[Report 1947] / Medical Officer of Health, Slough Borough.

  • Slough (England). Borough Council.
Date:
1947
Catalogue details

Licence: Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)

Credit: [Report 1947] / Medical Officer of Health, Slough Borough. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    35/40 (page 33)
    Table No. 8—continued. Food and Drug's Samples Reported not to be Genuine. Sample No. 164 (formal) 165 (formal) 166 (formal) 167 (formal) 168 (formal) 169 (formal) 170 (formal) 171 (formal) 179 (formal) 180 (formal) 234 (formal) 238 (formal) 241 (formal) 212 (formal) 256 (formal) 266 (formal) 268 (formal) Article. Adulteration. Action taken. Milk (p.m.) in transit. Deficient in 1 Solids-not- fat, no added water. Milk (a.m.) in transit. Deficient in fat 20%. Milk (a.m.) on delivery. Milk (p.m.) on delivery. Milk (a.m.) in transit. Milk (p.m.) in transit. Milk (a.m.) on delivery. Deficient in fat 21.6%. Deficient in solids-not- j fat, no added l water. V Deficient in / fat 15%. Deficient in S solids-not- ; fat, no added 1 water. 1 Deficient in 1 fat 15% 1 Samples are of Evening’s & Morn¬ ing’s milk from the same producer - “Appeal to the Cow” samples taken for comparison. Summary proceed¬ ings instituted in respect of the morn¬ ing’s milk samples:- 166, & 170 - Case dismissed. Milk (p.m.) on delivery. Deficient in solids-not- fat, no added water. Non-brewed Vinegar. Deficient in acetic acid 17.5%. Summary proceed¬ ings instituted, Manufacturer fined £5 with 1 gns. costs. Non-brewed Vinegar. Deficient in Acetic Acid 4.7% Summary proceed¬ ings instituted. Manufacturer fined £5 with 1 gns. costs. Ginger Beer. Deficient in sucrose 32.3%. Deficiency found to be due to technical¬ ities peculiar to the industry - no fur¬ ther action taken. Butter Butter Butter Was margarine] Was margarine ) Was margarine 1 Offence relating to the labelling of mar¬ garine - vendors warned. Milk Added water 14.6%. Summary proceed¬ ings instituted. Pro¬ ducer convicted and fined £3 with 3 gns. costs. Milk Milk Deficient in fat 13.3%. Deficient in fat 26.6%. Appeal to the cow” sample taken for comparison. Pro¬ ducer informed of the result.