The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1903-04-06


D. a. Yarnen. NJ D.. Versailles. Mo.
of date August -2S 1902, says:
It consider alum, if taken continu-
ously into the system, very deleterious.
1t IS strongly astringent and win cause
atrophy, and finally almost complete
obliteration of the gastric tubules, with
consequent anemfa and constipation.
I consider 1t very unheaIthful, and
it should be excluded from all articles
Of food
B. E. Finley, NJ. D., Charleston, No,
of date August g. 1902, says:
Alum in baking powder is Injurious
to health, and the manufacture should
be prohibited by law
Doctor H. Bartens, Lexington. Mo-, of
date August 80, 1902, says:
ANY and every baking powder con-
tanning alum ought to be prohibited by
law in this and every other state. Food
adulteration in this country is carried
on in a shameless way. Alum baking
powder is poisonous"
r. NJ. Bradbury. M. D.. Maryville.
No. Of date August So 1902 says:
The law excluding alum from all
articles of food should stand and not be
repealed There is no doubt that these
alum compounds, when incorporated
with food. are INJURIOUS
Elton S. Smith, M. D., Stockton. no.
of date August 80 1902, says.
The use of alum in baking nowder
or any food. product is undoubtedly in
furious to health. and is so considered
by nearly all physicians and chemists.
i especially those who have investigated
/ the subject. In my opinion its use il.
any article Of food should be Drohio-
! ited.''
George NJ. Moore. NJ. D., Linn Creek.
Mo-. OF date August %, 1902, says
] II am opposed to the use of alum in
4
First the local irritant effect upon the
mucous membrane of the alimentary
canal stomach and intestines. Second,
/ it causes constipation and incident III
health Third. literature tells that 1t
will constringe the minute blood yes
sefs. It should not be used in food
products"
J. X. Cantrell. NJ ., Alton, No, OF
/ date August % 1902 says:
No burnt alum baking powder
should be on the market. I heartily in
dorse the present law from the facs
that I know that alum baking powders
are unhealthy. Alum arrests digestion
stops peristalsis and causes constipa-
! ton. It also arrests secretions. esDeci~
ally OF the mucous surfaces of the sto11l.
ach. It is a gastro-intestinal irritant
ana should never be used in SreDaraA
tons of food. I think the present law is
a good protection. 1t should not be re-
/ pealed-'
w. +. Bell, physician and surgeon. of
Oseeola, Mo, of date August %, 1902.
says:
T am pleased to see you taking an
interest in this matter of food adultera-
There need he no uncertainty as to
alum in baking powder When brought
/ in contact with the mucous membrane
OF the stomach it produces whitening
and construction, thus obstructing the
action of the gastric glands largely
stops the flow of the digestive fluids
that are necessary in the digestion and
and assimilation Of food This is a very
potent cause Of the indigestion and dys-
psJ3Sld SO prevalent in this country 1t
IS IN its local action not its constitu-
tional effect. that alum does great in
jury.
Tt is to the interest of our people
that this law be not repealed
] a. B. Adcoek. NJ. D.. of warrens-
burg. Mo. member of the State Board
says
T think the use of alum in baking
4 powders IS running a useless risk. as
q very small amount of alum taken into
many persons. and the law prohibiting
its use works no hardship to any con-
sumner, therefore let the law stand"
c. s. Austin. A. NJ. NJ D. Of car
rollton. Mo, of date August 80, 1902,
says:
You may quote me as being opposed
to the use of alum in anything which
! goes into the stomach. Ills true that
in baking powder it may be infinites-
i imal in quantity. yet the continuous
ana constant use is very liable to pro-
duee irreparable structural changes and
injury"
Doctor John w Angle. assistant
/ physician at State Hospital for Insane
Nevada, Mo-, Of date August 30. 1902,
/
7 am fully. convinced that the adul-
teration OF baking powder with alum
i or ammonia is very deleterious to thes
4 health and believe that the law prohib-
iting the use of alum in any food pro
/ duct should not be repealed
Il stand ready to lend my aid to as
slst IN making the law even stronger
than it is.
LAS to the toxic effect Of alum. that
has been known to housewives for
many years back, and you will find
i TRAIT Old grandmothers have used it in
4 . mixture of sorghum to produce vou-
iting in eases of Group in children. 1t
/ Is very weakening. produces excess of
nausea, and the reaction of the vagus
nerve readily explains its irritant ac-
ton on the mucous membrane Of the
stomach"
]. w. Hendrix. NJ. D. New London.
Mo. of date August IS. 1902 says.
i am forever against alum in every
way as i food mixture. especially in
the making of bread Tt produces in
Examination Of the walls of the stomach
and bowels, and finally. If the use is
persisted in, the result will be death
Let the law stand
Doctor J. A. AIcComb, Lebanon, Mo-.
Of date October 3, 1902 says.
Il hold that commercialism is trans
cending its legitimate province when It
in any way, intereferes in the problem
Of pure diet It is ours to suggest and
that of commercial people TO do the
bidding of conscientious chemists. ply
siologists. hygienists and physicians. If
alum be injurious to the human system,
| then no consideration of cheapne has
any place IN the problem.
THAT It is injurious has been held