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 Southwark, Borough of]
This page requires JavaScript
123
Report on some Samples of "T.T." Milk.
"On July 18th last, six samples of 'T.T.' Milk were submitted to
me for bacteriological examination of which two did not satisfy the prescribed
tests. Although the samples had only been submitted for
bacteriological examination I considered it advisable, as Public Analyst,
to examine them chemically to see if they satisfied the standards laid
down by the Sale of Milk Regulations, 1901. One of the samples did
not satisfy these Regulations, being deficient in milk-fat to the extent of
15 per cent. (318A).
"I immediately asked the Inspector to procure another sample from
the same source and to take the sample as 'Milk' under the Food
Adulteration Act. This was done, and the portion submitted to me on
July 21st (Sample 401) proved to be deficient in milk-fat to the extent
of 2 per cent.
"In consequence of the taking of this sample a letter was received
on Saturday, July 23rd, from the vendors' Solicitor requiring my
Council to take samples in course of delivery to his clients at the Dairy
at Hatfield Peverel, Essex.
"The Chief Inspector of the Essex County Council was accordingly
informed of the facts by our Inspector and he agreed to take the required
samples, which he delivered to our Inspector on July 27th, August 10th,
and they were submitted to this laboratory for analysis on those dates.
"The first lot of 17 samples were morning milks from separate
farms taken after the milk from each farm had been bulked at the dairy.
"The second series of 5 samples were afternoon milks taken in the
same way.
"Out of the first 17 samples, 10 proved to be deficient in milk-fat
to the following extent:— 4.6, 5.3, 8.6, 9.3, 15.6, 7, 17, 9, 24.3 and
13.6 per cent. Out of the second 5 samples, 2 were deficient in milk-fat
to the extent of 8 and 5.6 per cent.
"A further sample (No. 439) was taken from the same retail source
on August 5th. This sample was also below the standard, being 6.6 per
cent. deficient in milk-fat.
"No request for the taking of samples in the course of delivery was
made in respect of this sample.