https://www.facebook.com/102448838149114/

Roger Nutritionist, Số 2 Hải Triều, Bến Nghé, Quận 1, Hồ Chí Minh, Hanoi (2026)

15/08/2026

Digital technology for breastfeeding?

Too many products and commercial innovations have undermined the mother-child dyad integrity, direct breastfeeding, and the provision and use of human milk. As digital technology and AI become increasingly integrated into health systems, we have an opportunity, and a responsibility, to ensure they instead protect, promote and support breastfeeding.

Imagine combining AI-assisted Code monitoring with citizen reporting and human verification. Extending breastfeeding counselling beyond routine health contacts through trusted digital touchpoints. Delivering more responsive social and behaviour change communication. Using real-time data to strengthen implementation, accountability and decision-making.

These technologies also bring risks, including bias, misinformation, privacy concerns, inequitable access and overreliance on automation.
Responsible design, human oversight, transparency and strong governance will be essential if they are to strengthen, rather than undermine, breastfeeding.

This World Breastfeeding Week, where do you see the greatest opportunities for digital technology and AI to protect, promote and support breastfeeding?

And what risk mitigation strategies should we be building into these systems from the start?

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/normativeai_worldbreastfeedingweek-wbw2026-breastfeeding-activity-7490799881838620672-_c-i?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_ios&rcm=ACoAAAJ_iuoB2yNVSkrbx5nnw0z74VtMK70FlS4

15/08/2026

When rights are at stake, accountability cannot be voluntary There is no shortage of principles and guidance on AI. We have been asking a more practical question: How do we translate principles into the way organizations actually make decisions about AI? Our approach starts before an AI tool is sele...

15/08/2026

Public systems can now monitor digital markets in ways that were not possible only a few years ago.

National monitoring platforms can continuously look for potential marketing violations across websites, e-commerce and other digital channels.

AI can crawl, detect, screen and classify large volumes of content. At the same time, citizens and health workers can submit pictures and reports from their phones when they encounter potential violations online or in their communities.

Technology expands the reach. People add context. Human experts verify the evidence and make the decisions.

Together, these sources create a richer picture of what is happening.

The data can identify violations and emerging marketing practices, reveal implementation and regulatory gaps, and provide evidence for stronger and more protective policies. Citizens can also receive feedback on their reports, increasing understanding of what policies regulate and strengthening connections with enforcement agencies.

Why does this matter?

Commercial actors increasingly use e-commerce, social media, behavioural data, algorithms and machine learning to make marketing more targeted, adaptive and difficult to monitor.

Public authorities may be expected to regulate the same environment with far fewer digital capabilities.

This matters for products subject to marketing restrictions or associated with harm, including breastmilk substitutes, feeding bottles and teats, to***co and ni****ne products, alcohol, gambling and unhealthy foods, particularly where children and other vulnerable groups require protection.

Digital technology also offers opportunities for more responsive social and behaviour change and stronger connections between public communication, health and social systems.

But the same solution will not work everywhere.

The Asian Development Bank’s Digitalization Index (1) illustrates why. It considers seven dimensions: digital economy, digital government, digital infrastructure, digital regulation, household digitalization, human capital and innovation, and production digitalization.

Countries, institutions and sectors can be at very different stages across these dimensions. Understanding context and readiness should therefore come before selecting the technology.

At Mantis Mentor, digital transformation is part of our registered investment project and business scope, spanning management consultancy, software and systems consultancy, systems analysis and design, programming, systems maintenance, data processing and database services, and market research.

Through NormativeAI and the Uptake Center for Knowledge Transfer & Innovation, we bring digital and AI capabilities together with expertise and experience in policy, programmes, research, implementation and evidence uptake. This allows us to develop integrated solutions tailored to the systems and capabilities already in place.

Our Responsible AI Toolkit brings transparency, accountability, evidence, equity, privacy and human oversight into design and implementation.

The aim is not to automate public responsibility. It is to combine technology and human intelligence to strengthen it.

We can support a quick digital and AI readiness assessment and explore practical opportunities for integrating digital technology into your area of work.

As a participant in the UN Global Compact, Mantis Mentor is committed to applying these capabilities in ways that support its Ten Principles and responsible, sustainable development.

1) Asian Development Bank. Digitalization Index, 2024. Digital Development Facility for Asia and the Pacific.

12/08/2026

What are influential religious and life stance institutions saying about AI?

Pope Leo XIV’s new encyclical, Magnifica Humanitas: On Safeguarding the Human Person in the Time of Artificial Intelligence, adds an important voice to a broader conversation about the values and principles that should guide AI.

Across religious and secular life stances, influential institutions are approaching this question from different foundations. What is interesting is not only where they converge, but what each perspective adds to a global understand.

Catholic social teaching | Human dignity, responsibility and the common good

Magnifica Humanitas places human dignity and the common good at the centre of AI governance. It is particularly strong on accountability: responsibility should remain identifiable across the AI lifecycle, from those who design and develop systems to those who use them to make decisions.

Humanism | Reason, evidence, human rights and democratic accountability

The 2025 Luxembourg Declaration on Artificial Intelligence and Human Values, drafted by Humanists UK and adopted by Humanists International, grounds AI ethics in “reason, evidence, and our shared humanity” and states that AI “must never displace human judgment, human reason, human ethics, or human responsibility for our actions.”

It also addresses power: AI should serve humanity rather than concentrate wealth and power, and its governance should be democratically accountable.

Islamic ethics | Balancing benefit and harm

In 2026, the Yaqeen Institute for Islamic Research published Toward an Islamic Ethics and Fiqh of Artificial Intelligence. It proposes an ethical and jurisprudential framework for shaping AI development and use, including fiqh al-muwazaat, the balancing of benefits and harms.

Buddhist perspectives | Compassion, interdependence and responsible use of knowledge

The Dalai Lama has long argued for bringing “compassion, tolerance, a sense of caring” and responsible use of knowledge and power into scientific development, while framing these as secular or universal ethics that can also provide common ground beyond religion.

These perspectives are not interchangeable, and they do not need to be.

Their added value may lie in their complementarity: dignity and the common good; reason and evidence; human rights and democratic accountability; justice and responsibility; compassion and non-harm; and careful consideration of both benefits and harms.

For NormativeAI, this plurality matters.

AI governance is ultimately normative. It requires us to decide not only what technology can do, but what it should do.

Who decides? Based on which values and evidence? Who remains accountable? Whose rights are protected? And what must remain human?

Further reading in comments.

Vatican News

Post by NormativeAI on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/normativeai_artificialintellig-aiethics-aigovernance-activity-7493142697554137089-3sF_?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_ios&rcm=ACoAAAJ_iuoB2yNVSkrbx5nnw0z74VtMK70FlS4

01/08/2026

What does it take to enable breastfeeding?

The World Bank Group’s Investment Framework for Nutrition 2024 places breastfeeding within the global nutrition investment agenda and considers the policies, services, financing and implementation needed to accelerate progress.

Breastfeeding is grounded in the rights of women and children. Fulfilling these rights requires coordinated action to protect, promote and support breastfeeding through legislation, financing, maternity protection, health systems, skilled counselling, community support, monitoring and accountability.

This question has guided collaborative work involving colleagues from the Uptake Center for Knowledge Transfer & Innovation and partner institutions over the past decade.

To mark World Breastfeeding Week 2026, we are sharing selected open access resources. They include highly cited publications and studies addressing important knowledge gaps across:

• The economic consequences of not enabling breastfeeding

• The volume and monetary value of mothers’ milk

• Investment needs for maternity protection, mass communication, counselling and community support

• Implementation and financing of human milk banks

• Protection of health systems from commercial influence

• The carbon and water footprints of commercial milk formula

• Recognition of breastfeeding within food systems, systems of national accounts and climate policy

Together, these resources contribute to the evidence informing policies, programmes and investments that strengthen what works.

Selected open access resources:

Investment Framework for Nutrition 2024
https://doi.org/10.1596/978-1-4648-2162-2

The Cost of Not Breastfeeding in Southeast Asia
https://doi.org/10.1093/heapol/czw044

The Cost of Not Breastfeeding: Global Results from a New Tool
https://doi.org/10.1093/heapol/czz050

The Volume and Monetary Value of Human Milk Produced by the World’s Breastfeeding Mothers: Results from a New Tool
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2023.1152659

The Financing Need for Expanding Paid Maternity Leave to Support Breastfeeding in the Informal Sector in the Philippines
https://doi.org/10.1111/mcn.13098

The Financial Costs of Mass Media Interventions Used for Improving Breastfeeding Practices in Bangladesh, Burkina Faso, Nigeria, and Vietnam
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192416923

Expenditures on Strengthening Large Scale Breastfeeding Counseling Programs in Bangladesh, Ethiopia, and Vietnam
https://doi.org/10.1111/mcn.70031

Community Support Model on Breastfeeding and Complementary Feeding Practices in Remote Areas in Vietnam: Implementation, Cost, and Effectiveness
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-021-01451-0

Cost Analysis of Establishing and Operating the First Human Milk Bank at Da Nang Hospital for Women and Children in Vietnam: An Activity-Based Costing Ingredients Study
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13006-024-00657-6

Estimating Carbon and Water Footprints Associated with Commercial Milk Formula Production and Use: Development and Implications of the Green Feeding Climate Action Tool
https://doi.org/10.3389/fnut.2024.1371036

Economic and Environmental Impacts of Commercial Milk Formula in Indonesia: Estimates and Comparisons Using the Cost of Not Breastfeeding, Green Feeding, and Mothers’ Milk Tools
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13006-025-00732-6

A Proposal to Recognize Investment in Breastfeeding as a Carbon Offset
https://doi.org/10.2471/BLT.23.290210
Babies Before Business: Protecting the Integrity of Health Professionals from Institutional Conflict of Interest
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2022-009640

Babies Before Bottom Lines: A Call for Australia to End Exploitative Marketing of Commercial Milk Formula at Home and Abroad
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lanwpc.2022.100640

Mantis Mentor

30/07/2026

NEW PUBLICATION: Gender-just reductions in greenhouse gas emissions in maternity care services through the ‘baby- friendly hospital initiative’: a scoping review.

This study highlights a significant evidence gap regarding carbon footprints of facilities providing maternity and newborn services.

Given the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with commercial milk formula (CMF), the absence of evidence of harmful impacts on female dairy farmers, and the under-investment in women’s competencies as maternity care professionals, facilities seeking to reduce their carbon footprint should implement gender-just strategies such as the Baby-Friendly Hospital Initiative (BFHI).

These strategies minimize unnecessary CMF use while increasing investments in breastfeeding support and the training of predominantly female maternity services staff.

Read the full open access article:
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13006-026-00839-4

Springer Nature Julie Patricia Smith University of Canberra The Australian National University Mantis Mentor FHI 360 VinUniversity Folkehelseinstituttet

World Alliance for Breastfeeding Action - WABA

25/07/2026

Putting Principles into Practice

Today we submitted Mantis Mentor’s Communication on Progress and Sustainability to the United Nations Global Compact.

As a newly established economic organization, we viewed this as far more than a reporting requirement. The Communication provided a structured opportunity to assess our performance, identify priorities, and strengthen how we integrate the Ten Principles into our governance, policies and everyday operations.

As an economic organization registered in Viet Nam and providing services locally and globally, compliance with national legislation and regulations is fundamental. The Communication challenged us to look beyond compliance by reflecting on how we embed internationally and locally recognised principles on human rights, labour, the environment and anti-corruption into the way we govern our organization, make decisions and deliver our work.

The process also encouraged honest
self-assessment. It prompted us to look at where we are making progress and where we still have work to do. Questions about governance, human rights due diligence, anti-corruption, grievance mechanisms, environmental
performance, greenhouse gas emissions, climate action and accountability became part of the conversation. Not every answer was complete, and that is precisely the value of the process.

During our first reporting period, we integrated the Ten Principles into our
Institutional Framework, service
agreements including General Terms and Conditions, and operational procedures. We also embedded the Sustainable
Development Goals into our vision and mission and continued developing our mission-driven initiatives, Uptake Center for Knowledge Transfer & Innovation and NormativeAl.

Following this assessment and review, our CEO signed Mantis Mentor's inaugural Statement of Continued Support, reaffirming our commitment to the Ten Principles of the United Nations Global Compact and to continuous improvement.

For me, this also reflects the beginning of a needed shift and direction of economies for the common good. One where purpose provides direction, collaboration creates value, learning is shared, and transparency and accountability build trust.

I am proud of what our team has accomplished during our first reporting period, but even more encouraged by the conversations this process inspired.
Responsible business is not about claiming to have all the answers. It is about asking better questions, learning continuously and improving over time.

We are proud to be part of the United Nations Global Compact and the global community working to advance responsible business. As an economic organization, we believe our responsibility extends beyond compliance. We look forward to continuing to learn, collaborate and contribute to sustainable development and the transition towards a Common Good Economy.

Letter in comments.

12/07/2026

What if we could listen better?

Listening has always been at the heart of Social and Behaviour Change (SBC).

Machine Learning, Natural Language Processing (NLP), and Large Language Models are creating new opportunities to strengthen how we listen, learn, and adapt, complementing community engagement, implementation research, and behavioural science.

Used responsibly, these approaches can help identify emerging concerns, barriers to access, implementation challenges, misinformation, and changing social norms. They can support better programme design, more responsive implementation, stronger accountability, and more informed policy and service decisions.

Sometimes the most valuable insights are surprisingly practical.

For example, community feedback may reveal that mothers are not breastfeeding because paid maternity leave is too short, not because they lack knowledge or motivation. That insight shifts the response from communication alone to policy action that enables women to breastfeed more frequently and for longer, in line with global recommendations.

As computational approaches evolve, success will depend not only on better technology, but also on responsible design, ethical implementation, transparency, accountability, and meaningful community engagement.

Across the United Nations, governments, academia, NGOs, and the private sector, these approaches are becoming part of a broader Computational SBC toolbox.

Follow our NormativeAI initiative on LinkedIn:
https://www.linkedin.com/posts/normativeai_computationalsbc-responsibleai-socialbehaviourchange-activity-7481950263163936768-BnEJ?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_ios&rcm=ACoAAAJ_iuoB2yNVSkrbx5nnw0z74VtMK70FlS4

27/06/2026

The Future Is Collaboratives

Relationships, trust, and shared purpose have always been at the heart of meaningful change.

What is changing is our ability to intentionally connect people, experiences, institutions, and resources in ways that create greater value for society.

Digital technologies, collaborative platforms, artificial intelligence, and new ways of working are making it easier than ever to share knowledge, build relationships, and mobilize professionals across institutions, sectors, and borders.

This is exactly why Mantis Mentor was created.

Our purpose is to provide lean, nimble operational and administrative backbone support that enables professionals, experts, institutions, and collaboratives to focus on what they do best.

The future is collaboratives.

Collaboratives are more than partnerships. They are intentional networks organized around a shared purpose. They create the conditions for learning, coordination, adaptation, and action across institutional, disciplinary, and geographic boundaries.

Most resources invested in sustainable development come from societies themselves: domestic budgets, taxpayers, institutions, communities, philanthropy, expertise, and time. We have a responsibility to ensure these resources create as much value as possible for people, communities, and the systems they serve.

This is not about spending less on quality. It is about organizing better.

Too often, capability statements highlight institutional experience, while much of the real capability sits with the people who built, led, and supported the work.

Institutions matter. But capabilities are only truly sustained when they are embedded in people, teams, relationships, and local institutions.

For Mantis Mentor, collaboratives are not abstract networks.

They are organized through mission-driven initiatives such as Uptake Center for Knowledge Transfer & Innovation and NormativeAI, and translated into action through programs including Grow & Glow Program, Excel to Excellence Program, and Work & Wellbeing Program.

The opportunity is not only to build stronger institutions.

It is to cultivate trusted networks that connect people, knowledge, resources, and action across contexts.

That is where collaboratives can create real value.

The future is collaboratives.
We’re here to enable them.

19/05/2026

Who is your AI really working for?

Is it actually a stealth sales agent?

I had a stark reminder yesterday about the hidden commercial motives driving AI-assisted decision-making, and why global regulators are scrambling to catch up.

I was using ChatGPT to help map out an automated workflow for our finance documentation process, looking for an objective way to handle the forms, approvals, and compliance support packs.

The tool smoothly recommended a fragmented Microsoft ecosystem solution, pushing products such as SharePoint and Power Automate. A Scope of Work for a Microsoft 365 consultant was also created.

On the surface, it sounded convenient because the files were Word documents. But beneath the surface, the implications are far more serious. OpenAI has a massive, multi-billion-dollar commercial and financial relationship with Microsoft.

When an AI tool acts as an undisclosed marketing channel for its investors' software products, it ceases to be a neutral advisor. It becomes a stealth sales agent.

When I pushed the tool on why it did not declare this massive conflict of interest, the draft announcement it generated for me tried to downplay the issue.

This is not just a minor technical bias; it is a fundamental governance issue. Businesses are increasingly relying on AI to guide high-stakes decisions in procurement, software architecture, and system integration.

Even the world's most comprehensive AI framework, the EU AI Act, is trying to tackle this.

Under its strict transparency mandates for General-Purpose AI, providers are legally required to disclose the structural limitations and training foundations of their models to prevent systemic bias and system collusion.

But while regulators are forcing AI to disclose what they are, they are still lagging on forcing them to disclose who owns them during a live consultation.

If an AI tool is hardwired to quietly guide users into its owners' and investors' commercial ecosystems without a prominent conflict-of-interest warning, it is a direct breach of corporate trust.

We expect humans to sign conflict-of-interest disclosures and comply with safeguarding policies before they provide advise. Why are we giving AI a free pass?

If you are using AI to brainstorm operational architecture, we have to treat the output with skepticism:

✔️ Identify the Investor Footprint: Always cross-reference who funds the AI model with the platforms or infrastructure it recommends.

✔️ Challenge the Monopolistic Nudge: Explicitly command the tool to provide open-source, vendor-neutral, or competing ecosystem alternatives.

✔️ Audit for Lock-In: Demand that the AI outline the structural downsides, ongoing licensing costs, and fragmentation risks of the system it just proposed.

Convenience cannot replace transparency. If AI is going to shape how we build our workflows, it must be held to the same conflict-of-interest standards we demand from any trusted partner.

Mantis Mentor

Roger Nutritionist

15/08/2026

15/08/2026

15/08/2026

12/08/2026

01/08/2026

30/07/2026

25/07/2026

12/07/2026

27/06/2026

19/05/2026

Address

Website

Alerts

Shortcuts

Share

Listing takedown request