TESTS OF RAT VIRUS.

By MARGARET HENDERSON, Assistant in the State Hygienic Laboratory. The experiments, the results of which are shown in table I, were undertaken to show the efficiency of the various brands of rat virus offered for sale in San Francisco,-Azoa, Parke, Davis & Co.; Ratite, Pasteur Vaccine Co., and Virus Danyz, Deutche Danyz-Virus-VertriebsGesellschaft, Berlin. The testing of a rat virus is not the simple matter that it seems at first thought. When a number of wild rats are kept in the same cage, the mortality from fighting and crowding is heavy. Furthermore, under such conditions, the equal distribution of dosage of the virus is uncertain. It was therefore necessary to keep the rats in individual rat-proof cages, the preparation of which in the number necessary was a matter of considerable trouble and expense.

The rats were obtained from the boards of health of Oakland and San Francisco, and were the ordinary gray or Norway, and black rats, caught by the city rat-catchers. They were put into individual cages on being brought to the laboratory, and were kept so, and fed on grain, for a period of two weeks, during which the mortality from the cage conditions, confinement and cold was very heavy. At the end of this time, when the survivors were supposedly more or less inured to captivity, feeding of the virus was begun. The food was in each case prepared according to the directions accompanying the virus. Oatmeal was used instead of bread wherever that was allowable. They were fed once at the beginning with the virus and then again on the eighth day, and at other times on grain. The rats ate all of the virus that was offered them without hesitation. The checks were fed on grain alone throughout.

Of the checks fed only on grain, nine of the fifteen, or 60%, died in the thirty-five days during which they were kept under observation. Of those fed virus, in only one case was the death rate higher, and that was in the case of the Danyz virus, with its rate of 73% of deaths, in the thirty-five days.

All the rats that died were examined post mortem and various causes of death were found that were in no way related to the virus, such as tape-worm, abscesses in old wounds and the like. In the column headed, "Possibly dead of virus infection" are listed only those rats whose

death was not obviously due to some of these other causes. Whenever the autopsy showed nothing, the death was attributed to the virus and the rat appears in this column. In no case did I observe the lesions that are supposed to be caused by the virus. Considering only these rats that did not obviously at least die of any other cause than virus infection, the highest rate of death is still that produced by the Danyz virus, 40% of the rats fed. This is 20% lower than the rate for the check rats. As a result of these tests I am unable to recommend any of the preparations tested.

FOOD AND DRUG INSPECTION.

The State Laboratory for the examination of foods and drugs is now established and equipped at the University of California, Berkeley. Samples have been received from several localities, chiefly from San Diego, Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Alameda counties. These are being examined as rapidly as possible.

In connection with the work of the Laboratory the Secretary of the Board and the Director of the Laboratory are daily in receipt of a large number of inquiries relating to the proper labeling of foods and drugs under the new law. In order that all such matters should receive due and proper consideration, it was decided by the State Board of Health to appoint a committee on Food and Drug Inspection, consisting of the President of the Board, the Secretary, and the Director of the Laboratory. This committee meets at the Laboratory in Berkeley every two weeks for the purpose of discussing the various questions incidental to the food and drug inspection.

It is certainly gratifying to note, from the large variety of communications and their contents, the evident desire of the varied commercial interests to conform to the requirements of the law. The many different inquiries may be classed under several different heads, as stated herewith:

A. The labeling of coal-tar colors allowed by the law.

By the terms of Regulation 14, adopted by the State Board of Health, coal-tar dyes which will be allowed are those permitted under the rulings of the U. S. Secretary of Agriculture. Those coloring matters are named and the circumstances under which they may be used are set forth in U. S. Food Inspection Decisions No. 76 and No. 77. These decisions may be had upon application to the Secretary of Agriculture, Washington, D. C.

The coal-tar dyes allowed by law as designated in U. S. Food Inspection Decision 76, are given numbers, the numbers preceding the names referring to the number of the dye in question as listed in A. G. Green's edition of the Schultz-Julius Systematic Survey of Organic Coloring Matters, published in 1904. The list is as follows:

The general answer to the question relating to coal-tar dyes may be summarized as follows:

1. No coal-tar dyes may be used in foods except those specifically enumerated in U. S. Food Inspection Decisions 76 and 77.

2. Although a coal-tar dye may be one there enumerated, it may not be used in foods unless it has been tested and certified, given a lot number and labeled as required by said decisions.

3. Dealers using or selling dyes which do not conform to U. S. Food Inspection Decisions 76 and 77 are not protected by the guaranties mentioned in the California acts and regulations. These dyes are not in themselves a food product, and the provisions as to guaranty do not apply to them, although in the case of food colored by the use of forbidden dyes and sold under guaranty, the purchasing dealer would be protected.

4. Although complying in every respect with the requirements of said decisions, a coloring matter may not be used to color a food so as to deceive or mislead the purchaser, or to conceal inferiority.

B. The labeling of drugs with particular reference to the percentage of alcohol contained therein.

This matter, it would seem, is covered by Section 6, subdivision second, of the Drug act, which, in part, states that a drug shall be deemed mislabeled if the package, as offered for sale at retail or wholesale, fail to bear a statement on the label of the per cent of volume of alcohol, etc. The words "about 20 per cent alcohol" would not be in conformity to the law.

Section 6 of the drug act also answers another question submitted to the Board concerning the labeling of a mixture of drugs, some of which contain alcohol, with the percentage of alcohol contained in said mixture.

C. The labeling of drugs as to the contents of packers,. etc., of certain ingredients.

The questions under this head are fully answered by Sections 5 and 6 of the drug act. The former is explicit with reference to false or misleading statements, and the latter, in connection with Regulation 27, "Substances named in Drugs and Foods," contains sufficient data for the guidance of those desiring such information.

D. The labeling of "Soda Water" artificially colored with coal-tar dyes.

All such beverages are in violation of the law, unless the dye used is one permitted by U. S. Food Inspection Decisions 76 and 77, and has been properly tested, certified, guaranteed and labeled as required by said decisions.

It must be remembered, however, that a coloring matter may not be used to color a food so as to deceive or mislead the purchaser, even though the dye complies in every respect with the requirements of the law.

E. The relabeling of Foods and Drugs on hand previous to January 1, 1908. The use of stickers, etc.

66

This point is covered by an extract from U. S. Food Inspection Decision No. 78, reading:- 'Any person has a right to use a label which is not. false or deceptive in any particular, even though this result is arrived at through the use of stickers, erasures, or other suitable means. Attention is directed, however, to the fact that misleading and deceptive statements must be obliterated. In other words, it is not sufficient, in the opinion of the Board, that a deceptive statement should be allowed to remain in one portion of the label with a corrective statement in another portion of the label."

See also Regulation No. 16, adopted by the State Board of Health. In this connection, it might be well to state that Regulation 17 of the California laws, "Name and Address of Manufacturer," and U. S. Food Inspection Decision 46, "Fictitious Firm Names," contain the following statements which answer other questions received along this line:

When a proper name, other than that of the manufacturer, is placed upon a label, it must not be used in the possessive. For instance,

CHARLES GASTON'S
OLIVE OIL
BORDEAUX

can only be properly used on an oil manufactured by Charles Gaston at Bordeaux. The same is true if the designation

GASTON'S
OLIVE OIL
BORDEAUX

be employed.

On the other hand, the word "Gaston" might be used in an adjective sense, and not in the possessive case as qualifying the words "Olive Oil," in a manner that would indicate that it represented a brand and not a manufacturer, as

GASTON OLIVE OIL.

or

OLIVE OIL, GASTON BRAND.

In such case, however, neither the given name nor initial should be employed. The word "Gaston" should be in the same type as "Olive Oil" and in equal prominence, thus forming a part of the label.

The phrase "Olive Oil, Charles Gaston Brand," may be used, in which case the name of the actual manufacturer should appear, in order that no false indication of the name of the person or firm manufacturing the product may be given.

F. The labeling of compounds, or mixtures of one food product with another.

This matter is partly covered by California Regulation 19, "Distinctive Name," and by Regulation 26, "Mixtures or Compounds with Distinctive Names."

U. S. Food Inspection Decision 75, "The Labeling of Mixtures of cane and maple syrup," fully illustrates and answers many of the questions included under this head. This is referring to mixtures of oats and wheat, lard and beef suet, etc.

When both maple and cane sugars are used in the production of sirup the label should be varied according to the relative proportion of the different ingredients. The same of the sugar present in excess of 50 per cent of the total sugar content should be given the greater prominence, on the label; that is, it should be given first. For example, a sirup of the sugars of which consist of 51 per cent cane sugar and 49 per cent maple sugar, would be properly branded as "Sirup made from Cane and Maple Sugar," or as "Cane and Maple Sirup.' The terms, "Maple Sugar" and "Maple Sirup" may only be used on the label as part of the name when those substances are present in substantial quantities as ingredients. They should not appear on the label as part of the name when only a small quantity of these substances is used to give a maple flavor to the product. A cane sirup containing only enough maple sirup or maple sugar to give a maple flavor is properly labeled as "Cane Sirup, Maple Flavor," "Cane Syrup Flavored with Maple."

Whenever it is necessary to declare cane sugar (sucrose) on a label it should be declared as cane sugar and not as white sugar.

With reference to the matter of the use of cereals in the manufacture of sausage, it may be said that the fact must be so stated on the label, although the kind of cereal used need not be so designated.