However, we find that the allegations about Nestlé result primarily from an interpretation of the WHO Code (and other WHO recommendations) which we believe is contrary to the Code itself.

Most allegations deal not with infant formula, but with cereals and other baby foods which are not marketed as breast-milk substitutes. One of the main reasons this issue still persists is that, since the WHO Code was introduced in 1981, some groups have made a conscious effort to apply the Code not just to products marketed as breast-milk substitutes, but to any commercial foods for children under the age of 2 (or even 5).

Other allegations deal with Nestlé marketing practices in developed countries. We continue to believe that it is the intent of the WHO that where governments, such as those of the United States and EU countries, have clearly decided on how and to what extent to implement the Code, it is not appropriate for individual companies to implement the Code in contradiction to the ruling of governments.

In summary there is a clear tendency, when accusing Nestlé of improper marketing practices, to ignore the application of the International Code by governments. Those groups are applying standards out of keeping with the decisions of member states of WHO, as well as extending the Code to products not marketed as breast-milk substitutes.