Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

British Food Journal Volume 8 Issue 3 1906

British Food Journal Volume 8 Issue 3 1906 Of milk alone no less than 36,000 samples were purchased during 1904, almost as many as the total for all articles 10 years ago. Of these 4,031 or 11.1 per cent. were returned as adulterated. In the previous year 10.4 per cent. were condemned. The difference is not of necessity due to any increase in adulteration, as the figures are admittedly inaccurate owing to the differences of procedure on the part of Public Analysts in making out their reports. In support of this view it is mentioned that in 14 Metropolitan Districts where 6,270 milks were examined, 4.9 per cent. were reported as containing percentages of added water under 5 per cent., while in 15 other districts, where 3,205 samples were submitted, only 0.56 per cent. were returned as being adulterated to this extent. The explanation is that in the former case the Public Analyst adhered more or less rigidly to the standard fixed by the Sale of Milk Regulations, while in the latter, in most instances, where the amount of adulteration was under 5 per cent., the samples were reported as genuine. Here the Report takes what is a more or less new and certainly welcome departure, in definitely expressing an opinion for the guidance of those in doubt, and stating that so long as the Sale of Milk Regulations remains in force, Public Analysts have no warrant for the adoption of a still lower standard. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png British Food Journal Emerald Publishing

British Food Journal Volume 8 Issue 3 1906

British Food Journal , Volume 8 (3): 20 – Mar 1, 1906

Loading next page...
 
/lp/emerald-publishing/british-food-journal-volume-8-issue-3-1906-E2ju60IvNc

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Emerald Publishing
Copyright
Copyright © Emerald Group Publishing Limited
ISSN
0007-070X
DOI
10.1108/eb010933
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Of milk alone no less than 36,000 samples were purchased during 1904, almost as many as the total for all articles 10 years ago. Of these 4,031 or 11.1 per cent. were returned as adulterated. In the previous year 10.4 per cent. were condemned. The difference is not of necessity due to any increase in adulteration, as the figures are admittedly inaccurate owing to the differences of procedure on the part of Public Analysts in making out their reports. In support of this view it is mentioned that in 14 Metropolitan Districts where 6,270 milks were examined, 4.9 per cent. were reported as containing percentages of added water under 5 per cent., while in 15 other districts, where 3,205 samples were submitted, only 0.56 per cent. were returned as being adulterated to this extent. The explanation is that in the former case the Public Analyst adhered more or less rigidly to the standard fixed by the Sale of Milk Regulations, while in the latter, in most instances, where the amount of adulteration was under 5 per cent., the samples were reported as genuine. Here the Report takes what is a more or less new and certainly welcome departure, in definitely expressing an opinion for the guidance of those in doubt, and stating that so long as the Sale of Milk Regulations remains in force, Public Analysts have no warrant for the adoption of a still lower standard.

Journal

British Food JournalEmerald Publishing

Published: Mar 1, 1906

There are no references for this article.