Secretary East. We did not have a National Secretary in those days to call upon, so that we had to go to that expense. They came back with the report that the 30,000 standard seemed to be a general one in the East, and we adopted that; a short time after starting in with the production, at the suggestion of our dairymen, we adopted 10,000 and we found that we could keep below 10,000 as well as we could below 30,000.

Dr. Ludlum: We started with 30,000 but did not keep there long.

President McCleave: The fact remains it is 10,000 today, and that it originated with the Certified Milk movement first by Dr. Coit. Dr. Traum, I am sure, will give proper credit in his paper. Mr. Davis, have you anything to say?

P. H. Davis, Sleepy Hollow Ranch: The speaker has referred to a matter of very great importance to us as dairymen, and I believe to you as producers of something that is being brought to the front now, that is the matter of contagious or infectious abortion. That is something that we would like to hear discussed by the profession, because it is something that is coming to the front now, and we want to know how to head it off. If there is any danger to health from abortion in a herd, we want to know what to do at the present time. I would like to hear that very fully discussed at this time, if there is time for it. While I am on my feet, I want to suggest that since we have been certified we find that we have decreased the percentage of abortion in our herd materially by the aseptic procedure. It is something that interests us intensely.

Ford A. Hutton, Dixon, California: Contagious abortion is something that we have had to contend with considerably, and the dairies in our vicinity I know have been bothered with it a great deal; but we find that we can control it to a large extent by immediately quarantining the animals that are affected, and by using preparations described by Dr. Roadhouse. We have not been bothered nearly as much with contagious abortion of late years, as we were early in the game. I am firmly of the belief that it can be controlled, at least that has been my experience.

H. R. Timm, Dixon, California: I was just talking to a Doctor from Portland on this very same subject at luncheon, and he said that he was working in connection with Dr.

who had, he thought, an absolute cure and preventative. I do not know that he wants to tell us anything about that.

J. P. Sedgwick, M. D., Minneapolis, Minnesota: I regret that I am not from Portland, but I may say a word or two on this subject. I said a word or two about it yesterday. Answering the first question, I do not know of any other work that has been done on the effect of epidemic abortion in humans, except the work of Dr. Larsen and myself. We reported, I believe, three years ago, to this organization the results of tests on some four hundred and twenty-five children. In seventeen per cent. of these children we got a positive reaction showing a deviation of the complement, using bacillus abortus as an antigen, on the blood of these four hundred and twenty-five children. That would indicate that there may be some connection between this disease and human pathology.

Since that time, during the past three years, we have tested the bloods of seven hundred children, but are hardly in position to form definite conclusions as yet.

Henry L. Coit, M. D., Newark, N. J.: May I illuminate that point about the 10,000 per cc.? The requirement is not mandatory upon every sample of the milk examined, but 10,000 is the standard, and producers can not repeatedly run above 10,000. In case the milk exceeds this count, the bacteriologist must examine every day, and if it continues to remain above 10,000 for ten or twelve days, the certification is withdrawn. The object is to keep the dairy hygiene under control.

R. Ralph Ferguson, M. D., Chicago, Illinois: Last year the Chicago Pediatric Society made a very vicious attack on the Chicago Milk Commission on this very point; which is the reason we have spoken of it here. The Chicago Milk Commission can not guarantee any milk to be below 10,000 bacteria per cc. any more than any other Milk Commission in the United States can guarantee their milk to be below 10,000 bacteria per cc. We put out an advertising pamphlet several years ago in which we made the definite statement that our bacterial count was below 10,000 per cc. Professor Haynes warned us that it was not the right thing to do; that we could not guarantee it to be below 10,000 as it was delivered to the consumer before the counts were made; now we have changed the wording so that it

reads that we do everything possible to keep our counts below 10,000 per cc.

J. Traum, D. V. M., University of California: I have not very much to add except that I would like to inquire of Dr. Ferguson how they can tell when a certified herd is free from contagious abortion? It is stated that they withhold their certification until such time as they are absolutely sure that there is no more abortion on the place. I would like to know if they have any means of determining that point?

R. Ralph Ferguson, M. D., Chicago, Illinois: I can not answer that exactly. Not being a veterinarian, I do not know how they will determine that. I know one farmer reported to us that his herd was clean and we sent out our veterinarian who reported that there were two fresh cases, so we have to leave that to the veterinarian to determine as to whether or not the herd is clean.

President McCleave: The program is rather full this afternoon, so we can not allow perhaps as much time as we would like to for unlimited discussion.

The next paper is on the subject of "Certification versus Pasteurization," by Dr. Walter D. Ludlum, of Brooklyn N. Y.

Walter D. Ludlum, M. D., Brooklyn, N. Y.: I am here under false pretenses. At the time this program was under preparation I expected not to be able to be present; but I am always intensely wearied by the assumption that pasteurization makes milk perfectly safe, the assumption expressed so widely among laymen particularly, aided by the yellow daily journals—so I wanted the question of pasteurization as against certification presented here, and called on Dr. Harris Moak to get this data together. My relation to this paper is essentially that of inspiration and the presentation of it; and the real credit is due to Dr. Moak.

In the absence of Dr. Moak, the paper was then read by Dr. Ludlum, as follows:

Certified Milk vs. Pasteurized Milk

By Harris Moak, M. D., Expert for the Kings County Medical Milk Commission, Brooklyn, N. Y.

From certain standpoints there should be no argument between these two propositions. To restate from Dr. Bell's report "It has always been the desire of our Milk Commission to furnish the profession the highest grade basic product in Certified Milk. The physician can then change or modify, boil or pasteurize, as suits his desires in his professional work.”

Argument begins only in places like New York where last fall an ordinance was passed by the Board of Health requiring every drop of milk coming into the city to be pasteurized. It should be said that as far as Certified Milk was concerned this ordinance after forty-eight hours was not further enforced, as it was contrary to our State law governing Certified Milk.

This was done with the idea that foot and mouth disease might sometimes strike a Certified herd and thus be transmitted to humans. Yet the only two cases of this disease reported in New York City occurred in two children about twelve and fourteen years old who drank only pasteurized milk.

There are a few men of some repute in this country who argue that milk is not safe without pasteurizing and that any milk pasteurized is safe. Let us frankly admit that Certified Milk is only relatively safe. Mishaps could befall it. Perhaps some have. Similarly the next breath we breathe may be fraught with danger.

With this frank admission can we turn to pasteurized milk and find the haven of our desire an absolutely safe milk? Some so preach.

Practically every drop of milk now coming into New York City, except the Certified, is pasteurized. Should the Certified also be pasteurized before delivery to the consumer? Another question-who is the consumer of this milk?

Through the cooperation of our largest distributors we have found that between 86% and 90% of our Certified Milk goes into homes for infant feeding and that the remaining 14 or less per cent. goes into homes where there is sickness, and that every quart or 100% goes into houses upon a physician's prescription

or order. This then is a purely medical problem and in no sense a municipal problem.

Holt has gathered statistics that show that 85% of the babies of New York City are breast fed and only 15% are artificially fed. Forty-eight thousand babies were born in Brooklyn last year. Fifteen per cent. of this number is 7,200.

We are selling about 8,000 quarts of Certified daily. If 85% of this is used for feeding babies then we are feeding about 6,800 daily.

Combining our own figures with these of Holt, forms the conclusion that we are feeding a very high percentage of our artificially fed babies. This is in contrast to the oft made statement that Certified comprised 1% or less of our total city supply. Certified Milk is a dairy specialty. We are surprised to know after fourteen years how nearly it is fulfilling the purpose of our original aim.

Should the Certified be pasteurized before delivery to the home? Or should we leave this operation to the discretion of the physician?

What percentage of the Certified is pasteurized in the home before feeding to babies we do not know but those can who wish. We do our best to furnish an article that will be safe without pasteurization to those who may wish to feed natural milk, and at the same time something fit to be pasteurized in case it is desired.

From the beginning Strauss Laboratories have purchased Certified Milk and pasteurized it and used it in their infant feeding stations. So far as we have ever read all credit for the good results from this milk have been given to the process of pasteurization and no credit has ever been given to the methods of decency used in the previous work of production and handling of the milk. Perhaps some credit belonged there nevertheless.

This pasteurization practically takes the place of the home process. It in no way argues for the commercial pasteurization of Certified before entering the home. This last is the proposition that is being so strongly urged by certain people interested in so-called milk standards. Parenthetically we could say more interested in pasteurizing machinery.