Industry influence at United Nations body exposed in Bonn

The joint food standard setting body of the UN‚s (Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) and the World Health Organisation (WHO) this week reached a tentative agreement on highly controversial standards covering the composition and labelling of baby milks and foods which had been in development for 8 years. At the start of the meeting the chair openly expressed preference for the proposals favoured by the food industry and on several occasions the meeting nearly reached an impasse.

Discussion among the experts present exposed the shaky scientific ground upon which global food standards are being set. The differing views regarding the composition of foods for infants and young children showed that there is no consensus on what should go in baby foods, yet industry is pushing hard to add even more substances and additives with seemingly little more than its own scientific evidence to back this. The highly processed foods - which currently form part of a market worth 17 billion dollars - need extensive manufacturing along with processing aids, emulsifiers, thickeners and acidity regulators, many of which have little or no nutritional value.

Contentious issues raised by the International Baby Food Action Network (IBFAN), along with IACFO and ENCA, where the fact that the rules of procedure were ignored in order to favour industry positions, the need for more independent science and the need for prevent misleading labelling of infant foods - in particular the need to stop health and nutrition claims which are fuelling the growth of the so called 'medical' foods‚ market. A huge number of products are being marketed which are designed to alarm parents and medicalise normal behaviour and feeding occurances such as regurgitation, colic. Health and nutrition claims are increasingly being acknowledged to be misleading and to encourage reliance on expensive processed packaged foods rather than breastfeeding and fresh, local foods. In the case of infant feeding in the developing world - where breastfeeding is often the difference between life and death for infants - these marketing tactics which undermine breastfeeding are little short of criminal.

Other issues rejected by the Committee were a proposed ban on GM ingredients for baby milks and foods. The Committee also failed to address the growing concern over the risks of soya infant formulas, concerns outlined by two of the UK government's advisory Committees (COT and SACN). One important improvement, called for by consumers and several delegations and agreed by industry, was the removal of hydrogenated fats.

The 218 delegates attending the Bonn session represented non-governmental organisations and 48 countries - less than one third of the 165 Members countries of Codex. As usual the biggest delegations came from Germany, the United States and France. The food industry sent 100 delegates many of whom sat on Government delegations. Less than 4 % of the delegates came from Africa. 13 out of the 15 EU member states were present.

Of the 26 NGOs present, 5 were public interest NGOs (PINGOs) including IBFAN, ENCA and IACFO ; 20 were Business Interest NGOs (BINGOs).

Patti Rundall of Baby Milk Action represented IACFO (International Association of Consumer Food Organisations, and said: "It is really shocking to attend a meeting setting international standards which is so heavily dominated by industry. Decisions on food safety, particularly that relating to infant feeding, should be based on independent scientific research not the commercial priorities of food companies."

Wong Ang Peng from Malaysia said: "We strongly support the work of the public interest NGOs at this meeting and we should not allow science to be sold out to corporate interests."

For further information contact Patti Rundall or Mike Brady at Baby Milk Action on +44 1223 464420.