Research Paper on:
Nestle and Wyeth; Ethical Marketing?

Unformatted Sample Text from the Research Paper:
3 Does Nestle Formula Benefit or Harm Infants 9 Figure 4 General View of Nestle 10 Figure 5 View of Wyeth marketing infant formula 10 Figure 6 View of Wyeth Marketing 11 Figure 7  View of Wyeth Formula 11 Figure 8 View of Wyeth 12 1. Terms of Reference The way in which infant formula is marketed is a controversial  subject. Evidence may suggest that when used correctly it may save many babies lives, but the evidence also suggests that it is due to incorrect use of infant formula that  accounts for 1.5 million infant deaths a year (McSpotlight, 2007). Controversy, especially concerning the marketing of the major companies of Nestle and Wyeth, resulted in the development of International Code  of Marketing of Breast Milk Substitutes in 1981 by the WHO/UNICEF. However, despite this being in place there are claims that the companies are behaving unethically in their marketing despite  their supposed agreement to the code of conduct (Young et al, 2001, Taylor, 1998). However, when assessing ethics these may also be seen as subjective (Chyssides and Kaler, 2003; Singer,  1979). This paper has been requested by leading advocacy group on infant nutrition worldwide. The aim of the research is to give an unbiased assessment of that marketing is  being utilized in the infant formula market. Nestle and Wyeth are the companies being studied as they are the dominant companies, Nestle alone have half the global replacement breast milk  market (McSpotlight, 2007). It is hoped that the research will provide an insight into the reasons for the continued uptake of infant formula and separate the reality from the hype  in terms of marketing practices and then use this information to inform the public, and if there is wrongdoing found, to serve as the basis for further action. The