View report page

47
Quality of Milk Supplies
Arising out of the Council's work in connection with the
sampling of food and drink under the Pood and Drugs Act, 1938,
and the various Regulations made thereunder, it began to appear
that the quality of milk supplies was deteriorating. After
careful consideration, and in conjunction with the Council's
Public Analyst, Dr. H. Amphlett Williams, I submitted the
following report to the Public Health Committee on the 15th
July, 1953:-
"For some time, concern has been felt regarding
the number of milk samples which have failed to comply
with the presumptive standards established in the Sale
of Milk Regulations, 1939.
The Regulations provide that a sample of milk which
contains less than 3% of milk fat or less than 8.5% of
milk solids other than milk fat shall, until the contrary
is proved, be presumed to be not genuine by reason of the
abstraction therefrom of milk fat or milk solids other than
milk fats or the addition thereto of water. In any
proceedings taken under the Pood and Drugs Act, 1938, in
respect of milk failing to comply with these standards, a
producer may secure an acquittal if he satisfies the Court
that the milk was as it came from the cow. In this regard
he is empowered to require the sampling authority to obtain
samples from the cows, provided he does so within 60
hours of the original sample being taken. Most of the
milk supplied to Kensington retailers is bulked and
pasteurized by wholesalers and cannot be identified with
any particular producer, thus application for "Appeal to
Cow" samples in this borough are infrequent.
An exception to this general rule is Tuberculin
Tested Milk which is supplied to Kensington residents in
the same sealed containers as it was despatched from the
farm. During 1952 forty samples of farm bottled milk
were taken and no fewer than nine of these or 22½% were
reported adulterated. In the first three months of the
current year, twenty-eight similar samples were taken and
four of these or 14% were adulterated. Some of the
remaining samples, though conforming to the presumptive
standard laid down in the Regulations were, nevertheless,
below the average usually found. Of the thirteen samples
of farm bottled milk found to be adulterated in 1952/53,
eight were deficient in butter fat in amounts ranging from
1-9%, three were deficient in both butter fat and
solids not fat, whilst the remaining two were deficient
in non-fatty solids only. Where farm bottled milk has been
adulterated, it has been the practice to notify the
Regional Officer of the Milk Marketing Board in the hope
that by local action an improvement in the quality of milk
could be found.