View report page

86
n partial explanation of this it may be pointed out that this second examination
has been a more searching one than the other: (1) in the first examination
attention was mainly directed to the question of the presence of B. Tuberculosis,
and a less detailed examination with respect to general cleanliness of the
samples was made; (2) the sediment examined was from a greater quantity of
milk (150 cubic centimetres in the present examination, 100 cubic centimetres in
the former one), and so the chance of detection of B. Tuberculosis and other
pathogenic micro-organisms was considerably increased.
Of the twenty-five samples examined—
Seven, or 28 per cent., were satisfactory in every respect.
Nine, or 36 per cent., must be absolutely condemned as unwholesome, and
Nine, or 36 per cent., presented features which gave rise to a certain
degree of suspicion.
With regard to the nine last-mentioned samples, this may be said:—
In two samples (5 and 21), the evidence derived from microscopic
examination upon which suspicion was founded was very slight, the mere
finding of Streptococci in the sediment; but both samples had previously been
classified under the head of "suspiciously" dirty.
One sample (4) had been classified as a "clean" milk, but contained
definite pus cells in addition to Streptococci.
Four samples, two of which (2 and 11) had been classified as "clean,"
and two (12 and 25) as "suspiciously" dirty, produced disease in one of the
pair of guinea-pigs to which the sediment had been administered.
Two samples (14 and 20), both classified as "clean" milk, produced
disease in both of the guinea-pigs to which the sediment had been
administered.
In conclusion, I think it only fair to say that, in my opinion, the unfavourable
results obtained in the examination of this series of milks should not be taken as
representative of the condition of the milk supply generally. I am entirely
ignorant of the source of these particular samples, but the results of the
examination would strongly suggest that a considerable proportion of them have
passed through the hands of retailers who are themselves supplied from sources
which are not carefully selected, and who are either unable to handle the milkunder
cleanly conditions or who are neglectful of proper precautions in this way.
(Signed) ALEX. G. R. FOULERTON,
Director of the Bacteriological Department, the Middlesex
Hospital, and Hon. Consulting Sanitary Officer to the Hospital.
The Middlesex Hospital, W.
6th May, 1907.