Comparison between the for‐profit human milk industry and nonprofit human milk banking: Time for regulation?

Author:

Shenker Natalie12,Linden Jonathan3,Wang Betty3,Mackenzie Claudia3,Hildebrandt Alex Pueyo3,Spears Jacqui3,Davis Danielle3,Nangia Sushma4ORCID,Weaver Gillian2ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London IRDB London UK

2. The Human Milk Foundation Rothamsted Institute, Herts Harpenden UK

3. Centre for Environmental Policy Imperial College London London UK

4. Department of Neonatology Lady Hardinge Medical College New Delhi India

Abstract

AbstractHuman milk (HM) is a highly evolutionary selected, complex biofluid, which provides tailored nutrition, immune system support and developmental cues that are unique to each maternal–infant dyad. In the absence of maternal milk, the World Health Organisation recommends vulnerable infants should be fed with screened donor HM (DHM) from a HM bank (HMB) ideally embedded in local or regional lactation support services. However, demand for HM products has arisen from an increasing awareness of the developmental and health impacts of the early introduction of formula and a lack of prioritisation into government‐funded and nonprofit milk banking and innovation. This survey of global nonprofit milk bank leaders aimed to outline the trends, commonalities and differences between nonprofit and for‐profit HM banking, examine strategies regarding the marketing and placement of products to hospital and public customers and outline the key social, ethical and human rights concerns. The survey captured information from 59 milk bank leaders in 30 countries from every populated continent. In total, five companies are currently trading HM products with several early‐stage private milk companies (PMCs). Products tended to be more expensive from PMC than HMB, milk providers were financially remunerated and lactation support for milk providers and recipients was not a core function of PMCs. Current regulatory frameworks for HM vary widely, with the majority of countries lacking any framework, and most others placing HM within food legislation, which does not include the support and care of milk donors and recipient prioritisation. Regulation as a Medical Product of Human Origin was only in place to prevent the sale of HM in four countries; export and import of HM was banned in two countries. This paper discusses the safety and ethical concerns raised by the commodification of HM and the opportunities policymakers have globally and country‐level to limit the potential for exploitation and the undermining of breastfeeding.

Funder

Medical Research Council

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,Nutrition and Dietetics,Obstetrics and Gynecology,Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health

Reference53 articles.

1. Trade secrets claimed by prolacta to steal founders’ company;Anderson B.;ReadWrite,2020

2. The Lactariums of France: Part 1 The Lactarium Docteur Raymond Fourcade in Marmande

3. Use of pasteurised human donor milk across neonatal networks in England

4. Bindel J.(2017). An example of capitalism literally milking the poor. Available from:https://www.truthdig.com/articles/an-example-of-capitalism-literally-milking-the-poor/

5. Bloomberg. (2020). Moms on watch troubled by allegations at Prolacta Biosciences—Bloomberg. Available from:https://www.bloomberg.com/press-releases/2020-06-26/moms-on-watch-troubled-by-allegations-at-prolacta-biosciences

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3