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
Barnes 1951
[Report of the Medical Officer of Health for Barnes]
This page requires JavaScript
28
Sample No. 242—Milk.
The deficiency in milk solids, other than milk fat, in this sample, was
brought to the attention of the distributors, and attributed by them to the
seasonal decline in quality. There was no presumption as to added water and
no further action was considered necessary.
(b) B acteriological E xamination and P hosphatase T est.
| Taken from | Total No. taken | Results | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Satisfactory | Not satisfactory | ||
| Schools | 14 | 12 | 2 |
| Other sources | 2 | 1 | 1 |
Phosphatase tests were also carried out by the Laboratory on all the above.
Table 16.—Sampling of Other Foods and Drugs. (a) Chemical Analysis—Samples procured under the provisions of the Food & Drugs Act, 1938, included:—
| Foods. | ||
|---|---|---|
| Apricots in Syrup Atom Sugar Com Barley Crystals Beef Sausages Butterkist Popcorn Chocolate Mousse Compton's Gravy Salt Crab Fish Paste Desiccated Coconut Fruitade Tablets Ground Almonds | Herring Roes Lemonade Powder Lucky Dip Liquorice Macaroons Meat Rissoles Olive Oil Orange Mousse Parsley & Thyme Stuffing Peanut Butter Peppermints Pork Pie | Pork Sausages Raspberry Jam Rice Cremola Senior's Devilled Ham Thirst Quenchers Tomato Puree Tomato, Peeled Plum Veal, Ham & other Meat Paste Veal and Ham Pies Whisky White Pepper |
Serafig Laxative Syrup Medicated Peppermints
The Public Analyst reported adversely on five of the samples and the
following notes indicate the type of discrepancy and the action taken:—
Samples Nos. 252 and 257—Pork Sausages.
These two samples were obtained from the same source of supply and
showed a deficiency in the meat content. In view of the amount of the discrepancy
and the acknowledged difficulty in the mixing of ingredients, it was
decided, by the Public Health Committee, that no further action be taken in
these instances.
Sample No. 266—Sausages.
This was an informal sample of sausages handed in by a member of the
public who apparently had not specified any particular type of sausage at the
time of purchase. The question of labelling was taken up with the retailers and
they undertook to indicate clearly the various types of sausage on sale in future.
Sample No. 305—Orange Mousse.
A complaint about the appearance of this product was investigated. The
Public Analyst reported that the mousse was contaminated with specks of mould
growth on the surface. The matter was taken up with the Manufacturers. The
whole process of manufacture was checked, and it was finally concluded that
dust from building operations in the vicinity was responsible.