THE MILK SITUATION IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. 179 



tested, because there are not veterinarians enough to do the testing in 25 years. 

 (Dairy Machinery & Construction Co., Derby, Conn.) 



Not recognizing the necessity of the tuberculin test, should say that ordinary 

 care coupled with rigorous physical inspection by competent veterinarians 

 would obviate any necessity of the test far better than any pasteurization. 

 (Borden's Condensed Milk Co., New York, N. Y.) 



If pasteurization could be perfectly accomplished, probably, yes; but the 

 injurious effects on the milk would make this seem a questionable method of 

 reaching the desired end. (Walker-Gordon Laboratory, Washington, D. C.) 



No. (Dr. V. C. Vaughan, Ann Arbor, Mich.) 



No. (Dr. S. C. Prescott, Boston, Mass.) 



Yes; but only so far as milk is concerned. (Health officer Los Angeles, Cal.) 



Yes ; but the dealers should buy upon the scoring system, and the test might 

 be a feature of the score, but optional now. The milk must be good before 

 pasteurization. (J. M. Houston, White Cross Milk Co., Washington, D. C.) 



No. (Health officer San Francisco, Cal.) 



It would require more than any general insistence within my knowledge at 

 the present time. (Health officer St. Joseph, Mo.) 



Clean, raw milk from healthy cattle is more to be desired than any pasteur- 

 ized milk. I hope, therefore, that pasteurization will not be generally insisted 

 upon. (Health officer Wheeling, W. Va.) 



No. (Dr. Samuel McC. Hamill, Philadelphia, Pa.) 



I think so. (Health officer Scranton, Pa.) 



QUESTION 12. Would compulsory pasteurization obviate in any way the neces- 

 sity for a prescribed bacterial content f 



ANSWERS 



No; because the bacterial count would afford an indication of the efficiency 

 of the pasteurization and how the milk has been handled and kept after pas- 

 teurization. The bacterial count is an important aid in bringing about sanitary 

 conditions on dairy farms and should not be abandoned even though compulsory 

 pasteurization were adopted. The bacterial test should be applied to milk 

 before pasteurization, and milk should not be pasteurized if it is very bad, but 

 be rejected entirely. (Chief Bureau of Animal Industry.) 



No; because pasteurization does not make dirty milk clean and does not 

 destroy the toxins which may develop in old milk. (Surgeon General U. S. 

 Army.) 



It would not. (Surgeon General U. S. Navy.) 



In my opinion a prescribed bacterial count is an indispensable part of any 

 regulations requiring compulsory pasteurization. Pasteurized milk is the only 

 class of milk in which a definite bacterial standard can be set and enforced 

 independent of the inspection service. It is an absolute index of the efficiency 

 of the pasteurization and of the conditions under which the milk is kept after 

 pasteurization. (Surgeon General Public Health and Marine-Hospital Service.) 



It would lessen the need a little, but it would still be highly desirable, as a 

 milk chemically altered by excessive bacterial growth will not be rendered 

 wholesome for infants for drinking purposes by heating, even though it is 

 much less dangerous. (Dr. William H. Park, New York, N. Y.) 



No; the standards should be, first, certified milk; second, inspected milk; 

 and milk pasturized at a low temperature. The first through a medical milk 

 commission, and the last two through a board of health. (Dr. Henry L. Coit, 

 Newark, N. J.) 



It would make it more necessary. Commercial pasteurized milk is usually 

 recontaminated before it is disposed of. (Dr. R. G. Freeman, New York, N. Y.) 



If proper inspection can be maintained, bacterial content may be disregarded. 

 Bacterial content is one way of deciding on proper pasteurization, however. 

 (Dr. M. P. Ravenel, Madison, Wis.) 



Not at all ; the milk must be kept as clean as possible before pasteurizing, 

 and then pasteurized for complete safety, and then properly handled afterwards. 

 (Dr. a E. A. Winslow, New York, N. Y.) 



No. (Health officer Ann Arbor, Mich.) 



No; because sanitary conditions at the milk producers are more important, 

 both with and without pasteurization. (Health officer Baltimore, Md.) 



I do not think so. Strict methods in the production of milk should be 

 employed and bacterial counts made to determine if the milk is produced and 



