(Published )
C
Shivakumar
Chennai:
The
ready to use therapeutic food supplied to eight states, bypassing central and
state governments, by the Unicef had commercial dimensions.
Many
non-governmental organisations and experts question Unicef’s urgency to import
a particular brand of ready to use therapeutic food into India, when such food
can be locally produced.
“Why
is Unicef forgoing all the norms to supply ready to use therapeutic food in
India. With $60 per sachet, it is not possible for a poor child to avail of a
sachet of plumpynut. Obviously, it has commercial dimensions,” says a source.
The
UN body “has included the product on its own in the Draft Child Development and
nutrition work plan,” says Ministry of Women and Child Development (MWCD).
The
world body also tried to bend the rules and even lied to the government of
supplying ready to use therapeutic food to two states but in reality supplied
it to eight states.
“While
furnishing information in response to the provisional starred question in Lok
Sabha vide its letter dated February 11, 2009, Unicef mentioned names of only
two states. Whereas it now appears that procurement/supply of ready to use
therapeutic food has been made for eight states,” says MWCD.
“We
have taken up with the issue with Ministry of External affairs. The Unicef has
intimated the ministry of restoring $880,000 funds of equivalent value of the
ready to use therapeutic food supplies to GOI-UNICEF India Country Programme
2008-2012. The government and media should be vigilant,” Joint Secretary
of MWCD Dr Shreeranjan said.
“The
GOI-UNICEF India Country Programme 2008-2012 never mentioned supplies of ready
to use therapeutic food or emergency food. In our governmental
programmes, we don’t encourage ready to use therapeutic food. But at the same
time, if it is done privately then ministry of health has to decide on the
issue,” he said.
But
shouldn’t Unicef be held accountable for lying and giving false information.
“Now the world body is portraying as the government of India has wronged them
but the fact is that they wanted to promote the market of French firm Nutriset,
which sells its food under the brand Plumpynut, by sending it into public
programmes.
Unicef,
which buys three quarters of the world's supply, bought 10,000 tonnes of ready
to use food sachets in 2008, more than triple the volume bought in 2007.
Medecins Sans Frontieres and the former US president's Clinton Foundation are
major buyers too, sources said.
With
the rocketing global demand for ready-to-use-foods being unable to be met by
Nutriset, many firms have started paying royalty to the French firm and setting
up plants globally.
In
India, Norwegian manufacturer Compact for Life, began manufacturing in India
recently and plans are on to expand it to countries where Nutriset has not
patented Plumpynut.
“Products
like Plumpynut are effective in specific circumstances, to treat severe acute malnutrition.
However,
interventions of this kind, involving branded and patented products, also tend
to be linked with a dangerous invasion of corporate interests in food policy
and nutrition programmes,” warns Indian Right to Food Campaign.
The
business of nutrition for poor
In
the year 1999, Andre Briend, a French paediatric nutritionist, developed a
ready to use product ‘Plumpynut’ . The product is based on peanut butter for
use in treatment of severe malnutrition.
Few
trials were conducted in African countries to prove it’s’ efficacy. These
trials, though having many limitations in the design of the studies, were used
effectively to push the product into international guidelines as a treatment
option to treat severe malnutrition, first in indoor
facility and later on in home based care.
This
was done despite the fact that for any public health decision of such a
proportion, there should have been many Randomized Controlled Trials based on
which there should have been a Meta analysis/ systematic review.
One
of the studies, which was quoted maximum while building a case for the product
was supported by the Nestle foundation and the manufacturer of the product,
Nutriset. Andre Briend, who was a part of the research team for this study, was
given a consultancy by Nutriset during the conduct of this study.
Interestingly,
Andre Briend, was part of the research team for other trials in Africa also.
Briend was later affiliated with the Department of Child and Adolescent Health
and Development, World Health Organization, Geneva; becoming part of important
policy decisions on the treatment of “severe acute malnutrition”
which suggested among other things, ready to use therapeutic food as “the”
intervention to combat malnutrition.
