I totally agree that every mother needs to make that decision and it should be an informed decision that they make, I am not out to tell any woman what to do. This was not about banning formula milk. That was not what was being discussed here, it was not part of the resolution at all, so I do not know where you got that idea from, it was all about promoting breast milk, nothing was said about banning formula milk, we all know there is a need for it.
But when you have big corporations pushing their product on women in hospital's that is not acceptable in my eyes and trying to stop much needed information/promotion from being provided is not okay. I am not surprised of course as business will always come first, but we need to stay educated and informed that is the most important thing. But what happens if that is not happening, if mothers are not able to afford the formula then the babies become malnourished because they get half measures, that is not okay. The well being of babies should always be a priority, and as mothers we should be able to access all the information we need and make those decisions ourselves. I never said formula should be banned, I accept that there is a need for it, but breast is best at the end of the day and that is a very important message that needs to be seen. As A mother our bodies provide for our children and that should not be taken away from us all for making profit x
This article is very long and in depth, it addresses just about every angle of the pros and cons of both methods, list several reasons why in some third world countries a combination of both breast feeding and formula would be the best solution for the over all well being of infants. If there was a ban, which there will not be now, formula companies can now start working with under developed countries to make formula's that are consistent with each countries diets for the best aid of infants....you have to read the whole thing to understand that and why it's crucial there is no ban.
The controversy and confusion over opinions such as these reached the scale of global conflict earlier this year when the World Health Organization (W.H.O.) voted 118 to 1 to adopt a nonbinding code restricting the promotion of infant-formula products.
The United States's lone dissenting vote was explained, in part, by Elliott Abrams, Assistant Secretary of State for International Organization Affairs (since nominated to be the Assistant Secretary of State for Human Rights). ''Despite our governmental interest in encouragement of breast-feeding,'' he said the W.H.O. recommendations for a complete ban on advertising to the general public of infant formula and the proposed restrictions on the flow of information between manufacturers and consumers ''run counter to our constitutional guarantees of free speech and freedom of information.''
https://www.nytimes.com/1981/12/06/magazine/the-controversy-over-infant-formula.html
This was never about banning formula milk, you must have my article confused with another, I never even suggested that and it was not part of the discussion in the assembly in May, my article is about Breastfeeding. I am 100% for women's choice in this matter and I am fully aware that there is a need for formula milk, but again this was not what my article was about.
They said there was problems with the formula companies skirting the promotion rules, they wanted a complete ban on promotion of formula not the formula itself....it can be a bit confusing. As confusing as the whole debacle making it out that the US didn't want the promotion of women to breast feed. That's not what happened. The US threat was to withdraw funds given to promote breast feeding if they did a full out ban on the promotion of formula. That didn't mean they didn't want women to breast feed which is what the headline of your article suggest.