Breastfeeding: the Best Investment

ECONOMICS is often the main agenda of governments and family finance is a popular conversation topic for most people. Yet the economic value of breastfeeding is hardly ever considered. Through World Breastfeeding Week this year WABA aims to raise awareness on the economic benefits of breastfeeding and initiate action to protect, promote and support breastfeeding as one of the best health investments in the future of a nation.

The goals of World Breastfeeding Week 1998 are:

• to raise public awareness on the economic value of breastfeeding vs the high cost of bottle feeding;
• to inspire and support advocacy on behalf of mothers, babies and breastfeeding by providin concrete data on the economic advantages of breastfeeding and on the high costs of bottle feeding to be used for public advocacy;
• to encourage governments to budget for breastfeeding promotion programmes based on economic and other arguments.

Economic Advantages of Breastfeeding

Breastfeeding benefits society in many ways, and it is also makes good economic sense. Families, employers, health care institutions and governments all save by supporting breastfeeding.

Investing in breastfeeding is investing in the future health of a nation

• Families save by not purchasing infant formula and complementary foods. They also save by having to spend less on medicines, health care costs and even hospital bills because breastfed babies get sick less often.
• Employers benefit from less staff turnover, less absenteeism, improved worker productivity and increased worker loyalty.
• Health Care Institutions that maintain a baby-friendly hospital save money on two counts: less expenditure for various feeds to babies and in less costs for medicine and staff for treating sick babies.
• Governments save on scarce foreign exchange by purchasing less infant formula and baby foods. They also save on health care costs by having a healthier nation.

High cost of artificial feeding

Part of the economic value of breastfeeding can also be realised by looking at the costs of replacing it. These include the costs, both in money and time, of:

• the artificial baby food that replaces it,
• the equipment and fuel required for proper preparation of this food,
• the additional contraceptives needed to replace the birth spacing effect of breastfeeding,
• the additional iron and other nutrients needed to make up for the lost period of lactation amenorrhea,
• the damage to the physical and emotional health of mother and child caused by artificial feeding, even when done properly,
• the damage to the intellectual development of the child caused by artificial feeding, even when done properly.

Measuring the Economic Impact of Breastfeeding

Because breastfeeding impacts so many areas of health and social life, measuring its total economic impact is very difficult. However, many researchers have developed very compelling estimates of the money saved by families, institutions and governments when breastfeeding is practiced.

• It can often cost approximately three times as much for a family to optimally feed an infant artificially than to breastfeed.
• Breastfeeding promotion efforts, particularly BFHI, have led to an increase in the exclusive breastfeeding rate from 10% in 1991 to 53% in 1996. During that period, infant formula imports dropped from 48million tins to 12 million, saving over USD 50 million.
• One study estimated that in the U.S., not breastfeeding annually resulted in additional, avoidable health care costs: infant diarrhea treatment cost $291 Million; Respiratory Syncytial Virus treatment cost $225 million; insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (IDDM) cost $10-125 million; and otitis media $660 million;
• In the UK, bottle baby diarrhoeal disease was estimated to cost $41.5 Million (pounds) per year in hospitalisation costs alone;
• In Australia, it was estimated that an increase in the prevalence of exclusive breastfeeding from 60% up to 80% at three months would save $11.5 million per year for just four illnesses (otitis media, IDDM, gastrointestinal illnesses and eczema);
• In Norway 8.2 million kg of breastmilk was produced in 1992. This natural resource, valued at US$50 per litre by Norwegian hospitals, would be worth $400 million;
• In Singapore, an additional US$1.8 million was required to pay for breastmilk substitutes when the breastfeeding prevalence (at 3 months) fell from 71% to 42%.

Breastfeeding is a human right

While society needs to recognise the economic value of breastfeeding, it should first and foremost value the greater benefit of breastfeeding to human welfare - to sustain, care and nurture life for the infant and even protect the health of the mother.

Breastfeeding is a right of all women and children and this right should be protected. Economic calculations only help us to further appreciate the overall value of breastfeeding and breastmilk.

What you can do to start organising for WBW 1998

• get as much data on the costs of artificial feeding and publicise this through the press;
• encourage local researchers and health institutes to look into the economic benefits of breastfeeding to various sectors of society;
• link with consumer groups nationally and those in schools to discuss the economic benefits of breastfeeding;
• write to your Ministry of Health and Ministry of Trade highlighting the economic value of breastfeeding and suggest that breastmilk production be considered when measuring the wealth of the nation.

For more action ideas and WBW materials write to WABA.

WABA is a global network of organisations and individuals who believe breastfeeding is the right of all children and mothers who devote themselves to protect, promote and support that right. WABA acts to help implement the Innocenti Declaration and works in close liaison with UNICEF.

WABA does not accept sponsorship of any kind from companies producing breastmilk substitutes, related equipment and complementary foods. WABA encourages all participants of World Breastfeeding Week to respect and follow this ethical position.