Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

TREATMENT OF MEAT

SYDNEY DISCLOSURE. DISEASED STOCK AT ABATTOIR USE OF SULPHUR DIOXIDE. (From Our Own Correspondent.) SYDNEY, April 22. At a council meeting at Paddington the otter night, a firm of butchers in a considerable way of business in Oxford Street was called upon to show cause why its license should not be cancelled. During the discussion it was disclosed that 19 convictions had already been recorded against this firm, including 15 for the use of sulphur dioxide beyond the legal maximum. The head of the firm protested to the council that "everybody does it" and that sulphur dioxide has been in use here for 25 years for "dusting" over meat. The council finally contented itself with "warning" the butcher, but it has left the general public wondering how many breaches of the law are usually condoned before a cancellation of license becomes necessary. This matter of the use of chemical preservatives is interesting. Under the Pure Foods' Act, butchers here are permitted to use sulphur dioxide as a preservative in. sausages to the extent of 3.5 grains per lb, but its use is forbidden in other meat. The effect of th 3 chemical —from the standpoint of the butcher—is to prevent putrefaction and to improve the colour of the meat. But unfortunately sulphur dioxide interferes seriously with the digestion of the consumer, especially when taken in large quantities, and the natural tendency of the butcher is to apply it in a miscellaneous and generous fashion. During the past week butchers have been fined for selling meat "doctored" with this chemical, up to six and even 10 grains per lb—twice and three times the maximum allowed by law. Under the Local Government Act butchers' licenses may be cancelled after three convictions — yet this sort of thing goes on. Alderman's Allegations. Another question of an even more serious nature has just been raised on Lidcombe council. One of the aldermen made a series of charges against the Meat Board in regard to the alleged sale of diseased meat. He stated that at the Homebush State Abattoirs about 200 cattle suffering from cancer, T.B. .or lumpy jaw are killed' every week, and that after the affected parts have been cut away the residue is sold as food. The alderman produced photographs of afflicted cattle of a rather horrifying nature, and so much public interest was excited by his statements that the Meat Board and the Public Health Department thought it necessary to reply. The chief inspector and the veterinary officer in charge at the saleyards practically admitted the truth of Alderman Wilson's indictment, but they contend that no danger to public health is involved. It seems that about 2 per cent

of the cattle sent to the abattoirs are J marked "suspect." But it is asserted by the official that "most of them are fit for human consumption after email portions, such as the head and tongue, in cases of 'lumpy jaw,' are cut away." Cases of Tuberculosis. Even in cases of tuberculosis it is agreed that T.B. is, as a rule, a strictly localised infection, so that it is only necessary to condemn the affected organ or part. But all cases of generalised tuberculosis are condemned—although the Departmental veterinary official tells us that "in Germany and America much of the meat would he sterilised bv steam

or tne meat wouia De sterilised oy steam and sold to the public." As to cancer, beasts affected, by this disease are condemned, "except for small skin cancers, which can be cut away"; and we are offered the further consolation that "there is no evidence that cancer can be transmitted to man by eating diseased meat." Possibly not, but one would like some stronger safeguard than this assurance. The chief veterinary officer of the Meat Board has just issued a statement to the effect that "nowhere else in the world is the meat supply of the people subjected to such stringent examination as at the State Abattoirs at Homebush." This is all very well, but what is more important is the destination of the meat after it has been inspected.

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/AS19330501.2.160

Bibliographic details

Auckland Star, Volume LXIV, Issue 100, 1 May 1933, Page 16

Word Count
686

TREATMENT OF MEAT Auckland Star, Volume LXIV, Issue 100, 1 May 1933, Page 16

TREATMENT OF MEAT Auckland Star, Volume LXIV, Issue 100, 1 May 1933, Page 16