482 



INFLUENCE OF FOOD PRESERVATIVES ON HEALTH. 



TABLE II. Schedule of administration of preservative, Series VI Continued. 



IN CAPSULES. 



Period and date. 



Nos. 1,2, 

 4-12. 



No. 3. 



Third subperiod: Grams. Grams. 



November 8, 1903 0. 74 0. 42 



9,1903 .74 .42 



10,1903.... .74 .42 



11,1903 .74 .42 



12, 1903 .74 .42 



Total per individual 3. 70 2. 10 



Fourth subperiod: 



November 13, 1903 1.2 



14,1903 1.2 



15,1903 1.2 



16,1903 1.2 



17, 1903 1. 2 .8 



Total per individual 6. 4. 



Fifth subperiod: i 



November 18,1903 .6 1.2 



19,1903 :6 1.2 



20,1903 .6 1.2 



21,1903 6 1.2 



22,1903 .6 1.2 



. Total per individual 8. 



Sixth subperiod: 



November 23, 1903 2. 1.6 



24, 1903 2. 1. 



25,1903 2.0 1. 



26, 1903 2. 1.6 



27, 1903a 2. 1. 6 



Total per individual 10. 



Total per individual for entire preservative period 30. 85 21. 15 



No. 6 took no preservative on November 27, making his total dose for the sixth subperiod 8 

 grams instead of 10, and the total for the entire preservative period 28.85 grams. 



The only notable variation in the administration of the preservative 

 occurred in the case of No. 3, who, on account of a slight indisposition 

 which developed during the fore period, did not begin to take the 

 preservative until the second subperiod. 



METHOD OF ADMINISTRATION. 



The preservative was administered in two forms, considered to be 

 most convenient, namely, in tablets and in capsules. Objections have 

 been urged against this manner of administering the preservative, and 

 it has even been stated in some criticisms of the borax experiment 

 that the use of this method is sufficient ground for the rejection of all 

 the data collected relative to the injurious effects of the preservative 

 upon the metabolic processes, because of the alleged irritant effects 

 of preservatives so administered as compared with the effects pro- 

 duced by the same bodies as found in the foods themselves as purchased 

 on the market. 



It is hardly necessary to call attention to the futility of such an 

 objection. Were the preservatives employed poisonous bodies, in the 

 ordinary sense of the term, producing a direct mechanical effect upon 

 the membranes of the mouth, esophagus, and stomach, there might be 

 some ground for criticising their ingestion in the form of tablets or 



