THIRD REPORT OF THE COMMISSION ON MILK STANDARDS APPOINTED BY THE

NEW YORK MILK COMMITTEE.1

PREAMBLE.

Purposes of Milk Standards.

Proper milk standards are essential to efficient milk control by public health authorities. In the first place health authorities must ascertain that the chemical composition corresponds with established definitions of milk as food, but their more important duty is to prevent the transmission of disease. This means the prevention of the transmission by milk of infant diarrhea, typhoid fever, tuberculosis, septic throat infections, scarlet fever, diphtheria, and other infectious diseases. In the interests of milk consumers public health authorities must take positive action, to prevent the transmission of any of these diseases, in addition to their duty of preserving the food value of milk.

The milk producer is interested in proper standards for milk, and should support a movement to secure proper standards, for the reason that these contribute to the well-being and dignity of the milk industry itself. Proper standards, rightly enforced, distinguish between the good-milk producer and the bad-milk producer. This inevitably will lead to the improvement of dairy farming, and eventually to an increase in the financial prosperity of the milk producer himself through better prices for better milk. It will enable the producer to get properly paid for the quality of milk he produces, and thus put that industry for the first time upon a dependable basis.

The milk dealer finds the classification of milk resulting from milk standards to his financial advantage for the reason that it identifies clearly first-class milk and distinguishes it from second-class milk. Such a distinction gives to the seller of first-class milk the commercial

1 Previous reports were published in the Public Health Reports, May 10, 1912, pp. 673-700; and Aug. 22, 1913, pp. 1733-1756,

rewards which such milk deserves, and the official label creates a market for first-class milk which the dealer alone is unable to create. For milk consumers the setting of definite standards accompanied by labeling with official control of the labels makes it possible to know the character of the milk which is purchased, and to distinguish good milk from bad milk. The establishment of standards for quality, and of labels on retail packages indicating the quality, compels the industry not only to purchase milk on a quality basis, but also to sell milk on a quality basis. The selling of milk strictly on a quality basis, which includes not only chemical composition but sanitary character, makes it possible for consumers by an inspection of the label intelligently to select milk which in quality and price is most suitable for their needs.

Administrative Equipment.

Standards are useless unless properly guarded and enforced. The chief objection that has been raised to a grading system for milk is the difficulty of insuring that milk labeled as of a certain grade is actually of that grade when sold to the consumer.

The prime requisite for efficient milk control is that health departments shall be adequately equipped with men, money, and laboratory facilities. The commission is of the opinion that satisfactory results can not be expected from laws when there is not sufficient appropriation, and when there is no machinery for their enforcement. vey of the money appropriated for milk control shows that in the majority of municipalities this is entirely insufficient for public needs.

The key to the solution of the problem of the proper use of grade labels is the laboratory. The establishment and operation of an efficient milk testing laboratory is commonly supposed to be an item of great expense. This, however, the commission is convinced, is a mistake, since there are numerous laboratories scattered all over the land not only private, but public, which are inexpensive and operated at low cost. By efficiency methods a large number of tests can be made at a very low cost. Even small communities can afford to maintain and operate such laboratories. Where for any reason it is not possible to do this, it has proven to be practicable for one community to enter into laboratory arrangements with another, and even several can combine in the use of a common laboratory.

Grading of Milk.

There is no escape from the conclusion that milk on the market must be graded just as other commodities such as wheat, grain, beef, etc., are graded. The milk merchant must judge not only of the food value but also of the sanitary characteristics of the commodity in which he deals. There is no good reason for believing that fruit

beginning to decay is particularly unhealthful, but it should not be sold on a par with sound fruit. Small apples have as much food value as an equal quantity of large ones, but the latter properly command a higher price. So, too, with milk; the high-grade product, fresh and cold, will cost more to buy from the producer, and should sell for more to the consumer than does the low-grade product. The commission's most important work has been the attempt to separate milk into grades and classes. The commission has endeavored to make. its grading system as simple as possible, and at the same time.to distinguish between milks which are essentially different in their sanitary and other character. The commission is convinced that the experience of the last three years has fully demonstrated the value of the grading system in the communities in which it has already been applied, both from a public health and an economic standpoint. The commission believes that the grading of milk offers a satisfactory solution for most of the sanitary and economic problems which have hitherto prevented efficient milk control, and that it is feasible for small communities as well as large communities to adopt a grading system and to secure its benefits.

CHIEF SUBJECTS CONSIDERED.

The commission during its deliberations over a period of five years and on the occasions of its eight meetings and the numerous meetings of its subcommittees has given attention to a great variety of subjects. The more important conclusions it has reached are the following:

(1) Chemical Standards for Milk.

The lack of uniformity in chemical standards used by different municipalities and States throughout the United States and Canada has led the commission to believe that it is desirable for them to give expression to their opinion concerning proper chemical standards for milk. The commission recognizes that chemical standards do not involve public health questions excepting in so far as they safeguard the food value of milk. Nevertheless, as milk is a food, chemical standards are necessary for defining its nutritive value.

The chemical standards suggested are the work of a special committee, composed of chemists, which has carefully considered the natural composition of milk, as well as the Federal and State standards already established. The standard of 3.25 per cent fat and 8.5 per cent solids-not-fat, here proposed, is in accordance with the recommendations of the Association of Official Agricultural Chemists, and has been adopted by the United States Department of Agriculture and by a larger number of States than has any other standard. (The word "standard" used in connection with milk is not intended to imply excellence, but simply to express the lowest possible standard