View report page

85
To the samples thus condemned a ninth, sample 10, may be added without
any hesitation. Sample 10 was the very worst milk of its kind that I have ever
examined. It contained but little "foreign" dirt (it is classified under "2" on
the scale of general cleanliness), but on centrifugation a deposit of pus cells
equal in bulk to rather more than 35 parts in 150 of the milk was obtained. In
other words, the pus cells constituted at least 1 part in 430 parts of the milk by
bulk And, since the formed pus cells would constitute only a smaller part of
the fluid pus cells in the milk, one would be well within a reasonable estimation
in saying that the milk originally contained at least one part of pus cells in 200,
a proportion of pus cells which would be equal to one pint in twenty-five
gallons of milk.
To recapitulate, the nine samples condemned were condemned for the
following reasons:—
One sample (No. 3) because of the presence of B. Tuberculosis and of an
excessive amount of dirt.
Three samples (Nos. 17. 18 and 23) because of the presence of
B. Tuberculosis.
One sample (No. 10) because of the presence of a very large quantity of
pus cells.
Four samples (Nos. 6, 8, 9, 24) because of general dirtiness.
III. Certain oth'r Results of the Examination which tended to cast suspicions
on the Wholesomeness of other Samples.
Whilst the results of the examination in the case of each of the nine samples
to which detailed reference has been made were such as to enable one to affirm
without hesitation that the milk was so unwholesome as to be unfit for use as
food, in some other instances the results of the microscopical examination were
merely such as to throw a certain amount of suspicion on the sample. That is
to say, either the microscopical examination suggested the presence of pus, or
the results of the biological test proved the presence of organisms which were
pathogenic for the guinea-pig, and which would not be found in a milk obtained
from a perfectly healthy cow and handled throughout with proper care. These
results, it must be clearly understood, do not necessarily show that the
particular milks would have been injurious to the human consumer, they merely
raise a certain amount of suspicion as to the wholesomeness of the milk, a
suspicion which is accentuated in some cases on comparison with the results of
the examination with respect to the general cleanliness.
(For particulars, see Minutes of Council, p. 85.)
Conclusions.
It will be seen that the results of this series of examinations are very much
more serious than those obtained in a similar series made some two years ago.