A new study has cast a harsh light on a previously underemphasized threat to maternal health: the pervasive and often detrimental influence of the commercial sector.
According to the study maternal and child wellbeing is far from being solely determined by socio-economic factors or access to medical care but is increasingly imperiled by corporate behaviors and policies, according to a report published in NPJ Women’s Health.
Authored by Mark Hanson and a distinguished team of co-authors including Flavia Bustreo, Gian Carlo Di Renzo, Neena Modi, and notably, Prof Anne-Beatrice Kihara – President of the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) and a leading Kenyan Obstetrician and Gynecologist – the study, titled “Recognizing and tackling the adverse commercial determinants of maternal health,” issues an urgent call to action.
The study highlights how a wide array of industries – from tobacco and alcohol industry to fast-food companies and private healthcare conglomerates are systematically undermining the health of pregnant women and new mothers globally.
For years, the discourse around health has centered on social determinants such as poverty, education, and access to services. However, this new research elevates the ‘commercial determinants of health’ such as corporate actions and omissions that profoundly impact public health, often to the detriment of society’s most vulnerable.
“Health is shaped not just by our genes or our doctors, but by the political and commercial environments we live in,” the study read in part.
The study presents compelling evidence of these commercial pressures. It points to the tobacco industry’s lobbying efforts against age restrictions in the UK, and the aggressive targeting of young women by alcohol and fast-food companies through tailored advertisements.
Consequences of the industry lobbying according to the study are stark: In 2020, 5.5 percent of women in the United States smoked during pregnancy, a figure that surged to 13.6 per cent in rural areas, despite irrefutable evidence of harm to unborn babies.
Furthermore the study adds, the market is saturated with products that contribute to obesity, diabetes, and fetal alcohol syndrome.
The burgeoning commercial human milk industry also comes under scrutiny. The report raises ethical concerns about companies profiting from expressed breast milk from disadvantaged women, particularly in low-income countries, while questions of exploitation and child nutrition remain largely unaddressed.
Counterintuitively, the study reveals that an increase in private healthcare does not necessarily translate to better maternal outcomes. The United States, with its predominantly privatized healthcare system, bears the grim distinction of having the highest maternal mortality rate among wealthy nations.
The report warns that private healthcare, driven by profit, can weaken public health systems by “cherry-picking” profitable cases and siphoning off skilled staff, thereby exacerbating inequalities. In countries like India, the dominance of private health services has even introduced gender bias in access to care.
Equally alarming is the pharmaceutical industry’s lack of investment in maternal health. Over the past three decades, only three drugs have been developed specifically for use during pregnancy, a stark contrast to the unique medical needs of expectant mothers.
“The reason is largely financial: pharma companies fear litigation and perceive little profit in maternal health research compared to chronic diseases in high-income patients. This profit-driven model was painfully evident during the COVID-19 pandemic, where vaccine production prioritized profit over global need.”
The digital age introduces another layer of complexity. Social media, often the first point of reference for pregnancy-related information, has become a hotbed of misinformation, from vaccine hesitancy to dangerous home remedies, amplified by algorithms.
However, the report also acknowledges the untapped potential of these platforms for health promotion, calling it a “missed opportunity.”
The authors offer a multi-pronged solution to combat these adverse commercial determinants. Their recommendations include enforcing strict conflict-of-interest regulations, curbing harmful advertising, and investing in gender-equitable policies. They urge governments to leverage collective bargaining power to secure fair deals on drugs and medical devices.
Universities and regulators are called upon to resist industry-funded studies that distort the truth, and schools are highlighted for their crucial role in educating adolescents – the next generation of parents – about the risks of corporate influence on health.
The report underscores a fundamental imbalance: while health-harming industries contribute to GDP, the invaluable, unpaid labor of mothers – childbirth, caregiving, and breastfeeding – remains invisible in economic balance sheets.
“Maternal health is not just a personal issue. It is a public good,” emphasizes Flavia Bustreo, one of the study’s lead authors. The study concludes that unchecked commercial interests will continue to exploit, marginalize, and endanger mothers. However, through coordinated action – from grassroots efforts to global governance – it is still possible to rewrite this narrative.
As Hanson and his co-authors assert, “Recognizing and tackling the adverse commercial determinants of maternal health is not just morally right — it is essential for our future.”
