London's Pulse: Medical Officer of Health reports 1848-1972

View report page

Kingston upon Thames 1932

[Report of the Medical Officer of Health for Kingston-upon-Thames]

This page requires JavaScript

39
Ten fresh entries were added to the register, leaving a
total at the end of the year of 46. There is only one cowkeeper
in the Borough.
Graded Milks.
There is no licensed graded milk producer in the
Borough, but no less than 26 licences for the sale of graded
milk were issued during the year, compared with 20 for the
year 1931. There is not a great remand for the higher
grades of milk, and this fact discourages milk producers
from applying for the necessary licences. It does seem
somewhat paradoxical that a dairyman who desires to produce
and sell the best grade of milk should be expected to
pay ˆ5 for a licence permitting him to do so, whilst another
man can produce and sell an article which is simply
described as "milk" without any charge whatever. It
must be remembered that, apart from the annual licence fee,
the producer of "Certified" or "Grade A (T.T.)" milk
has to pay fees for the periodical examination of his herd.
It has been suggested, and there is good reason to believe
it is true, that cows which have been excluded from "Certified"
or "Grade A (T.T.)" herds may be found amongst
the herds which produce ordinary every-day " milk."
Two other matters, which have been referred to in
previous reports, remain in an unsatisfactory state. I refer
to the very confusing designations by which graded milks
continue to be known, and secondly, to the persistent lack
of care of milk bottles. The present designations of milk
have existed since 1923, and even after the lapse of 10 years
it is doubtful if more than a small percentage of the public
realise that Grade "A" milk is not the best milk, but is
actually third on the list. Milk bottles are subjected to
possible contamination very frequently, and the placing of
empty bottles on footpaths outside houses at least should
be strictly prohibited.
Samples of milk were taken from time to time and sent
to the Clinical Research Association for bacteriological
examination. Immediately an unsatisfactory result was
received, the dairyman concerned was interviewed and the
premises and processes were subjected to a careful inspection
to ascertain the cause. Further samples were then taken to
ascertain what improvement (if any) had been effected.