Feeding Rights, Not Feeding Markets (Editorial)
Every child is born with an inviolable right to health and nourishment. This right is not a matter of charity, culture, or convenience—it is the most fundamental human entitlement. Breastfeeding, universally recognised by science and endorsed by global health institutions, is central to securing this right. It is the single most effective way to protect infants from malnutrition, disease, and developmental delays, particularly in low- and middle-income countries like Pakistan. Yet, disturbingly, this foundational right is once again being undermined—not by ignorance or poverty, but by organised commercial interests determined to bend the law for profit.
The recent revelation that the Special Investment Facilitation Council (SIFC) has urged the Sindh Government to amend the Sindh Protection and Promotion of Breast-Feeding and Young Child Nutrition Act, 2023, in response to pressure from the Baby Food and Nutrition Council (BFNC), is a cause for deep alarm. This 2023 law was a significant step forward, aiming to protect children up to the age of three from exploitative marketing of breastmilk substitutes and complementary foods. It sought to correct the inadequacies of the earlier 2013 legislation, bringing the province’s law in line with the international code of marketing of breastmilk substitutes and closing dangerous loopholes that allowed infant formula companies to operate unchecked in hospitals, clinics, and marketplaces.
The backlash from the formula milk industry was predictable but no less unacceptable. Under the guise of protecting the “freedom to do business” and “the mother’s right to choose,” companies have repeatedly lobbied to weaken this law. But these slogans of liberty are hollow when seen against the backdrop of aggressive and misleading marketing campaigns that influence women’s decisions under the illusion of choice. When mothers are approached by agents disguised as health workers, when hospitals receive incentives for promoting specific brands, when free samples are pushed into the arms of new mothers without proper information—what choice is left? The manipulation of mothers under stress, especially in poor or poorly informed households, is a targeted business strategy, not an exercise in freedom.
It must be made clear: the 2023 Act does not criminalise the use of formula, nor does it prohibit companies from selling their products. What it does is regulate how these products are advertised, promoted, and distributed, especially to vulnerable populations. It ensures that feeding decisions are made based on evidence and need—not on persuasion and profit. To weaken this law at the behest of the Baby Food and Nutrition Council is to effectively strip protection away from millions of children and hand the reins to those who view their health as a market opportunity.
The argument that the law hinders business holds no moral weight when the business in question thrives on influencing infant feeding in ways that lead to real harm. The alleged constitutional freedom to conduct business cannot and should not override the child’s constitutional right to life, to development, and to be protected from harmful practices. Nor can it override the state’s moral and legal duty to protect the vulnerable. If freedom is the cornerstone of our democracy, it must be the freedom of the infant to grow up well-nourished and protected, not the freedom of corporations to advertise aggressively at the cost of public health.
You may also like
Faith and Fury in Pakistani Populism: Why PTI Isn’t TLP
