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 London, City of ]
This page requires JavaScript
36
In only two cases was there any reason for supposing that premature death
may have invalidated the experiment. In these cases I have recorded the
experiment as "presumably negative," The remaining animals were killed
with chloroform during the fifth week after inoculation. Eleven of the 48
animals (or 22.9 per cent.) developed local suppuration as the result of the
inoculation.
Five of the 48 developed tubercle, i.e., 10.4 per cent of the milk samples
contained living tubercle bacilli.
The last series of milks examined by me for the Corporation was in January,
1912, when two samples out of 30 (6.6 per cent.) proved tuberculous.
(Signed) F. W. ANDREWES, M.D., F.R.C.P., D.P.H.
December 30th, 1913.
So far as cleanliness is concerned, these results show a considerable improvement
on any recorded in the past. It will be observed that the Bacteriologist states that in
no single instance can the term "dirty" be applied to any of the samples under
review, and the unclean, which range from "trace of dirt" to "a little dirt," total
8 out of 48 samples, or 16.7 per cent.
For purposes of comparison, I give the results obtained in previous investigations:—
| 1st. | ||||||||||
As regards the presence of the tubercle bacillus the percentage is higher than in
any previous year since 1909. It should, however, be remembered that comparisons
based on small numbers often show wide differences in the results, and possibly the
conditions are not worse in the present year than they have been in the past.
During the first year (July, 1908, to July, 1909) of the administration of the Act
under which these samples were taken, the percentage of tuberculous milks averaged
12.9 for the whole of the County of London.
The percentage, however, for the period July, 1908, to 30th September, 1913, is
appreciably lower, being 9.9 per cent.
These samples of milk were taken under Section 35 of the London County
Council (General Powers) Act, 1907, in which the City have concurrent powers with
the London County Council in respect of milk sold in the City of London.
By arrangement with the London County Council, details of instances in which
positive results have been obtained have been forwarded to the Medical Officer of
Health of that body, whose practice in the past it has been to follow up the milk to