Courier Democrat. (Langdon, N.D.) 1891-1920, 1902-04-10
Rockefeller and the New
York Milk Commission,

Although the City Milk Supply is
not exactly within the scope OF the
Review, we have published several ar
ticles on the subject, and it may not
be amiss to say few words on this
all important subject as the daily
press has lately been full of sensa-
tional and conflicting articles, writes
]. H. Monrad in New York Produce.
Review. The melting cause for these
seems to have been the report of the
New York Milk Commission appointed
by the New York County Medical So
ciety, supported financially by fund
created by Mr.. Rockefeller.
The most absurd claims were made
One in describing the dangers of the
bacteria in milk mentioned the fact
that while 800 to the c. c. were con-
sidered suspicious in water, there
were often found from 100000 to 900,-
900 in milk, forgetting to state that
possibly the $4,000 were inocuous or
even beneficial. Another described the
process of sterilization and pasteuriza-
ton (the learned doctor did not seem
to discriminate between the two) as
killing babies by the thousand. The
truth is, that if the city authorities
would only stamp out the dangerous
practice of using chemical preserva-
tives, the question of good milk sup
ply partly solves itself, as without
these (for infants) death dealing
chemicals in milk producers and milk
dealers are compelled to be fairly clean
in their work, as otherwise the milk
will spoil before reaching the consum-
ers. The truth is, that large pro-
portion of the milk sold is fairly good
and only skinned to a moderate ex-
tent. The truth is, that the danger in
milk is always exaggerated more or
less when the daily press gets spasm
Of virtuous indignation. The truth is,
that $50 of thousand of the bacteria
found in milk are inocuous or bene6-
eial and an aid to digestion, and that
the ten dangerous ones are only lia-
lie to hurt the weak constitutions.
The truth is, that with average
milk, pasteurization, if properly car
ried out, is safeguard, and that it's
effect on the average child is bene-
fetal rather than detrimental, and that
while it is the best plan to have the
doctors prescribe in each case whether
child is to have raw or pasteurized
milk, the greatest danger lies in the
sudden change from one to the other,
and that for the average consumer who
has not an abundance of ice for cool
ing facilities, the pasteurized milk
must as a rule be the safest.
Meanwhile, as said before, reason,
able cleanliness, from the COW to the
consumer, may be ensured by a strict
enforcement of an anti-preservative
ordinance. However, we understand
that the aid given by Mr.. Rockefeller
has been withdrawn and that the
commission is left to carry out its
plans-if it can-by charging the deal
ers for the inspection, and this in our
estimation kills the whole thing. It
seems as if Mr.. Rockefeller, having
through the commission demonstrated
the need of a practical inspection, with
draws under the impression that such
inspection is in the interest of the
dealers, and we hope that he yet may
be made to see that no more philan-
thropic work could be undertaken in
the interest of the great mass of peo-
ple-of the consumers-than to con-
tinue to support the Milk commission
with liberal fund, which would en-
able them to carry out the idea of vol
untary certification in practical man
| ner.