The US strongly supports breast feeding but we don't believe women should be denied access to formula. Many women need this option because of malnutrition and poverty, Trump said in a tweet.
In an editorial, the New York Times alleged that the push by US delegates to the World Health Organisation to water down or scrap a simple resolution meant to encourage breast-feeding in underdeveloped countries was many things bullying, anti-science, pro-industry, anti-public health and shortsighted, to name a few.
But it was not surprising. In fact, it's just one of several recent examples of the administration's zeal for badgering weaker countries into tossing public health concerns aside to serve powerful business interests. The baby formula industry is worth USD 70 billion and, as breastfeeding has become more popular in more developed countries, it has pinned its hopes for growth on developing ones, it said.
The New York Times Editorial Board challenged Trump's argument saying Trump's contention, that women need access to formula because of malnutrition, defies both science and common sense.
The overwhelming balance of evidence tells us that breast milk is the most nutritious option for infants, by far. Among many other benefits, it has the potential to ward off diarrheal diseases and respiratory infections, both of which are prevalent in low-income countries, it said.
(This story has not been edited by Business Standard staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)