The Washington times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1902-1939, 1909-07-06

Board Begins Hearing on
Question of Pure Food
Rulings.

Secretary of Agriculture James VIII
son. DR.. Harvey W. Wiley, chief chem
lst. and T. I. Dunlap, an expert on
1000 and drugs, constituting the board
OF iood and drug inspection, listened
inns morning TO arguments for and
against the use of alum in food. and
whether or not alum or sodium potas-
SUM or cream of tartar substitutes are
injurious to health.
A large array OF experts, including
professors OF some well-known medical
colleges. and manufacturers who are
connected intimately with products in
which alum is used were present.
Former Secretary of War Luke f.
Wright, backed up BY H. c. Morrison
secretary OF the American Baking Pow
der Association. with several chemists
presented the case Of those nanufaez
turers who contend that the use of
alum is not injurious. DR.. James Els
berg, of Cincinnati. who said that ne
represented the medical profession as
well as the American Health I.eaeue Of
ONO, and Dr. j. M. Andrews of Pbila-
qelphla, who was retained by the Heinz
Plekle Company of Pittsburg. were the
prlncipal speakers in opposition TO the
use of alum
Statement Ruled Out.
Vice President Dow. of the fifty
seven varieties" concern, wished to in
9ect into the hearing a statement OF the
effect of alum in pickles on the human
system, and the manner in which his
company is making pickles successfully
without the use of alum. DR.. Wiley.
however, after a Consultation with the
other members of the lR,erd. ruled thar
the arguments must b. z srniane to the
statement sent out by tffe uoaref-the ef-
rect on health of the use in food OF
alum.
Dr. Eisberg made the first arguments
against alum He Travelled along gen
eIal INES and was a bit epigramatic
at times, but when he had finished. DR.
dunlap suggested that ne might send
the board some actual facts in regard
70 Ill effects of alum, which he actually
nao seen or experienced. The Ohio doc
tor said he would do So
DR.. Eisoerg said there is no question
IN the minds Of physicians as TO the
Ill effects of alum. When first used.
he said, it is an astringent, which has
pad effect upon the alimentary canal
and upon the fibers of the stomach.
Cites Medical Use.
It's use in dysentery and other all
ments as an astrinsent, ne thought. was
an indication that il could not be safe
~ used as steady article of diet II
persisted in. alum becomes an irrit.nt
and has an increasing i'll effect. It pro-
duces. he said. intestinal catarrh and
indigestion. The manufacturers prefer
to use alum, he said. because of the
fact that 1t is cheaper.
Dr. J. NJ. Andrews argued upon the
same lines. He said that the use of
alum had been observed in the case of
a large number of rabbits and that two
drains in sOlution-about the quantity
used in bread-produoed death. He said
that, while there have been few, If any,
cases Of death of human beings from
the use of alum, IL undoubtedly has
bad effect. NeurOtic girls, especially,
who, he says, are fond Of eating pickles,
should be careful not TO deVour any
that contain alum.
+. G.. Pond, professor of chemistry
Of the Pennsylvania State Colleae, made
a general argument to the effect that
alum in baking powder does not mean
alum in bread made with that baking
powder. The chemical change under
gone before the baking powder is en-
tirely decOmposed in the bread an
initiates the alum and leaves no deleteri-
Gus substance.
Secretary Morrison wanted to tell the
board how big an industry the baking
powder business is. but the board
thought ii was there to hear testimony
as TO possible injury through the use
OF alum and consequently wouldn't
listen.