HealthGap Project

In recent news, Nestlé’s baby products have come under intense scrutiny.  Swiss watchdog Public Eye and the International Baby Food Action Network  (IBFAN) conducted an investigation that revealed a troubling inconsistency  in Nestlé’s baby cereal products. They found that a serving of Nestlé cereal  sold in some markets contained at least 6 grams of sugar, about a cube  and a half of the sweet stuff. Yet, Nestlé’s baby cereals sold in European and  other first-world countries contained little to no added sugar. This apparent  double standard has sparked widespread outrage, especially in light of the  World Health Organization’s (WHO) warnings about the risks of high sugar  intake in children, including obesity and cardiovascular diseases.  

A flashback:  The discovery of this inconsistency is not entirely surprising as this  is not the first time that Nestlé has faced ethical controversies. The most  infamous of these dates back to 1974, with a publication by Mike Muller  titled “The Baby Killer.” This paper exposed Nestlé’s unethical marketing  practices in third-world countries, where they aggressively promoted  formula milk to mothers, suggesting it was more nutritious than breast milk.  The paper described how the company manipulated mothers into buying its  products, employing tactics such as distributing free samples and using  salesgirls dressed as nurses. This triggered a decade-long controversy and  a fierce battle fought by international NGOs, public health professionals, and  religious organizations. 

The public outcry eventually led to the WHO’s development of the  International Code for Marketing of Breast-Milk Substitutes, which  established guidelines for companies like Nestlé, dictating ethical  responsibilities in marketing baby formula. After years of resistance, Nestlé  eventually complied with these guidelines.  

The big question: Why third-world countries? So why do multinational corporations like Nestlé target third-world countries  with their ethically questionable products? One reason is simple market  economics: these countries often have growing populations, rising demand  for consumer goods, and vulnerable customer bases who may not have  access to robust awareness and healthcare systems. Offering cheaper,  sugar-laden products is an attractive option in markets where strict  regulation is lacking. This leads to the second reason: a lack of stringent  guidelines and enforcement in these regions. Some European countries have  stricter regulations enforced by international organizations, providing a  higher level of protection for their consumers.  

So, what can governments and policymakers do?  The key lies in a combination of advocacy, awareness, and strict monitoring.  Governments must invest in public health campaigns in collaboration with  national and international bodies to educate consumers about the dangers  of high-sugar products and the benefits of breast milk for infants.  Additionally, stronger surveillance and enforcement mechanisms are crucial  to ensure companies comply with ethical standards. Increased funding for  investigations into corporate practices can help identify and address ethical  violations more rapidly.  

As the Nestlé controversy unfolds, it serves as a powerful reminder of the  ongoing need for vigilance and advocacy to ensure that corporate profits do  not come at the expense of public health, especially where the big  corporations like Nestlé hold enormous market shares around the globe and  there could be millions of children who will face the impacts both directly  and indirectly.  

Sources:  euronews. (2024). What is the sugar scandal hitting Nestlé and what  happens now? [online] Available at:  https://www.euronews.com/health/2024/04/19/what-is-the-sugar-scandal hitting-nestle-and-what-happens-now.  Sasson, T. (2016). Milking the Third World? Humanitarianism, Capitalism, and  the Moral Economy of the Nestlé Boycott. The American Historical Review,  [online] 121(4), pp.1196–1224. doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/ahr/121.4.1196