New-York tribune., 1910-08-29
COMMEND STRAUSS WORK
Milk Depots Save Many Lives.
NY. Milk Committee Says.
BENEFACTOR NOT CRITICISED
Pasteurization Not Opposed and
Opinions Misquoted, the
Committee Asserts.

The New York Milk Committee, through
It's secretary. Wilbur c. Phillips, expressed
regret yesterday at the intention of Nathan
Straus to close the milk depots which he
has maintained for seventeen years. The
committee issued a statement designed 10
clear away some of the misunderstanding
which, it says, has prevailed for so long
time with regard to the general subject or
pasteurization and has prevented concerted
action toward improving the milk supply
and reducing infant mortality.
Asserting that it's opinions have been
misquotcd and that from time to time the
committee has be.- spoken of as opposing
the use of pasteuTized milk. and thus 1nU-
rectly as being opposed to the work carried
on by Mr.. Straus, the committee goes on
to say:
Two years ago at our infants milk sta
tons we fed a certain number of bables
on raw milk and certain number OF baoleS
on pasteurized milk. the milk I'm each m
stance coming from the same dairy. AZ
the end of the summer there was prac-
ticaly no difference in the condition OF the
two groups of babies Among the pasteur-
lied milk babies 1So per cent lost Welsn! si1l,
| babies lost weight On the other hand 81 !
per cent of the pasteuriZed babies showed
marked Improvement at the END o, the the
raw milk babies The total number OF
babies whose condition was either station
airy or improving in the raw milk depoIs
was ST. per cent, against s6.5 per cent
| in the pasteurized milk depots.
| In the raw milk depots there were
eighteen deaths of babies. whereas IN tne
| pasteurized milk depots there were only
| fifteen deaths. The number of these deaths
was almost equal in ratio to the mum per
of babies fed in the three depots where
| pasteurized milk was sold and in the four
! depots where raw milk was sold.
In letter written to Mr.. Straus in Oc-
/ tober 1905 the committee expressed an
/ opinion that has remained unchanged The
| committee believes that the pasteurfza-
| ton of milk which is not strictly sanitary
| is desira bic from the standpoint of public
| health. although a the same time 1t recos-
nizes that the question of the Compara-
| tive nutritional value of raw and pas
| teurized milk as a diet for infants and
young children still remains undecided
! The committee is raising money TO
| supplement an investigation of two years
| ago by another experiment. which shall IN
t clude chemical laboratory tests and the
| observation of infants strictly under con-
| troll. The results of the former investiga-
| ton were not absolute the committee says.
! because the conditions under which the
| babies lived were too little under control
but it is hoped that the proposed study
will definitely settle the technical question
OF the comparative nutritional value OF
| raw and pasteurzed milk.
| Regarding the evidence on this point as
insufficient, the committee says:
But the difference, if any. is so slight
that it cannot offset the great good which
| Mr.. Straus and all others are accomplish
| ing who distribute pasteurized milk TO per-
| sons who otherwise would be compelled
through poverty. TO buy a badly infected
| milk. There can be no doubt that Mr.
| Strauss work. which he has so munif1cent-
| ly maintained. has effected a great saving
| of infant life. To critiCise him is 10 criti-
else one of our city's greatest benefactors
| and to see his depOtS shut down would bt
tC witness, as DR.. Lederle says, "a great
| public calamity"
Mr.. Phillips said that in the interest OF
the ba bies who were the real sufferers
| every effort should be made to induce MIR
Straus to reconsider his announced inten
| ton.