360 THE MILK SITUATION IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. 



who had reason to think their herds were free from tuberculosis permitted the 

 test to be made. 



I took, in the fall and winter of 1908, 272 samples of the market milk of 

 Washington and injected them into guinea pigs. Of the 272 animals 49, or 18 

 per cent, died within 3 weeks of other causes before tuberculosis could have 

 developed. I wish to direct attention, also, to the fact that the milk from 

 some of the dairies, therefore, killed actually a high percentage of all the ani- 

 mals to which milk was given, showing the milk contained other bacteria. 



Of the 223 samples that remained for study 15, or 6.72 per cent, contained 

 sufficient tubercle bacilli to cause typical tuberculosis in the inoculated animals. 



Of the samples of milk from 104 dairies 2 were lost by acute death of the 

 animals, leaving 102; the milk from 11 of these 102 dairies contained tubercle 

 bacilli. This gave a percentage of 10.7 of the dairies examined showing tubercle 

 bacilli in the milk supplied their customers. 



ELEVEN PER CENT AFFECTED. 



These results, showing that approximately 11 per cent of the dairies whose 

 milk was examined contained tubercle bacilli virulent for guinea pigs, do not, 

 however, give a fair idea of the frequency of the presence of tubercle bacilli in 

 the market milk of the city of Washington. When two animals were inoculated 

 with the same sample both did not always develop tuberculosis. This would 

 indicate that the bacilli were so few in the amount inoculated that one of the 

 animals, by being a little more resistant, was able to overcome the infection. 



The amount inoculated, less than 2 cubic centimeters of milk, is a very small 

 portion of a pint bottle. The creamy layer was not inoculated, and other 

 workers have shown that tubercle bacilli are more frequent in this than in the 

 bottom milk. It is very probable that if more animals had been inoculated 

 with the same sample and both cream and sediment used, the percentage of 

 positive results woudl have been much higher. 



The results, however, as they are found are sufficiently high to emphasize 

 the necessity for the enactment and rigorous enforcement of a law requiring 

 that all cows supplying milk to the District be tuberculin tested and freed from 

 tuberculosis. This test, which is now universally recognized as a means of 

 determining whether an animal has tuberculosis, should be made by a com- 

 petent veterinarian, and those animals that respond should be disposed of in 

 some way so that their milk may no longer be a source of danger to the com- 

 munity. 



I have compiled the statistics of investigators who have collected in all 1,734 

 samples of milk in recent years. Of these samples 11.3 have been found to 

 contain tubercle bacilli. 



i 



Mr. HERBERT P. CARTER. I speak from the producers' point of view. There 

 are two questions brought up which I have nothing to do with. One is the 

 personal controversy between the officials of the health department and the 

 dealers in milk here, and the second is the matter of the scientific controversy 

 as to the merits of pasteurization. I am not entitled to any opinion on its 

 merits, but I can be convinced by an examination of the evidence, which shows 

 that the tuberculin test is sufficient in a large number of cases. 



I can say for my part I am not bothered about the order for the tuberculin 

 test, as my herd has been tuberculin tested from the first, and I know about 

 the cattle that have been slaughtered from my herd after reacting, and I should 

 have been sorry to serve milk from them. It certainly served to weed out the 

 bad cattle from my herd, cattle that I would be sorry to keep in. 



It seems to me this is a matter which neither the producers nor dealers 

 have a right to discuss. We can not pretend to be scientists. If the scientific 

 opinion requires such tests, it is the business of the producer to obey them as 

 well as he can. 



The whole question is a matter of compensation. It is a matter of dollars 

 and cents. There may be many people who have worked hard for many years 

 to produce a herd of, say, 20 cattle, honest, hard-working, laboring men. They 

 have not had any tuberculin tests applied, and they have not done anything 

 against the law or against their conscience. The profit of the herd of 20 cattle 

 is not anything extraordinary. You must consider in this connection that the 

 producer of milk has an exceptionally hard life. It is a case of working seven 

 days in the week and not six. He should therefore receive additional 

 compensation. 



