View report page

47
ANNUAL REPORT OF THE PUBLIC ANALYST
for the year ended 31at December,l96l.
To the Mayor, Aldermen and Councillors of
the Metropolitan Borough of Chelsea,
Your Worship, Ladies and Gentlemen,
During the year 1961, 260 samples only of food, of which 100 were samples
of milk and 160 samples of food other than milk, were submitted for examination.
At the present time the general standard of food sold to the public is very
good, but it is doubtful whether too high a standard will be maintained if the
number of samples taken is reduced too far.

The suppliers of milk sold in the borough maintained the high standard
of quality that has existed for many years and more difficulty is found in
London at the present time due to the improper washing of dirty bottles
than to the actual quality of milk sold. Of the 100 samples of milk submitted
during the year 46 were of good quality and contained 3.8 per cent or more of
milk fat, 51 were of fair quality in that they contained between 3.3 and 3.8
per cent of milk fat, and only 3 were reported as of poor quality because
the milk fat was less than 3.3 per cent. No sample of milk was found to be
adulterated when purchased by the sampling officers.
Complaints were received about two further samples of milk. In the
first case a slug had been found in the milk, but your analyst was of the opinion
that this had gained access to the jug into which the milk had been emptied and
had not been present in-the milk in the bottle as sold. Had the slug been
present initially it could not have failed to have been attacked by the alkaline
washing solution used for bottle washing. The milk itself was a pasteurised
milk and had been passed through a strainer in the pasteurising process. After
pasteurisation it had run directly into the bottles as they emerged from the
washing and drying process. The slug, moreover, showed no signs of having
been attacked by alkali. In the second case the bottle contained a piece