25 



butter is a very large quantity. Probably, as a rule, not more than one- 

 half of 1 per cent is employed. In this case the quantity of boric acid 

 likely to be consumed by any one individual in a day would be reduced 

 t<> one-quarter of a gram. 



In the case of 'meats preserved by borax, although larger quantities 

 are eaten than of butter, it is not likely that any larger quantities of 

 liorax would be consumed. Thus it appears that those who habitually 

 eat butter and meat preserved with borax might be consuming a half a 

 gram or a little more of boric acid per day. But preserved meats are 

 not regularly eaten, and hence the quantity mentioned is likely to be 

 overestimated. It would be unwise to affirm in a case of this kind, in 

 the light of the data obtained by the experiments, that such a minimum 

 consumption of borax, and especially when not a continuous one, would 

 prove deleterious within any reasonable time of observation. The ques- 

 tion then arises, Does the absence of such proof or the impracticability 

 of obtaining it serve as a justifiable excuse for the use of this preservative? 



This question ought not to be decided alone, because the principle of 

 the decision must stand, not only for boric acid and borax, but for every 

 preservative used in foods. In other words, whatever principle is estab- 

 lished for judgment as to the use of boric acid in small portions must 

 also be applied to the use of every other preservative used in foods. 

 The principle must also be still further extended so that whatever may 

 be established as regards butter or meat must be admitted in respect of 

 every other substance used in food. Hence before admitting the full 

 force of the argument based on minimal quantities the full significance 

 of such an admission must be considered and the practically unlimited 

 extent of its application acknowledged. 



This leads to the discussion of the fact that in the majority of cases 

 the labor of freeing the system from added preservatives falls princi- 

 pally upon the kidneys. In the method of life in vogue in this country 

 the kidneys are already hard-worked organs. Americans probably eat 

 more freely than the citizens of almost any other country, with the 

 possible exception of England. Large quantities of nitrogenous foods 

 are consumed. In the breaking down of the nitrogenous tissues the 

 kidneys are the chief organs for the excretion of the debris. The addi- 

 tion of any further burden, therefore, no matter how minute, is to be 

 deplored. If, however, the principle be admitted that injurious sub- 

 stances may be used in such small quantities as to be practically harm- 

 less, then we find the way open for loading upon the kidneys many dif- 

 ferent functions in addition to those which they now discharge. If they 

 may be justly called upon to eliminate the small quantities of boric acid 

 added in food they can not logically be freed from the necessity of elim- 

 inating also minute quantities of salicylic acid, saccharin, sulphurous 

 acids and sulphites, together with the whole list of the remaining pre- 

 servatives, which are eliminated principally through the kidneys. It 



