[Report 1927] / Medical Officer of Health, Brighton County Borough.

  • Brighton (England). County Borough Council.
Date:
1927
Catalogue details

Licence: Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)

Credit: [Report 1927] / Medical Officer of Health, Brighton County Borough. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    42/100 (page 40)
    C.—‘ Appeal to Cow A 10. Average milk fat over samples examined Number of samples below standard Samples deficient in fat :—5. Deficiencies, 15-0%, 6-6%, S’O® 3-00% 5 or 50-0%. rc.AO/ ^ /05 3-3°/ /O ' D.- E. F. Retail samples from Shops and Roundsmen, 189. Average milk fat over samples examined Number of samples below standard Samples deficient in fat :—14. Deficiencies, 3-470/ 26 or 13-80, lO-Qo/o, 3-30, 1-00, 3-3%, 3-3%, 3-0%, 1-6%, 1-6 05 Deficient 5-80/ 1-6%, 1-60/. in solids not fat 2-00// 1-60A, 1-20/ 05 ^05 22-00/,, yo51-60/ 12-60/t ^5 1-60/,. -10. 1-20/ Deficiencies, 17-6*) 1-10/, cox, 0-90/ 05 17-50/ ^05 /05 /05 /05 /05 Deficient in fat and in solids not fat :—2. Deficiencies :—116% fat and 16-1% S.N.F. 5-O0/0 fat and 15-00/^ S.N.F. -Samples from Institutions, 22. Average milk fat over samples examined Number of samples below standard Samples deficient in fat :—3. Deficiencies, 6-6%, 5-00/ -Separated Milks, 1. Number of samples adulterated :—Nil. 3-28 0/ 3 or 13-6®% 4-0%. 05 All samples were examined for preservative but in no case was pre- servative found. In addition one sample of ordinary milk was submitted to examination for dirt and found to contain an appreciable amount of dust but no manure. A warning letter was sent to the farmer. Proceedings. Summonses were issued against one producer and two dairymen whom he supplied in respect of samples deficient in solids not fat. The jmoducer was fined £3, and 5s. analyst’s fee, and the summonses against the dairymen were withdrawn. A sample from a registered seller of “ bottled milk ” was deficient in fat 22 per cent. The vendor offered to give up the sale of milk and was removed from the register of milk sellers. A retailer was fined £1 and 5s. costs in respect of a sample deficient in fat 10 per cent. A shopkeeper registered to sell milk in sealed bottles only, sold milk from an open can. The sample was genuine. For selling milk from premises not registered as a dairy, the vendor was fined 10s. A roundsboy was observed filling a milk bottle in the street. The emj)loyer and boy were both summoned, the former being fined £1 and the latter 5s. PUBLIC HEALTH (CONDENSED MILK) REGULATIONS, 1923. Two samples of Full Cream Condensed milk and two of machine skimmed condensed milk were submitted to analysis and proved to be genuine. Of the samj)les, one was found exposed for sale without any label. This 7>roved to be a fuil cream milk and the vendor was warned. The remainder of the consignment was withdrawn from sale until properly JabeJJed in accordance with the regulations.