One of Nestle's main evil plans in the Low Income Countries is to aggressively tell mothers that formula is better than breastfeeding, have doctors suggest it, or even give free formula until the mothers' breastmilk dries up.

Humans evolved to crave sugar which is scarce in nature.

Babies will naturally prefer milk with higher sweetness i.e Nestle Cerelac. This will help convince the mothers to breastfeed less, buy more formula, and/or let their milk dry up.

Edit: here's UNICEF on these evil marketing practices in Bangladesh.

[–] HumanPenguin@feddit.uk 11 points 7 months ago

Add to that.

Nestle has a huge bonus long term from sugar. It is hugely addictive. Haveing children grow up with an early addiction can only benifit them long term. Given how much sugar is a part of other non bany products they sell.

[–] ipkpjersi@lemmy.ml 5 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Why do they do this in specifically lower-income countries, where there is less money to be made for them? That's the part that confuses me.

[–] livus@kbin.social 12 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

They do it wherever they can get away with it. They used to do it in the West.

These days though in the West new mothers are likely to receive education about breastfeeding from advocacy organizations, which formed to combat this problem. Such organizations also put pressure on govts to regulate formula and the health system.

Back in the 1950s when La Leche League was formed, only 20% of mothers in the US were breastfeeding.

[–] inetknght@lemmy.ml 10 points 7 months ago (1 children)

There's less regulation in a developing country. So... if you get them hooked on it then, at least, you've got easy (albeit low) income. During the developing country maturity they will then be hooked on sugar and less likely to ban it or curb it.

It's just as any addiction.

[–] ipkpjersi@lemmy.ml 5 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Ah, regulations, that's what I was missing. That sucks.

[–] Instigate@aussie.zone 3 points 7 months ago

It’s also not an exclusive situation: that is, selling to the Global South doesn’t in any way impede or prevent their sales in developed nations. It’s just an extra source of income. Sure, they’re making less money per unit sold, but less extra money is better than no extra money. Aggressively marketing to these countries also helps prevent local companies from creating their own competitive products, which protects Nestle’s global dominance interests.

Suffice to say that the list of reasons they would want to do this is long while the list against is very short.