POISON. We had an instance of this some time ago when we received two grades of wood alcohol, one labelled Wood Alcohol-Poison, the other Columbian Spirits, etc., etc., with a small note "This may not be taken internally."

This covers but a small part of the subject of pure food, but is offered as a basis for our general discussion.

DISCUSSION.

C. H. Jones, Chemist Experiment Station, Burlington, Vt.

I am not exactly a pure food chemist, and it is therefore with some diffidence that I stand before you to open the discussion on this important portion of your Board of Health Laboratory work, namely, "Pure Food." It has been my privilege to be a member of the Association of Official Agricultural Chemists for several years, to have attended many of their meetings and to have taken part in their work. This association, as you know, has been indirectly, at least, responsible for most of the methods and standards that obtain in the control work of your Laboratory.

What is meant by pure food laws and regulations? You have already been told, but I am going to tell you again. They are simply measures whereby you and the general public are enabled to get just what you want to eat. Do you want pure tomato catsup, or some pickled in benzoate of soda? When these measures that have been discussed have been enforced you can doubtless get either; but I doubt if you could before. Personally, I prefer to add formalyn myself to the milk I use, if necessary, rather than have some irresponsible farm help dump it in, hit or miss, under the alluring title of "Freezine," "No Ice Needed," etc.

Now, a word as to standards. According to the old saying, "He discovers who proves." It would seem that this was followed by the United States chemists and sundry state controls in formulating standards for the various food products. Unbiased and representative data were in the main consulted, and the result has been that pure products of American origin can in most instances be clearly separated from their preserved or inferior competitors. Take the case of preservatives. As you all know, carefully conducted experiments have shown their injurious effect on the human system; and it is, therefore, the ultimate intent of the government to exclude their use. While I believe that there is a use for preservatives, it is my emphatic opinion that man's chief articles of food, including milk, flour, meat, vegetables, etc., should be free from them. On the other hand, it might be allowable to permit the use of benzoate or salicylate of soda in Worcestershire sauce, its presence being so stated on the label.

To consider briefly one or two specific cases illustrating the work of your State Laboratory, let us mention milk and maple sugar. Take the former: Is there anyone who does not want milk clean, sweet and free

from preservatives? This topic alone might be discussed indefinitely. Milk inspection has always been carefully looked after in all board of health laboratories, and the state of Vermont may well be thankful that a start has been made on these lines within its borders. As this question will later receive the attention it merits, I need dwell no longer upon it. Look at the maple sugar situation. The past season was a good one, and even though national and state laws had already taken a hand in the matter, it is probable that, so far as the original producer was concerned, but little adulteration would have been attempted. This has been shown by the results of your inspection. The seasons from 1899 to 1906 inclusive were, however, poor and the temptation has been strong to help out by a little granulated cane sugar in many instances. Pure maple products should command luxury prices and not be compelled to compete with the ordinary cane product. Already the salutary effect of the national law is felt, and you can now actually purchase mixtures of maple and cane sugar where formerly only Vermont Pure Maple (made in Chicago) was offered.

As you have gathered from Mr. Moat's paper, this pure food inspection is comparatively new to Vermont. In many other states, notably Massachusetts, such control has been in operation for years.

In closing, the point I wish to impress on your mind is to work gradually towards the goal. Miracles are not to be accomplished in one year or two, particularly with your limited appropriation; but, aided by the national and state laws, this branch of your work is bound to grow so that in the near future we can be assured that Vermont is no longer the dumping ground for any old food product.

This branch of your Laboratory's work is a very important one and should merit an enthusiastic discussion. I trust you will ask the officials in charge all the questions that occur to you.

Dr. Frederick Fletcher, Bradford, Vt.

Mr. Moat said we were getting short measure. I want to know if wine measure is the legal measure for milk.

Dr. G. H. Branch, Grand Isle, Vt.

Is it necessary that butter colored with butter color should be so labelled? Discussion by Dr. C. M. Ferrin, Essex Junction.

About a year ago a butcher called me to his shop to see a carcass. I found a very good carcass of a cow. It was in every respect fair to look upon, but the lungs were very much diseased. I took a large slice and sent it to Dr. Rich and he returned the answer that it was tubercular. I asked the butcher what he was going to do with the body. He said he did not know. I said, "You must not use it for food." He said he would take it to the rendering plant and I have every reason to believe he did. After I received Dr. Rich's answer I wrote him again and asked him what, if

anything, had been done about it. The creature came from a herd in Colchester. The man brought it in good faith, but it was in this condition. I wanted to know if something could not be done about the herd. He made no reply. The question is, What has been done with that carcass? It was good looking beef. What was my duty farther than that?

Discussion by Dr. C. F. Ball, Rutland, Vt.

I am interested in the suggestions Mr. Moat made with regard to the need of a law in this state requiring a prescription from a physician for the sale of cocaine.

I have a case in my town which I am following up rather closely. I am certain that cocaine is sold to a little girl. She can go to one of our drug stores and tell them that a certain man wants fifty cents' worth of his medicine. There is nothing written on the box, but examination of its contents shows it to be cocaine. At one time the box did come back with the word "Poison" on it. This little girl goes and gets it about once a week. The man is a railroad employee. This is very evident that our laws are lax. I haven't quite enough evidence to make a prosecution, but I am working that way. Certainly the sale of morphine, cocaine, etc., is on the increase. Some of the stores are selling without a prescription but are placing a label on the container.

Closing Discussion on "Pure Foods," by C. P. Moat, Burlington, Vt.

With regard to Dr. Ferrin's question about the beef. I think that the beef could not be legally sold. It is, of course, a question of wholesomeness, and a cow with a badly tubercular lung would not be held to be good, wholesome beef by most of us.

Regarding the wine measure as the legal measure for milk. Wine measure is the legal measure for milk in Vermont.

The United States government allows butter color in butter. I do not know what our new rules and regulations will do regarding that matter. Our new law does not go into effect until the first of July. I have not a copy of our new regulations so do not know what stand we are really going to take. Nothing will be done with decisions of that sort under the pure food law until further notice. We will not prosecute the retailer without giving him the benefit of the doubt and a warning.

In closing let me say that we must realize that the pure food question is a question of education. Like everything else, the sooner everyone demands pure foods, the sooner we will get them.

Dr. A. Morton, St. Albans, Vt.

In taking up the discussion of Mr. Moat's paper I propose to confine my remarks almost wholly to medicinal agents.

The pure drug requirements are very drastic. Each article must conform

to the pharmacopoeial or national formulary standards or be properly labeled.

Before the pure food and drug law went into effect the physician had no way of being sure that the drugs he used were pure, except as he depended upon the reputation of the manufacturer. To say that the manufacturers sadly abused his confidence is to state the case mildly.

Remedies were misbranded. The amount of drugs in tablets could not be depended upon, and I have been told that some manufacturers substituted cheaper drugs and drugs of an entirely different action.

Two-grain quinine tablets contained anywhere from one grain to a grain and a half. Tablets which were supposed to contain 1/100 grain of nitroglycerine were found to be deficient and now the drug houses tell us that it is impossible to make a nitroglycerine tablet that will maintain its strength. Morphine and strychnine tablets were often inaccurately made. Preparations of chloral and closely allied substances were foisted upon the medical profession under certain trade names as perfectly harmless. Tinctures and fluid extracts could not be depended upon, some being stronger while many were weaker than the pharmacopoeia called for.

The crude drugs varied very much from the standard required, although before the law went into effect the manufacturers claimed to be satisfied that the standard was just; since then, however, many protests have been received claiming that it was impossible to produce certain drugs of the required pharmacopoeial strength.

It seems strange that these men were perfectly willing that the physician should use these drugs for years supposing them to be of the official strength, and wait until the law compelled them to correctly label their products when they were under the proper strength.

I do not wish to say much in regard to the manner in which the law will effect patent medicines, as this has been gone over time and again in the journals and newspapers. It seems certain that if the requirements of the law are strictly adhered to, many of the concerns manufacturing these nostrums will be forced out of business and that the general use of them by the public will become less and less.

I think the subject of medicinal foods might well be discussed under this title. While not impure under the strict interpretation of the term, still we as physicians often get an erroneous opinion of their food value. This is often brought about either through the carelessness of the physician or through the mislabeling by the manufacturers, and the misleading statements of the traveling salesman. We are often told that the dose recommended is sufficient to maintain our patients' vitality even when used over a long period of time.

Now if we as physicians are careful to investigate the facts of the case we will find that our patients, even when taking the best of these foods, do not receive more than a fifth of the nutrition necessary to maintain the

equilibrium of the body and fully one half of this energy is derived from the alcohol which the food contains.

The council of Pharmacy and Chemistry have recently made some very interesting analyses of medicinal foods from nine different firms.

A patient taking the full daily dose recommended by these firms would receive, exclusive of the alcohol, only from nine to a hundred and eleven calories a day. A sick person needs about fifteen hundred calories a day.

If we take the best of these foods, the one that furnishes the most calories, it will be readily seen that our patients would receive in a day hardly one tenth the amount of nourishment that they should.

This misconception has been fathered by the manufacturers, and while we perhaps have not been poisoning our patients, still many of us have labored under a false sense of security and it is a great wonder in some instances that we have not starved our cases.

If a patient should take enough of these foods to obtain the required amount of nourishment he would be in an alcoholic stupor most of the time, for most of them contain over fifteen per cent alcohol. If we wish to give alcohol, let us do it, but let us not give it as a beef product.

We can by a very little trouble nourish our patients far better by using milk prepared in various ways, eggs and beef. It only takes two quarts of milk to yield fourteen hundred calories, enough food to amply nourish our patients, with this we can combine eggs, jellies, etc., so as to give our patients a variety.

It seems to me that our law ought to be amended so that the manufacturers would be obliged to print on the labels of medicinal foods the food value in calories.

FOOD AND DRUG INSPECTION.

By L. P. SPRAGUE, M. D.

The work in this department of the Laboratory has been largely confined during the past three months to the analysis of maple products. The work on the milk supply of the cities and towns has been continued and the miscellaneous foods and drugs submitted have been analyzed. Some of the samples previously collected have beeen analyzed, but the work along this line has been suspended because of the maple sugar work. It is evident that analyses of maple goods must be made during the season to be of any value. There are still at the Laboratory unanalyzed samples which were collected during January and February. These will be analyzed as