London's Pulse: Medical Officer of Health reports 1848-1972
View report page
Hints from the Health Department. Leaflet from the archive of the Society of Medical Officers of Health. Credit: Wellcome Collection, London
Lewisham 1950
[Report of the Medical Officer of Health for Lewisham Borough]
This page requires JavaScript
Adulterated samples
Table 36
| Parliamentary division | Article | Formal or informal | Adulteration or irregularity | Action taken |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| West | Butter | Informal | Contained glass. | Sample supplied by retailer. Wholesaler supplied as received from Ministry of Food (prepacked). Deptford Borough Council (wholesaler's area) notified. |
| West | Apple conserve | Informal | Sulphite preservative equivalent to 95 parts of sulphur dioxide per million. | Formal sample taken and found to be genuine. |
| South | Pork sausages ... | Informal | Sulphite preservative equivalent to 220 parts per million. | Formal sample taken and found to contain sulphite preservative. See next entry. |
| South | Pork sausages ... | Formal | Sulphite preservative equivalent to 125 parts of sulphur dioxide—per million. | Warning letter sent. |
| West | Beef sausages | Informal | Sulphite preservative equivalent to 270 parts of sulphur dioxide per million. | Notice subsequently displayed in shop to legal requirement. |
| West | Coffee and chicory extract. | Informal | 440 parts of benzoic acid per million. | Formal sample taken and found to be genuine. |
| West | Tomato juice | Informal | 2-4 grains of tin per pound. | Stock withdrawn from sale. |
Unsound food
A considerable amount of food was surrendered as unfit for human
consumption. In all, approximately 15 tons was dealt with by the
Council's food inspectors, consisting of meat, fruit pulp, fish, vegetables,
etc.
In order to prevent waste where possible, most of this unsound food
was forwarded to the appropriate authorities for reconditioning or animal
feeding.
Other samples
In addition to samples submitted to the public analyst by the
food inspectors during their routine sampling, the following were also
submitted either to the public analyst or for bacteriological examination.
They were submitted for various reasons, but mainly because of
complaints received, or as a result of enquiries made into cases of
food poisoning.