Years ago, Nestlé caused a scandal because of aggressive marketing tactics. A current investigation reopens the case. Is history repeating itself?
Vevey – Almost 50 years after the big “Nestlé kills babies” court case, the Swiss food company is again being criticized for baby food. The trigger for this is a current analysis by the organization Public Eye. According to this, Nestlé acts with double standards when it comes to the sugar content in certain products.
Public Eye denounces – too much sugar in Nestlé products?
Just like Nestlé itself, Public Eye also comes from Switzerland. The organization works to ensure that other companies based in the Alpine republic respect human rights. The core message of the new analysis: Nestlé adds massive amounts of sugar to its baby food products - but only in certain developing and emerging countries.
“Nestlé is making babies and toddlers addicted to sugar in lower-income countries,” writes Public Eye in the recently published report. On Wednesday (April 17th) the Swiss called on Nestlé to end “the double standards”. Those willing can currently submit a letter of complaint to Nestlé on the Public Eye website. When asked by the
German Press Agency,
Nestlé did not dispute the results of the laboratory analyses.
“A piece of sugar cube” – laboratory examines sugar content
For the analysis, Public Eye teamed up with the International Infant Formula Action Network (IBFAN) and examined dozens of Nestlé products for their sugar content. They concentrated on Cerelac (a type of muesli) and Nido (milk powder). In some cases the proportion was already visible on the packaging, in other cases the laboratory had to provide information. The strange thing is that samples from European countries such as Germany, France and Great Britain generally did not contain any added sugar. Those from Bangladesh, India, Pakistan, South Africa and Thailand, on the other hand, did - and there was between 1.6 grams and 6.0 grams of sugar per serving. Public Eye compares the amount to a sugar cube.
The situation was different for various cereal products for babies; Here the laboratory also found “a lot of sugar” in European samples. Experts from the World Health Organization (WHO) warn: If children get used to the taste of sugar at an early age, they tend to choose sugary products more often later on. Such a diet paves the way for obesity or diseases such as diabetes.
Nestlé wants to remove all added sugars from children's milk
In response to
an Ippen.Media
request, a Nestlé spokeswoman said: “We are continuing to develop and reformulate our cereal products for infants in order to further reduce the content of added sugars without compromising on quality, safety and taste,” said Nestlé. “In some countries in Europe there are products with no added sugar, in addition to the traditional products with added sugar.” There are actually “slight differences” in the recipes, depending on factors such as regulations, consumer trends and the availability of ingredients.
The group has also made “significant efforts” to reduce sugar across its entire portfolio. “All added sugars (sucrose and glucose syrup) in the recipes are being removed from our infant milk products for children over 12 months of age worldwide,” the spokesperson assured. However, the first six months of a child's life are particularly formative.
Nestlé as a “baby killer” case in the 1970s caused negative publicity
Nestlé had already attracted enormous attention in the mid-1970s when a report accused the company of baby murder. At that time, two English aid organizations published a study that stated that Nestlé was using “aggressive” advertising to persuade mothers in developing countries to give their children artificial baby milk powder instead of breast milk. Thousands of babies had died from diarrhea and other diseases - the mothers were not informed about the risks of poor hygiene and contaminated water. Nestlé fought back and won the defamation court case. The judge nevertheless noted that Nestlé was certainly responsible.
The World Health Organization (WHO) then drew up a code of conduct. This only allows very limited marketing of baby food. For example, all products must state that breastfeeding is always a better option than baby milk powder in the first few months of a baby's life. “Nestlé is not complying in the slightest with the WHO recommendations and is thus continuing to endanger baby lives,” the
SRF
quoted an expert from IBFAN as saying. Nestlé's marketing aims to gain the trust of mothers and to prefer preserved baby food to breastfeeding.
The problem is that the code of conduct is not binding, but international legislation is. Most countries' national laws still allow the addition of sugar to baby food. During its analysis, Public Eye criticized the fact that many laws are based on the so-called Codex Alimentarius, a collection of international standards. Because the code allows up to 20 percent added sugar in infant cereals, many countries have simply followed it. There has been repeated criticism of this from the World Health Organization.
With material from DPA