Away in a manger no crib for a bed. The little Lord Jesus
laid down his sweet head.
It seems to me at Christmas we enjoy talking about how Jesus
didn’t have a proper cot or crib and had to lie on straw, but we don’t often
mention his other needs such as food and nappies. Why not? After all they are also part of a babies
basic needs.
Thinking about this an article in the BMJ caught our eye
this week as we catch up on back issues whilst in the capital -Support
breast feeding and the environment.
Most of the talk about breast milk vs bottle feeding
concentrates on the value of breast milk and the risks of bottle feeding. WHO
estimates around 800,000 children under 5 die world-wide per year as a result
of bottle feeding. A few days ago I had a message from Bardai telling me that
one of our cleaners at the hospital had lost her baby after it was initially admitted
with diarrhoea and dehydration and the family decided to take it to Libya for
care. Almost all Teda women bottle feed and we spend a lot of our time dealing
with diarrhoea as a result of poor hygiene. The bottles have an offensive smell
of sour cheese, they are so dirty. Breast feeding is so much easier than
sterilising bottles and much cheaper.
But now it looks like we have another reason to encourage breast
feeding. The environmental effect of breast feeding we can assume is small as
it uses few resources and produces minimal waste. When it comes to formula
feeding let’s start with the milk. The water footprint to make one kg of
powdered milk is an incredible 4700l and we shouldn’t forget the methane
produced by the cows giving the milk (methane of course trapping heat in the
atmosphere 30 x more than C02). Cows milk alone is not nutritionally adequate,
so palm oil, coconut oil, fish oils and minerals are added, only adding to the
environmental costs of production. Interestingly only 40-50 processing plants
exist worldwide, so imagine the food miles transporting the raw ingredients and
then distributing the milk world-wide. Once the milk is finished we have to
consider what to do with the 86,000 tonnes of metal and the 364,000 tonnes of
paper left -land fill is the usual option. These figures are from 2009 and
apparently use of formula has doubled since then. So it looks like formula milk
is not a very eco-friendly option and that’s before we start thinking about buying
and making bottles and sterilising them and heating water for the milk. In the
UK alone estimates of the carbon emissions savings gained by breast feeding
instead of bottle are the equivalent of taking 50 000 to 77 500 cars off the
road per year.
We can safely assume that Jesus was breast fed and Mary and
Joseph didn’t have to worry about such issues. Unlike the 78 million children
who are not breast fed in the world, the 76% of children not being exclusively breast fed at 6 weeks in the UK
and of course our Teda friends.
What about the other end of the baby. There has been a lot
of discussion about cloth versus disposable nappies and the fact that using both electricity and hot water to wash and
dry cotton nappies makes them less eco-friendly than you would imagine. Washing
at lower temperatures and line drying would clearly reduce their impact. However
this is far from the only consideration, for a start nappies have to be
transported around and obviously you need a lot more miles to transport disposable
ones than cotton! Then they have to be disposed of; in the UK estimates are
that they make 2-3% of land fill as they slowly disappear.
Things begin to look
even less ecological when you start to consider production; it takes 3 times
more energy, 20 more raw materials and 2 times more water to make a disposable
nappy compared to a reusable one.
Sadly Bardai doesn’t do too well. Although where we live
most clothes are washed by hand using no electricity and dried on the line ( easy
when it doesn’t rain) all of which should make the cloth option even better.
However most of our Teda friends use disposable nappies and they are disposed
of just about anywhere, with no concern for hygiene and waiting for the next
500 years to pass before they disappear. All the other problems apply too , they
have to be brought to Bardai in trucks across the desert and of course they
have to be manufactured as well. It could be time for some interesting conversations.
Let’s get back to Christmas, I guess Mary didn’t have the
luxury of nappies in any form and must have used some eco-friendly extra
swaddling for Jesus and that’s not so uncommon in Chad either, it can be
disconcerting to end up wet when giving a baby a cuddle!
So after all this cheerful information what next? May be
this year as we celebrate the birth of this special baby it might be the moment
to start thinking and working out what you can do to make a difference to
protect this beautiful world we have been given.
Happy Christmas and many blessings for an environmentally friendly New Year
Happy Christmas and many blessings for an environmentally friendly New Year