View report page

56
To the Mayor, Aldermen and Councillors of
the Metropolitan Borough of Chelsea.
Madam Mayor, Ladies and Gentlemen,
During the year 1953, 4-00 samples of foods and drugs were examined
under the Food and Drugs Act. Ctf these 178 were taken formally and 222
informally.
The number adulterated or incorrectly labelled was 27, or 6.75 per
cent. No samples of milk examined during the year were found to be
adulterated.

In general the food situation throughout the country is now improving
rapidly and, whilst the public need the protection of the Food and Drugs
Acts as much as ever to protect them from skilful sophistication, there
is little doubt that many inferior products will disappear or be forced to
improve in order to meet the natural competition of other foods. With the
reappearance of proprietary products, however, the shelf life of foods in
shops will tend to be prolonged and greater care will have to be devoted to
the keeping properties of food on storage.
A portion of a sliced loaf of bread was sent for analysis owing to
black marks running through it. The marks were caused by fungus due to
improper and dirty packing conditions, showing that there was considerable
carelessness in the Bakery. No traces of iron or mineral oil could be found.
A local resident had the unfortunate experience of being served in a
restaurant with a sausage containing a large piece of gristle. On making a
complaint he was served with a meat pie in which there was present a piece
of bristle long. Your analyst suspected that the piece of bristle was
from a brush used in the bakehouse and this was found to be correct. Investigation
showed that the manufacturer of the sausages did nob run his meat through
a mincer, but used a bowl cutter only and that insufficient care was employed
in subsequent examination. As the complainant had thought the piece of
gristle was part of a mouse, it was disturbing to find a piece of bristle in
the meat pie served in exchange.
A sample labelled "Puregg" contained eggs, skim milk and salt and the name
was therefore considered misleading. The percentage of skim milk was nob
inconsiderable and some of the egg protein and fat were coagulated and not
readily emulsified with the remainder of the constituents making it unsuitable
for ~ertain culinary jobs. The manufacturers explained later that this was
very old stock, and they did not intend to manufacture any further supplies.