Читать книгу Foods and Their Adulteration - Harvey Washington Wiley - Страница 22

Table of Contents

—There is a difference of opinion among veterinary and hygienic experts respecting the disposition which is to be made of carcasses affected with tuberculosis. It is claimed by some that if the tuberculosis is local, that is, does not extend beyond the lungs, there is no reason why the flesh of the animal should be refused to the consumer. The basis of this contention is founded upon the opinion of some of the most eminent veterinarians that bovine tuberculosis and human tuberculosis are entirely distinct diseases and cannot be transmitted either from the cow to man or vice versâ. It is not the province of this manual to decide this controversy, although it is only right that the consumer should be given the benefit of the doubt. Therefore, if the carcass of an animal affected with local tuberculosis is to be passed into consumption it should be plainly marked as the flesh of a tuberculosed animal,—not only the carcass as a whole, but every piece thereof that is introduced into consumption directly or after canning or mincing. The consumer is thus left free to choose for himself whether to eat such meat or not. There is a universal agreement among hygienists and veterinarians that where tuberculosis is generalized, that is, has affected practically all the organs of the body, the carcasses should be condemned. No one will take exceptions to this ruling, though it does not appear very plain to the ordinary consumer why a little tuberculosis is not a bad thing if a great deal of it is a very bad thing. There is an unfortunate tendency in many quarters to neglect minute effects and only pay attention to mass action. This does not seem to be a reasonable or desirable method of procedure.