottle as a symbol of status and prestige, and the unbridled commercial promotion of infant formulas by American, European and Japanese multinational corporations. This last factor has been at the center of a stormy international controversy that has pitted the industry against a variety of health professionals, public interest groups and social justice activists. In January 1977, these groups formed a coalition to organize a grass-roots campaign to halt the unethical promotion of infant formula by multinational corporations in developing countries. They called themselves INFACT, the Infant Formula Action Coalition. The following July, a boycott of all Nestle products was announced by INFACT and the Third World Institute in Minneapolis, Minnesota. (Being a Swiss company, Nestle is not subject to shareholder resolutions, lawsuits or U. S. legislation—tactics used successfully with American companies such as Borden's, Abbott and Bristol-Myers.) Their demands were: (1) immediately stop all promotion of Nestle artificial formula, (2) stop mass media advertising of formula, (3) stop distribution of free samples to hospitals, clinics, and homes of newborn, (4) discontinue the Nestle milk nurses, and (5) stop promotion through the medical profession. The boycott soon spread to other cities and became the focus of citizen action programs throughout the United States. The campaign now lists over 200 cooperating organizations and hundreds of individual organizers. Most organizers are women, many of whom have never been involved in a cause before. Ralph Nader had predicted that the campaign would "likely become a major cause in the corporate responsibility movement throughout the world." The boycott is now estimated to be the largest non-union boycott in U. S. history. The efforts of organizations against the formula promotion served to increase public awareness in the U. S. and a nationwide letter-writing campaign was started. This campaign resulted in hearings by the U. S. Senate Subcommittee on Health and Scientific Research on May 23, 1978, with Sen. Edward Kennedy as chair. The hearings gave Third World doc- » ft -K* i< *>#.*«* :»*!**;* yj* t fe« • -aft* « *ft «*«*«¥ - & ft *•« « *« ntmmwm »m&w#tm#}9fiM& S*»1 -&A ! BWM ■■■ w#*V£ Klim makes babies gi as strong as iron. | For a healthy | healthy bones and : heaHhy teeth, your : to a by n e ©d s a h eait h* I giving food. Your ba&y needs I fuii-crearr. KHm pow ■ dered roll*. Nourishing i fuil-eream *Mm is full ! of all the good things ■ your growing b>*t>y | needs—-vitamins, ca*- f cium and protein. Klim i is delicious tasting too. |And Klim stays so fresh i in the Un you simply .; mix it as you need It! Give your baby full- fcream Kilm every day... land watch him grow up las strong as iron. ',';K:. Klim builds strong, healthy babies. Houston Breakthrough 16 May 1979