London's Pulse: Medical Officer of Health reports 1848-1972
View report page
Hints from the Health Department. Leaflet from the archive of the Society of Medical Officers of Health. Credit: Wellcome Collection, London
Coulsdon and Purley 1937
[Report of the Medical Officer of Health for Coulsdon]
This page requires JavaScript
No samples of graded milk were taken under the special instructions
of the Ministry of Health, but two samples of " Tuberculin Tested " milk
were submitted, one of which did not conform to the prescribed standard
as judged by the methylene blue test. The second sample, which was
a repeat sample, proved satisfactory.
During the year the Council granted the following licences to sell milk under the Milk (Special Designations) Order, 1936:—
| Ordinary. | Supplementary. | |
|---|---|---|
| " Tuberculin Tested " | 9 | 8 |
| "Accredited" | 2 | 1 |
| " Pasteurised " | 10 | 5 |
ICE CREAM.
During the year 20 samples of ice-cream were taken with the following results :—
| Sample. | No. of Bacteria 1 c.c. on ager at 37° 6. in 48 hours. | Coliform Bacilli. | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Present in | Absent in | ||
| 1. | 39,600 | .1 c.c. | .01 c.c. |
| 2. | 9,900,000.. | .001 c.c. | — |
| 3. | 2,100 | — | .1 c.c. |
| 4. | 66,000 | — | .1 c.c. |
| 5. | 330,000 | — | .1 c.c. |
| 6. | 4,686,000 | — | .1 c.c. |
| 7 | 2,376,000 (repeat of No. 2) | .01 c.c. | .001 c.c. |
| 8 | 448,000 | .0001 c.c. | — |
| 9. | 19,200 | — | .1 c.c. |
| 10. | 5,400 (repeat of No. 5) | — | .1 c.c. |
| 11. | 496,000 (repeat of No. 6) | .1 c.c. | .01 c.c. |
| 12. | 54,330 (repeat of No. 8) | — | .1 c.c. |
| 13. | 72,330 | — | .1 c.c. |
| 14. | 605,000 | .01 c.c. | —- |
| 15. | 725,000 (repeat of No. 11) | .001 c.c. | — |
| 16. | 194,000 | .01 c.c. | — |
| 17. | 2,200 (repeat of No. 14) | — | .1 c.c. |
| 18. | 19,000 (repeat of No. 12) | .01 c.c. | — |
| 19. | 1,848,000 (repeat of No. 15) | .001 c.c. | —- |
| 20. | 3,630,000 (repeat of No. 16) | .001 c.c. | – |
The following notes illustrate the procedure adopted, and the degree
of success achieved.
Sample No. 2.—Letter sent to manufacturer and method of
manufacture investigated. Further sample (No. 7) taken later
showed considerable improvement, but was not satisfactory.. The
producer thereupon discontinued its manufacture.
Sample No. 5.—Manufacturer notified of the result of this sample
and the method of manufacture examined. A further sample
(No. 10) was satisfactory.
60