Filipinos spend a staggering P43 billion a year on infant formula, says WHO. But you and I know that breastmilk is best. And we can’t stress this enough.
However, says UNICEF senior communication assistant Ma. Alexis Rodrigo, "Filipino mothers are misled into using breastmilk substitutes by misinformation perpetuated by milk companies through advertising."
Just recently, the Senate Committee on Health and Demography, chaired by Senator Pia Cayetano, herself a mom, conducted a public hearing on the implementation of the National Code on Breastmilk Substitutes or EO51. The discussion focused on how milk companies have been violating the Code, and how misinformation can be avoided in advertising. There was a suggestion to ban the advertising of infant formula altogether.
Reacting to the Senate Committee hearing, the UNICEF notes that an increasing number of mothers are using infant formula because of the mistaken notion that this is good for their babies.
"Filipino parents buy breastmilk substitutes in all good faith, thinking that they are doing the best for their children," says Dr. Nicholas Alipui, UNICEF country representative to the Philippines. "This is the result of massive penetration of strategies to glorify and portray breastmilk substitutes to ordinary people as safe and reliable substitutes. But in fact, they are bad and dangerous substitutes."
Breastmilk substitutes are any food being marketed as a partial or total replacement for breastmilk.
The UNICEF cites the following dangers of breastmilk substitutes:
• Breastmilk substitutes can cause deaths in children. In the first two months of life, an infant who receives infant formula is up to 25 times more likely to die of diarrhea and four times more likely to die of pneumonia than an exclusively breastfed baby.
• Infants who are formula-fed experience more severe respiratory tract illness and require more hospitalization than infants who are exclusively breastfed. Acute respiratory infections are among the leading causes of deaths among infants and children in the Philippines.
• Infant formula is sometimes intrinsically contaminated or becomes contaminated during preparation, leading to illnesses and deaths. Specific brands of infant formula have been recalled from the market due to contamination with enterobacter sakazaii, salmonella, and other bacteria. Contamination can also take place when feeding bottles, artificial nipples, and water are not properly sterilized during milk preparation.
• The use of infant formula has also been linked to a host of other diseases and disadvantages, such as asthma, allergies, lower IQ, and cognitive skills, childhood cancers, type 1 diabetes (during childhood and later in life), cardiovascular disease, obesity, gastrointestinal infections, ear infections, and exposure to environmental contaminants (on the other hand, breastmilk counteracts the adverse effects of pollutants; it’s also readily available nice and fresh when the baby needs it).
In stark contrast, breastmilk substitutes are touted as being nutritious and capable of producing child prodigies. A clear violation, indeed, of Executive Order 51, also known as the National Breastmilk Code.
EO 51, enacted by then President Cory Aquino, prohibits the glorification of breastmilk substitutes in marketing campaigns. It also bans point-of-sale advertising, giving out of samples, and other promos directly to consumers, health establishments, and health care personnel.
Dr. Alipui adds, "Our recent survey among urban mothers in the National Capital Region shows that milk companies, with their slick advertising campaigns, have penetrated the minds of young mothers, leading them to think that it is safe and even desirable."
Even worse, Dr. Alipui laments, these ads undermine the mother’s confidence in being able to provide her baby with the perfect food that is also a medicine, immunity booster, IQ enhancer, environment-friendly and – best of all – free!
A CNN report cites a study done by University of Arizona researchers led by microbiologist Dr. Charles Gerba. These germ hounds tracked disease-causing bacteria in offices in New York, San Francisco, Tampa, and Tucson, and found that there are 400 times more germs on an office desk than there are on the toilet seat in the office. According to the study, the most bacteria-infested places in the office are as follows:
• Telephone – 25,127 germs per square inch.
• Desktop – 20,961 germs per square inch.
• Keyboard – 3,295 germs per square inch.
• Computer mouse – 1,676 germs per square inch.
• Toilet seat – 49 germs per square inch.
Also, this germ team cautions that you should wash your hands after sending a fax because a typical office fax machine harbors bacteria levels that are three times higher than on the bathroom door.
Using a state-of-the-art ultraviolet germ meter, Gerba’s team found that bacteria levels went up during the workday. Even tidy desks were not spared from germs. Which meant that they should be cleaned with more than just a feather duster.
"Without cleaning, a small area on your desk or phone can sustain millions of bacteria that could potentially cause illness," warns Gerba.
Gerba points a finger at employees’ habit of eating at their desks, creating an environment that’s bacteria-friendly.
"For bacteria, a desk is really the lap of luxury," Gerba told CNN. "They can feast all day – from breakfast to lunch and even dinner."
By scrubbing your desk daily with a disinfectant, you can reduce bacterial levels by as much as 99 percent.
And here’s a mouthful of advice to get rid of these hidden, hideous monsters lurking at every nook in the office: Don’t eat at your desk.