Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 10 submissions in the queue.
posted by mrpg on Tuesday July 10 2018, @12:05AM   Printer-friendly
from the ¿?¿? dept.

NY Times (primary source), Vox, Gizdomo and some others report over a resolution to encourage breast-feeding, which was expected to be approved quickly and easily by the hundreds of government delegates who gathered in Geneva for the United Nations-affiliated World Health Assembly.

Vox:

[...] American officials surprised international delegates at the United Nations-affiliated World Health Assembly in May when they opposed a widely popular resolution to promote breastfeeding, according to a Sunday report by Andrew Jacobs for the New York Times. Specifically, they pushed to remove language asking governments to "protect, promote, and support breast-feeding." They also took issue with a passage that called for policymakers to restrict the promotion of food products that may harm children.

It appears that the administration of President Donald Trump sided with corporate interests — the $70 billion infant formula industry — over the health and well-being of kids around the globe. The baby food industry is primarily based in the US and Europe.

The Americans were so ardent in their opposition that they made serious threats to Ecuadorian delegates, who were going to introduce the resolution. According to the Times, the Americans said if Ecuador didn't drop the proposal, "Washington would unleash punishing trade measures and withdraw crucial military aid."

The resolution ultimately made its way through, as a result of Russian intervention. "We feel that it is wrong when a big country tries to push around some very small countries, especially on an issue that is really important for the rest of the world," a Russian delegate told the Times. The US did not make the same threats to Russia as it had to Ecuador, and the resolution was passed mostly in its original form.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Informative) by AthanasiusKircher on Tuesday July 10 2018, @05:34AM

    by AthanasiusKircher (5291) on Tuesday July 10 2018, @05:34AM (#704943) Journal

    Oh, I forgot the link to the investigation mentioned [theguardian.com].

    If you think my comparison to drug dealers was harsh, I suggest you read that article and see the effects of formula marketing to poor people in developing nations...

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Informative=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3