- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
Experts say there can be long-term health consequences for babies and infants who consume too much sugar at a young age.
In Switzerland, the label of Nestlé’s Cerelac baby cereal says it contains “no added sugar.” But in Senegal and South Africa, the same product has 6 grams of added sugar per serving, according to a recent Public Eye investigation. And in the Philippines, one serving of a version of the Cerelac cereal for babies 1 to 6 months old contains a whopping 7.3 grams of added sugar, the equivalent of almost two teaspoons.
This “double standard” for how Nestlé creates and markets its popular baby food brands around the world was alleged in a report from Public Eye, an independent nonpartisan Swiss-based investigative organization, and International Baby Food Action Network.
The groups allege that Nestlé adds sugars and honey to some of its baby cereal and formula in lower-income countries, while products sold in Europe and other countries are advertised with “no added sugars.” The disparities uncovered in the report, which was published in the BMJ in April, has raised alarms among global health experts.
America and the EU are imposing the economic and political order that gives those companies leverage over small countries and blocks them from consumer protection or worker protection legislation. Heck, the US invaded foreign countries more than once to make sure their companies get to maximize profits, while making the people suffer.
What on earth are you on about? The EU lobbies world wide for consumer and worker protection. Where are you getting your info from?
https://www.euractiv.com/section/development-policy/news/eu-africa-free-trade-agreement-destroys-development-policy-says-merkel-advisor/
https://waronwant.org/news-analysis/empire-20-uk-trade-deals-squeeze-wealth-global-south
https://www.foodwatch.org/en/study-on-precautionary-principle-in-ttip-and-ceta
have you actually read those links? First is a political statement from 2014 which starts with :
and it should be easy to see now that the guy was just playing his voters.
the second one is about britain post brexit
the 3rd is about the influence of other markets on the quality of products in the EU.
Which one of those actually proves your point?
Free trade agreements come through pressure from the west -> free trade agreements provide shadow courts for protecting the interests of companies and their profits against national regulation -> free trade agreements destroy labor markets and consumer protection in the weaker side of the “agreement”
that’s a ridiculously superficial take on free trade agreements. And since 10 years have passed since then, you should be able to show some evidence of that happening, but you can’t.