THIRTY-SEVENTH ANNUAL CONVENTION. 21 



it is needless and when the milk is dirty it does not take the dirt 

 out of it. What is it for? It destroys all the harmless germs 

 and leaves more room for the more dangerous ones which it 

 does not kill. 



Pasteurized milk, when sweet to the taste, may be poison- 

 ous. It is a bad thing all around, except to the man who is in- 

 terested in selling pasteurizers — there is the keynote of the whole 

 thing. I want to read to you one thing about this pasteurized 

 milk which Dr. Evans has been urging, it is from an article in 

 Pearson's December issue, written by Arno Dosch, entitled, "The 

 Pasteurized Milk Fraud" : 



" * * * * If you use the dirty raw milk com- 

 monly sold in cities, you take some chance with half 

 a dozen disease germs, but the one you are a hundred 

 times more likely to encounter than any other is that 

 of tuberculosis. The others appear only sporadically 

 and locally. Tuberculosis is there all the time, every- 

 where, but in raw milk the danger is minimized because 

 it is hampered in its growth. 



" * * * * The first man to raise his voice 

 against fraudulent pasteurization was Dr. George W. 

 Goler, Health Officer of Rochester, New York. Dr. 

 Goler is a pioneer in the fight for pure milk. With 

 an unusual appropriation of only $6,500, in ten years, 

 he has purified Rochester's milk supply, without resort- 

 ing to pasteurization. 



" Tasturized milk,' he has said, referring to the com- 

 mercial process, 'while having a low bacterial count, 

 owes it to the death of countless millions of the more 

 harmless micro-organisms, while leaving more danger- 

 ous organisms to multiply.' " * * * * 



So much for pasteurized milk. There is no necessity for it 

 and it is an insult to the dairymen when they say they have got 

 to pasteurize our milk. 



