On some websites devoted to boycotting Nestle for supposed unethical marketing practices of infant formula in the '70s and '80s, a picture of a woman holding two babies, one healthy, one emaciated, can be found:
There is usually an accompanying text - “These babies are twins. Their Pakistani mother was wrongly advised that she would not have enough breastmilk to feed both and so bottlefed her daughter while breastfeeding her son. The girl died the day after this photo was taken in Islamabad Children’s Hospital. 'Use my picture, ’ said the mother, ‘if it will help others not to make the same mistake.’”
However, if you look closely at the picture, it looks as if the emaciated baby was grafted onto the picture - the mother isn’t holding her or the bottle in her mouth. Most people I know think it’s a fake, nothing more than crude propaganda.
This picture apparently also appears in the book “Milk, Money and Madness” by Naomi Baumslag, and the author claims that the picture’s source is UNICEF.
So, has some clever propagandist put one over on UNICEF, or is the photo genuine after all? Let’s have the straight dope on this picture for once and for all.
As WILLASS has already told you, the link doesn’t work (you get the “We’re sorry, but this page is currently unavailable for viewing. If this site belongs to you, please read this help page for more information and assistance.” message).
I’d recommend you to mail one of the moderators of this forum and ask them to change the thread title to read “Pakistani” instead of “Paki”.
It’s a shame that picture isn’t high-res - though it the edges around the girl’s leg look quite smooth: She could have been added. I didn’t notice how old the picture was. Pre Photoshop?
jjimm - I can’t believe that!
There must be enough of those for a book by now - they can’t possibly come under intellectual property…
:rolleyes:
I dunno. I have a copy of “Milk, Money, & Madness” and the photo in there (large than the ones you linked to) appears authentic but I’m not a very sharp judge of such things.
I don’t know about the picture, I can’t help but wonder why all the American formula fed babies are fat and healthy looking. If the picture is not a photoshop (or somesuch), perhaps the small baby had some disease or impure water or something.
There are several objections to using milk substitutes in developing countries, but one of the principal ones is that water cleanliness cannot be relied upon.
…bottlefed her daughter while breastfeeding her son.
I find it hard to believe that a mother would watch one child wither away and not think of partially breastfeeding both of them, likewise partially bottle-feeding both of them to make up for the (supposed) lack of sufficient breast milk. You gonna tell me she didn’t even try to breasfeed her daughter, regardless of what she was told? It don’t make no sense.
As everton noted, you’ve hit on it exactly. Formula is a perfectly acceptable form of infant feeding in developed countries. (I mean, yes, breastfeeding is preferable, but the problems with formula feeding in the U.S. and places like it are pretty minimal).
However, in less-developed countries, it’s not. Lack of safe water (for mixing, and for sterilizing bottles) is one problem. The cost of the formula is another–families with extremely low or unsteady incomes may not be able to afford all that the baby needs, and the temptation to overwater it to make it last is tempting. Illiteracy also contributes to inaccurate mixing.
If you google on nestle boycott, lots of sites come up. Most of them are quite partisan; this one seems balanced, with a helpful list of links towards the bottom: http://www.boycottinfo.co.uk/bcnestl/
Whether or not the photo is faked strikes me as a red herring. The real question is what’s the reason for the difference between the two children, and does said reason have anything to do with the grievances against Nestle. Given the tone of the various anti-Nestle proclamations, I have my doubts.
I just had to add my two cents…maybe I should even change my name to Two Cent… anyhoo, about formula vs. breast: I have 2 baby boys, a 2 1/2 year old and a 5 month old, and I breastfed my oldest until he was 2 and I will do the same for the youngest. They are both in excellent health and are quite smart for their ages. I also have a couple nephews who were strictly on formula and I must say: one was sickly and slow-developing, and the other is a terror and way too precocious. I think he has ADHD (attention deficit hyperactivity disorder). And I have been doing some research on this disorder and have read that high iron levels can cause ADHD and that when a kid has it, there is no going back… they put lots of iron in formula don’t they? They say that it is all to benefit the baby, when the same babies go on to develop learning disabilities. I have to wonder if maybe it is all a big conspiracy with the formula companies and the pharmaceutical companies who make ritalin and all those drugs - which I find, that doctors are quick to put kids on these days… there are sooo many kids out there who are on it right now! Someone should do some kind of study on this, if they haven’t already. Anyhoo, this has been Two Cent. (PS: This site is awesome! I love it in here!) (PPS: I haven’t looked at the picture, because I hate seeing things that I’ll never get out of my head - is it gory???)
Anybody know when the photo was taken? I have to wonder if a Pakistani, presumably Muslim, woman would really allow herself to be photographed in the act of breastfeeding.
I was thinking the same thing, Wikkit (only “is,” not “was”). Otherwise, I think she’d have noticed things were screwy somewhere down the line. Also, any record whatsoever of either child’s original birth weight/healt status?
It’s not a slur among Pakistanis here, so don’t beat yourself up about it. It was clear to me (and probably everyone else) that nothing offensive was meant by the thread title.
