Question : SCHEMES FOR CHILDREN

(a) whether the amendments introduced in IMS, Act, 2003 regarding Production, Supply and Marketing of substitutes of infant milk, feeding bottles and infant food are being complied with strictly;

(b) if not, the reasons therefore;

(c) the details of incidents of violation of this Act noticed so far; and

(d) the corrective measures and the penal action taken in this regard?

MINISTER OF STATE IN THE MINISTRY OF HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT (SHRIMATI KANTI SINGH)

(a),(b),(c)&(d) Between January to August 2004 twenty incidents of violation of IMS Act, 1992 have been noticed by the Breastfeeding Promotion Network of India, an organization authorized in this behalf, which are at preliminary stages of investigation. Details of these cases are given in the statement enclosed,

Statement referred to in reply to Lok Sabha Unstarred Question No. 2260 for 14.12.2004 by Shrimati Karuna Shukla regarding Schemes for Children.

Details of the Action Taken regarding Violations of the Infant Milk Substitutes, Feeding Bottles and Infant Foods (Regulation of Production, Supply and Distribution) Act 1992, as amended in 2003 (IMS Act) by The Breastfeeding Promotion Network of India January 2004 to September 2004 (1st , 2nd and 3rd Quarter)

January 2004

S.No Details Action taken Legal Comments
Analysis
 
1. Bombay Dyeing An in-house Advertising
had published analysis was Council of India,
an done in the responded by a
advertisement light of IMS letter stating
in their Act, 1992. A that that the
magazine for consultation advertisement was
women with experts in the breach of
“Gladrags” was also the law, but as
presenting sought. After the advertisement
Gladrags Mrs analysis it was one-time and
India in which was concluded the advertiser had
a feeding that this not advertised
bottle had been advertisement again, the file
shown in the, violates was closed.
Oct-Nov issue Section 3 of
2003 IMS Act. A

(Annex-1) Letter was
written to
editor of the
magazine
“Gladrags”
Mr. Rituraj
Sharma and to
advertising
Council of
India.

2. Dr. J P Dadhich All the Legal After legal and in-
from Delhi evidences opinion house analysis it
received were gathered sought was concluded that
invitation card and analysed this is violation
from Nestle to in light of of Section 9 (2)
attend a the Amended of the IMS Act.
symposium. The IMS Act.
invitation of Opinion was
the same event also sough
was advertised from experts
in DMA Bulletin on the issue.

(Annex-2)

S.N0 Details Action taken Legal Comments
Analysis
 
3. Dr. Ajay Gaur The originals Legal After legal and in-
from Gwalior of the opinion house analysis it
reported a materials sought was concluded that
complaint, distributed this is violation
regarding by the of Section 7 (1) a
educational company were to b of the IMS
material and traced. The Act and Rule 9 of
poster materials the IMS Rules.
distributed by were analysed
Reptakos, Brett in the light
and Company, a of the IMS
company Act 1992, as
manufacturing amended in
infant milk 2003. After
substitutes and analysis it
infant foods. was concluded

(Annex-3) that these
materials are
violating the
IMS Act in
letter and
spirit and it
was forwarded
to the legal
experts for
his comments.

S.No Details Action taken Legal Comments
Analysis
 
4. The Magazine During an Received a letter
“Femina Book of ongoing from Femina,
Good Parenting” activity of stating that they
had a picture BPNI to will carry errata
of an infant monitor in their July
feeding a violations in edition.
bottle on the newspaper and
cover page as magazines, it
well as inside as found that
pages the magazine

(Annex-4) “Femina Book
of Good
Parenting”
bared a
picture of a
infant
feeding on a
bottle. The
photograph
was examined
and it was
concluded
that this
photograph
violates the
spirit of the
IMS Act. A
letter was
written to
editor of
editor of
Femina,
Sathya Saran,
and to
Advertising
Council of
India.

5. Complaint was After Legal After legal
received from receiving opinion analysis it was
Dr. A complaint in sought concluded that
Muthuswami from written from this is violation
Chidambaram our member, of Section 3 (c)
regarding the evidences and 8(1) of the
distribution of were analysed IMS Act.
pamphlets and in respect to
persuasion of IMS Act. It
doctors by was concluded
representatives that this
of Nestle India action is a
Ltd. violation of

(Annex-5) the IMS Act
and the
evidences
were
forwarded to
our legal
expert for
analysis

S.No Details Action taken Legal Comments
Analysis
 
6. It was noticed Letter was No response
that on the written to
channel DD News Director,
on 6th May at Dordarshan,
6.10 PM in the Akashwani
programme “ Bhawan for
Health” popular stop showing
version “Haal such
Chaal Theek programmes
Thak Hai”, that promote
there were artificial
comments on feeding in
“use of cup & the country
spoon while and also take
feeding a small action to
baby” reverse
damage done
by that
programme.

S.No Details Action taken Comments
 
7. Advertisement Letter was No response
of Mortein Rat written to
Kill aired on Manager of
Zee TV in Kitchen
between the Appliances
programme Sa Re India Limited
Ga Ma depicted for stop
an infant showing such
feeding on a images that
baby soother. promote

(Annex-6) artificial
feeding in
the country.
This was also
brought in
notice of
advertising
Council of
India.

8. Complaint was The evidences Legal After legal
received from were gathered opinion analysis it was
Dr. Rajinder and analysed sought concluded that
Gulati, in the light this is violation
Ludhiana for of the IMS of Section 3 (c)
distribution of Act. After and 8(1) of the
Immunisation detailed IMS Act.
record cards analysis it
and other was concluded
printed that this is
materials by a violation
Nestle India of the IMS
Ltd. Act. The

(Annex-7) evidences
with our
opinion was
forwarded for
legal
analysis

9. Complaint in The evidences Legal After legal
respect to were gathered opinion analysis it was
letters dated and analysed sought concluded that
April 2004 sent in the light this is violation
to doctors by of the IMS of Section 3 (c)
Reptakos, Brett Act. After and 8(1) of the
and Company. detailed IMS Act.

(Annex-8) analysis it
was concluded
that this is
a violation
of the IMS
Act. The
evidences
with our
opinion was
forwarded for
legal
analysis

S.No Details In house Legal Action taken
Analysis and Analysis
Comments And Comments
10. The company An in-house After legal No action was
“Hello Baby” analysis was and in-house taken
who are done in the analysis it
manufacturers light of IMS was concluded
of infant Act, 1992 as that this
products amended in booklet by
including 2003. A passed the
feeding consultation provisions of
bottles and with experts the IMS Act
related was also
products, sought. The
published a said booklet
booklet was then send
“Growth for legal
Record Book” opinion.
containing
messages on
various
issues
related to
infants
11. Container of BPNI did a Legal opinion
“Farex” an market survey was sought
infant milk to analyse After legal
substitute labels of and in-house
and infant infant milk analysis it
food substitute was concluded
manufactured and infant that the
by Heinz foods container
bearing available in violates the
packing date the market. A provisions of
of September carton of Section 6 and
2003 Farex was Rule 7 of the
bought IMS Act.
bearing the
manufacturing
date of
September
2003. The
container was
analysed with
respect to
the
provisions of
IMS Act and
legal opinion
was sought
12. Carton of BPNI did a Legal opinion
“Amul Spray” market survey was sought.
an infant to analyse After legal
food labels of and in-house
manufactured infant milk analysis it
by Mehsana substitute was concluded
Distt. Co- and infant that the
operative foods container
Milk available in violates the
Producers the market. A provisions of
Union Ltd.” container of Section 6 and
bearing “Amul Spray” Rule 7 of the
packing date was bought IMS Act.
of September bearing the
2003 manufacturing
date of
September
2003. The
container was
analysed with
respect to
the
provisions of
IMS Act and
legal opinion
was sought
13. Container of BPNI did a Legal opinion
“Lactogen 1” market survey was sought.
an infant to analyse After legal
milk labels of and in-house
substitute infant milk analysis it
manufactured substitute was concluded
by Nestle and infant that the
bearing foods container
packing date available in violates the
of March 2004 the market. A provisions of
carton of Rule 7 of the
Lactogen was IMS Act.
bought
bearing the
manufacturing
date of March
2004. The
container was
analysed with
respect to
the
provisions of
IMS Act and
legal opinion
was sought
14. Container of BPNI did a Legal opinion
“Lactogen 3” market survey was sought.
an infant to analyse After legal
milk labels of and in-house
substitute infant milk analysis it
manufactured substitute was concluded
by Nestle and infant that the
bearing foods container
packing date available in violates the
of February the market. A provisions of
2004 carton of Rule 7 of the
Lactogen 3 IMS Act.
was bought
bearing the
manufacturing
date of
September
2003. The
container was
analysed with
respect to
the
provisions of
IMS Act and
legal opinion
was sought
15. Carton of BPNI did a Legal opinion
“Cerelac” an market survey was sought.
infant food to analyse After legal
manufactured labels of and in-house
by Nestle infant milk analysis it
bearing substitute was concluded
packing date and infant that the
of February foods carton
2004 available in violates the
the market. A provisions of
carton of Rule 7 of the
“Cerelac” was IMS Act.
bought
bearing the
manufacturing
date of
January 2004.
The container
was analysed
with respect
to the
provisions of
IMS Act and
legal opinion
was sought
16. Carton of BPNI did a Legal opinion
“Nestum” an market survey was sought.
infant food to analyse After legal
manufactured labels of and in-house
by Nestle infant milk analysis it
bearing substitute was concluded
packing date and infant that the
of February foods carton
2004 available in violates the
the market. A provisions of
carton of Rule 7 of the
“Nestum” was IMS Act.
bought
bearing the
manufacturing
date of
January 2004.
The container
was analysed
with respect
to the
provisions of
IMS Act and
legal opinion
was sought.
17. Advertisement After in Letter was
of “Nipcare” house written to
an ointment analysis and Editor of
to prevent discussions Indian
and treat it was Pediatrics to
dry, sore and concluded stop
cracked that the said publishing
nipples advertisement advertisement
published in violates IMS s, which
Indian Act. undermines
Pediatrics women
Volume 41, confidence in
Number 7, breastfeeding
July 2004. as well as
violates IMS
Act. No
Response has
been received
till yet.

S.No Details In house Legal Action taken
Analysis and Analysis
Comments And Comments
18. Symposium on BPNI came Legal opinion A letter was
“Approach to across an sought and issued by Dr.
a child with invitation letters were D K Dewan,
chronic cough card send to written state MCH
and medical Secretary, Officer,
infections & professional Commissioner, Directorate
introduction to attend the Assistant of Family
to integrated said Commissioner Welfare to
management of symposium as of Department The medical
Neonatal and well as a of Family Superintenden
Childhood invitation Welfare, t of R.M.L
Illness” letter issued bringing this Hospital,
organised by by Department to their stating that
Nestle for of Pediatrics notice by organising
medical & a symposium
professionals Neonatology, under the
on 7th August Dr. Ram aegis of “
2004 at Ram Manohar Lohia Nestle
Manohar Lohia Hospital, New Nutrition”
Hospital Delhi for the

(R.M.L. faculty Department
Hospital), members, have violated
New Delhi. residents and the
post provisions of
graduates to the IMS Act
attend the and in future
symposium. An such
in-house activities
analysis was does not
done and it happen.
was concluded
this Act is a
clear
violation of
Section 9 of
IMS Act.
19. Article on BPNI noticed Legal opinion
Infant two said was sought.
Feeding articles on After legal
published in infant and in-house
Punjab Kesri, feeding. analysis it
Delhi on 7th After was concluded
August 2004 & analysing the that the
Rashtiya contents of articles
Sahara on12th the articles violates the
August 2004. in respect to provisions of
the Section 7 and
provisions of Rule 9 of the
the IMS Act, IMS Act.
it was found
that the
articles miss
on certain
particulars
as prescribed
in the
Section 7 and
Rule 9 of the
Act.
20. Health and BPNI noticed Legal Opinion Opinion
Nutrition banners in was sought awaited
Programme Mayur Vihar,
organised by New Delhi put
Nestle in by Nestle for
play school organising
of Delhi programme in
a preschool
on 7th
August.