Hints from the Health Department. Leaflet from the archive of the Society of Medical Officers of Health. Credit: Wellcome Collection, London
[Report of the Medical Officer of Health for Greenwich Borough]
This page requires JavaScript
85
Food and Drugs Act, 1938.—Altogether 461 samples were
submitted to the Public Analyst during the year for analysis in
accordance with the provisions of the above Act and of these 33
were formal and 428 informal. Three formal and 32 informal
samples were reported as being non-genuine or otherwise unsatisfactory,
the resultant adulteration figure of 7.5% showing an increase
of 3.6% over that of last year. In recording this increase during
the current year, however, it must be emphasised that in many
instances no fault was to be found with the actual constituents,
the infringements being in respect of wrong or incomplete labelling.
A further 15 samples were also examined by the Public Analyst but
as these were taken in consequence of complaints and not in the
normal course of sampling, the results have not been included in
the above figures.
As in previous years, Milk was the main food sampled and of
the 54 samples submitted for analysis 5 proved to be adulterated.
In the analysis of each of the latter 5 cases the equivalent of up to
1% added water was presumed, but as the total solid content was
more than the legal requirement, each was considered to be a sample
of good milk and the very small deficiency in milk-solids other than
fat was assumed to be due to the seasonal decline.
Fifty-four samples of Ice-cream and 6 of "Ice-lollies" were
submitted for examination and all proved to be genuine. The
standard shown by these samples was much higher than that
demanded in the Food Standards (Ice Cream) Order, 1951. The
maximum fat content recorded for Chocolate-coated Ice-cream was
26.3% and the minimum 20%. In the case of ordinary Ice-cream
the comparable figures were 16.3% and 7.8% respectively.
Legal proceedings were instituted in respect of a formal sample
of Sal Volatile which had proved to be considerably deficient in
free ammonia and ammonium carbonate: the chemist was fined five
guineas and ordered to pay costs.
As the result of tests, confirming the existence of a tin content
far in excess of the 2% normally considered dangerous to health,
samples of canned Concentrated Tomato Soup were the subject of
non-genuine reports to the Public Health Committee on several
occasions during the year. Intensive efforts were made to trace the
whole of the consignment received into the country and a warning
letter was sent to the District Manager of the firm concerned who
took immediate steps to prevent the sale of the suspected soup
from shops in his area. His action brought about the withdrawal