One of the main criteria for admission of NGOs into official relations with the WHO is that "its aims and activities shall be in conformity with the spirit, purposes and principles of the Constitution of WHO, shall centre on development work in health or health-related fields, and shall be free from concerns which are primarily of a commercial or profit-making nature." WHO's principles governing relations with NGOs states: "The objectives of WHO's collaboration with NGOs are to promote the policies, strategies and programmes derived from the decisions of the Organization's governing bodies; to collaborate with regard to various WHO programmes in jointly agreed activities to implement these strategies; and to play an appropriate role in ensuring the harmonizing of intersectoral interests among the various sectoral bodies concerned in a country, regional or global setting." During the Executive Board's debate on WHO's Framework on Non State Actors, Dr. Margaret Chan, WHO's Director General, said, "We need to make sure there is no influence in the policy space that is countries' prerogative, or in the technical standard setting space which is the second space. I call it the Red Lines. Two Red Lines. No industry. No Business Interest organisation or any organisations who want to influence the work of WHO to their benefit should be allowed in those two spaces." "If WHO is to fulfill its constitutional mandate, it has to develop policies that address the complexity of today's world and protect its independence, integrity in decision-making and trustworthiness. It must not fall into the trap of confusing the 'not-for profit' legal status with 'not working in the interest of profit-making.' There is a big difference between public-interest actors (who are guided by a public health mission) and those who follow the market profit-making logic (transnational corporations, corporate and venture philanthropic foundations, business associations and front groups, public-private partnerships and other hybrid entities)," said Patti Rundall, co-chair of IBFAN's Global Council. While activists and civil society groups have expressed satisfaction with the WHO's decision to not grant NGO status to the International Special Dietary Foods Industries (ISDI), they have expressed reservations about the entry of Global Alliance for Improved Nutrition (GAIN) into the list of NGOs in official relations with WHO. "ISDI represents the "global specialized nutrition industry" including 24 infant feeding associations and notoriously irresponsible baby feeding industry which includes global giants Nestle and Danone," said Rundall adding that identifying ISDI as a business group was not difficult. "But entities like GAIN that were set up to open up markets, but cleverly hide this true purpose, are trickier. I hope that Dr Chan stays true to her word and develops distinct policies that will keep the NGO 'space' for those whose only mission is public health," said Rundall. Meanwhile, GAIN Executive Director Marc Van Ameringen said: "We are delighted to receive confirmation from the World Health Organization of our new relationship status and look forward to strengthening our partnership with WHO." After consideration by its Standing Committee on Non-governmental Organizations, the WHO Executive Board confirmed GAIN's position in support of WHO's nutritional policies, including those on infant feeding and the promotion of complementary food, said a statement issued by GAIN.