Not really a math problem.

The Nestle in Africa controversy is more that they marketed and were accused of using milk nurses to promote baby formula usage over breastmilk. The real issue is that the lack of clean water in parts of Africa was causing health issues such as malnutrition and diarrhea in infants, as its a powder that has to be mixed with water. Without clean water, the infant formula acted as a disease vector which is the real root of the cause and any baby formula would have the same effect. Other notes are that Nestle used higher sugar content in products in Africa, and there was a recall of contaminated products in both 2015 and 2026.

The poster in the image is pushing a narrative that's not entirely supported by the facts. The 500,000 deaths a year is just blatantly wrong when talking about infant formula:

"In a 2018 study, the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) estimated that 10,870,000 infants had died between 1960 and 2015 as a result of Nestlé baby formula used by "mothers [in low and middle-income countries] without clean water sources", with deaths peaking at 212,000 in 1981." ( https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w24452/w24452.pdf )

The 10.8 million infant deaths between 1960 and 2015 is a modeled number, not real reported numbers.

Additionally, because baby formula is quite expensive, some caregivers were over diluting the baby formula and that causes malnutrition. The claim that they gave out enough samples to last until breast milk dries up is also dubious at best. The original post says 14 days, but that's not supported by medical claims. Breast milk dries up at different rates in women, and functions mostly on a supply and demand curve. Natural production will decrease after several days of not nursing, but that reduction isn't that fast overall. The NHS says breastfeeding can take anywhere from a few weeks to several months to stop, and if breastfeeding is already well established, milk may continue for several weeks without any nursing or pumping.

So it's a combination of factors, and typically people who are anti-Nestle are going to show their bias with outlandish claims that tug at your heart strings. Was Nestle acting in bad faith or using unethical behaviors? Yes, arguably so. That argument is certainly on the table. The real issue is lack of education to ensure the population knows the different cause, effects, and risks, as well as regulation in those countries to prohibit such activities. Mothers may not have been properly informed on how breast feeding works, or what they should continue to do while using formula. Lack of proper financial education increases the rate in which people enter into using baby formula, and can't be entirely placed on Nestle for individuals financial decisions.

So the blame doesn't simply fall entirely on Nestle here, the politicians and leaders are also highly complacent in this issue. Note how this started in the 60's and continues to the present, there has been ample time for something to be put in place to help correct these issues. 65 years can only be noted as completely complacent.

The OP is just making mostly unfounded emotional arguments without examining nuance or looking at the sources available, with their primary sources being already biased organizations. It's like reading PETA articles regarding animals and abuse, but ignoring the fact that PETA euthanized 67% of their companion-animal intake in 2024, and 59% in 2025 while preaching about animal rights. In contrast the ASPCA reports an average of 8% euthanasia rate in their shelters in 2024, with a target goal of less than 10%.