[ad_1]
World Health Organization (WHO) officials were confused when the United States not only refused to support a resolution that encourages badfeeding to children under 6 months of age, but have also threatened countries with economic reprisals. they presented this resolution.
According to a report by the New York Times, the US delegation in Geneva, he protested against the language used in the resolution, which stipulated that states should "protect, promote and support badfeeding", and limit the promotion of alternative food products, such as infant formula
. ] When the objection of the United States That did not work, they resorted to threats, starting with Ecuador, whose delegation was the one who presented the resolution to the plenary. The US ambbadador to Quito warned officials in the South American nation that Washington would impose trade sanctions and withdraw military aid.
The delegation of Ecuador, surprised by the aggressive response of the Americans, withdrew the resolution. WHO officials have sought out other countries that might support the resolution, but all have retreated for fear of angering the United States. "We were shocked, dismayed and sad," said a British activist who supports badfeeding programs across the UN.
What happened was tantamount to blackmail, the United States holding the world hostage and trying to undo nearly 40 years of consensus on the best way to protect the health of infants and children. young children.
What, at first glance, should be a simple procedure for the WHO has become a controversial global debate. Officials, delegates and activists from around the world recalled that the Obama administration had unconditionally supported badfeeding programs. In contrast, the Donald Trump government remains consistent in its tendency to confuse and annoy its international allies.
On this occasion, the position of the Trump delegates amounts to placing the United States on the side of corporate interests. . The infant formula industry represents a $ 70 billion industry, and it is precisely in developing countries that there is more room to grow, unlike the developed country market where Families are better informed about the benefits of badfeeding. Kindergarten
It is no secret that bad milk is the healthiest option for feeding a baby. The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends badfeeding exclusively newborns for six months. There are many health benefits for both mother and child, especially in poor countries where bad milk reduces the risk of diarrhea and saves hundreds of thousands of lives per year. year
. Russia had to intervene in the controversial debate to reintroduce the resolution in plenary, and that is the only way for Americans not to have opposition. For the Russian delegate, it was a matter of principle:
We do not try to be the hero here, but we think it's wrong when a big country tries to put pressure on other smaller countries, especially on a subject
Despite multiple sources cited by The New York Times, Donald Trump expressed himself as follows on Twitter striking again from Fake News to the American newspaper:
The United States They strongly support badfeeding, but we do not believe that women should be denied the "badfeeding". access to preparations. Many women need this option because of malnutrition and poverty.
However, the tweet showed how badly the president was misinformed on the issue. Dr. Michele Barry, of the Stanford School of Medicine, told the NYT:
Malnutrition and poverty are precisely the environments in which it is absolutely necessary to badfeed, because it is the only way to badfeed. environment where access to clean and safe water for the replenishment of the formula, it is often impossible to find.
Fortunately, Trump delegates' efforts to stop a resolution that put the interests of global health on the economic interests of an industry were in turn hindered by a joint effort of the international community and the support of A superpower.
[ad_2]
Source link
