Lists (None yet)

Login to create lists

Tagged (None yet)

Add Tags

Comments (None yet)

Add New Comment

1 correction by anonymous - Show corrections



In estimating the importance and the origin of the various impurities which are present in milk, whether they are of the dead matter class or of the bacterial

group, the responsibility of the cow itself is one phase which should by no means be overlooked (says a qualified writer in the " Fanner and Stockbreeder"). The popular belief, which is of long standing, and is not yet proved quite incorrect, that the food actually taken by the cow woe to some extent the source of many of the faults to which the milk was li able, has hem shown, to be of much less importance than was originally Buppoeed. It is more than doubtful whether 'turnips, for example, unless given in absurdly large quantities, do really give, a flavour to the milk. The fact that bacterial ori gin is proved the correct one in not a few ca^es shows Hint these aro not the only causes, and it is more tluuh probable that the food has liWla or no effect- when eaten upon the flavour of the milk. It has bten conclusively proved that so far ai? bacteriological content is concerned, the milk drawu from * healthy cow is quite sterile, and the definiteneM of this proof has cleaned the way considerably for the more accurate investigations in other directions. Jt has once for all laid low the long-held belief that the "germ life in milk is derived from the food," in the sense Which that dictum was assumed to have. With a newer interpretation it is, however, but too true. The bacteria in the food taken by the cow pass in one of two directions. They either pass through the body of the animal with the undigested portion of the food, and are voided in the foecal matter, or a smaller number, if any, which are absorbed by the tissues, are without doubt destroyed by the bodily fluids with which they come in contact, and which arc in part definitely of a germicidal character. Their atofjioe from the milk when drawn is proved beyond question. The entrance of such impurities as these into the milk must be looked for after the milk is drawn, and not before. When it is realised that the cowdvng is often left lying for n considerable time in the shed where quite frequently the milking takes place, and i hat the milk is there exposed in an open pail, both dur ing and Sometimes) after the milking, the true means by which the impurities and bacteria which were prfnent originally in the food • reach the milk is clear enough. It is thronsh the air that th?*e eubstancc* reach the milk, and the ill ventilated character of many cow-houses n:akes the evil much more inevitable than it need be with reasonable hygienic pre cautions. The nature of the oow's coat makes the matter still worse, for its character is the most favourable possible for the long and thorough retention of dust and dirt which settles on it. The sight of cows wading in stagnant pools, which are not infrequently covered with clime, and which teem '.nth bacteria, is one which cannot be looked on. by the hygienic dairy farmer anxious for the cleanliness of his milk with any other feelings than those of anxiety and disgust. The mud and slime thus gathered on the coat of the cow dries*, the # impurities become a caked mass, attach themselves sooner or later an dust, or an impalpable powder, and are then transmitted by the cow and the atmosphere in all and sundry directions.

There is no better medicine for babies than Chamberlain's Cough Remedy. It? pleasant taste and prompt and effectual cure* make it a favourite with the mother? of tunall children.*