a century of controversy

[Guest guest]

Toronto's 100-year battle over "pure milk" has its roots in the evolving priorities of urban centresA little more than a hundred years ago, Mayor ph Oliver was sworn into office at Toronto's Old City Hall, vowing to clean up this burg. This was no metaphorical sweep of the broom Oliver was talking about. He meant it literally. His Jan. 13, 1908, inaugural address made it clear what three of his top priorities were: the construction of a trunk sewer, clean water and pure milk.Oliver's address was an articulation of the new priorities of urban centres in the early 20th century. And Toronto, in part because of activist journalism and the philanthropy of newsmen such as ph Atkinson and Ross on, was to become a leader in making those public-health ideals a reality. It wasn't going to happen all at once, though. While Oliver had said that the "establishment of a milk standard of the highest possible percentage (was) of the utmost importance," the best way to do that was going to be the subject of a debate that would rage for some time – arguably to this day. To some, the answer was to test milk for a minimum three per cent butterfat content, to ensure there was no adulteration. It was common practice to dilute milk with water, skim fat off the milk, and to mask spoiled milk by adding molasses or even chalk. Even this proposal to test was surprisingly controversial. The Municipal Committee of the Legislature killed a "pure milk bill" on March 27, 1908, on the grounds that it might discriminate against some Holsteins who, it seems, had unusually lean milk. Others were proponents of certification, basically a regulation of the dairy industry by ensuring that barns and trucks were clean, equipment and bottles sterilized, and the product kept at a cool temperature across the supply chain. This solution was not terribly contentious, and the municipal Pure Milk Commission, established in 1908, advocated the adoption of these measures. However, putting the infrastructure in place for certification was going to take time. In the meantime, Dr. J. Hastings, who would later become Toronto's Medical Officer of Health, had the bright idea to pasteurize all milk, certified or not. His 1907 visit to the pioneering Straus Milk laboratory in New York, and his understanding of Toronto public health, convinced him that unpasteurized milk was the main culprit in the spread of bovine tuberculosis and typhoid fever, and responsible for the death of 400 Toronto children per year. To make his point, Hastings began testing milk samples from various Toronto hospitals, and reported high levels of bacteria across the board. One hospital's milk (Hastings refrained from mentioning the facility's name) apparently had "no less than eight million bacteria per cubic centimetre." (A roughly contemporaneous study put the highest acceptable level at 10,000 bacteria per cubic centimetre.)A picture and a thousand words CITY OF TORONTO ARCHIVES, SERIES 372 S0372_SS0032_IT06344 The picture on this page appears to show filters through which milk has been poured, capturing the dirt found in one pint. These samples are from the City of Toronto Archives' Public Health Series, a collection of photos documenting the gains made in controlling disease through vaccinations, cleaner water, better sewage treatment and, of course, pure milkA current Toronto Archives exhibit, which draws from that collection, is called An Infectious Idea: 125 Years of Public Health in Toronto (and runs through 2009) and contains similar images. This photograph was taken Sept. 23, 1921. Hastings' hospital revelation, reported in the Sept. 14, 1908, Toronto Daily Star, didn't seem to faze Medical Health Officer Dr. Sheard, who maintained that pasteurization "was not worth it," given the cost.Sheard was not Hastings' only opponent in the medical community. Many were dismayed that they might lose the right to give patients raw milk, which some doctors reported was easier for patients needing nourishment to digest than pasteurized. At a public debate with Hastings, Sheard advocated that, instead of pasteurizing milk, they should concentrate on improving the standards of its production.Hastings was quick to point out that this was a false dilemma – there was, from his point of view, no reason not to do both – and proceeded to skewer his opponent's faulty logic. In the Star, the subhead for the report on the debate read: "A Roast for Sheard." But there were valid arguments against pasteurization, too. As mentioned, doctors reported that patients had difficulties digesting pasteurized milk. And pasteurization threatened to drive up the cost of milk by 60 per cent, a significant increase for a household staple. That's probably when it occurred to philanthropists such as Atkinson, legendary publisher of the Star, that the problem wasn't so much pasteurization, or even bacteria, but poverty. After all, "pure" milk had been available at the City Dairy for years, but the poor couldn't afford to buy it. The first philanthropic outfit to address this disparity was a clinic at 88 St. established in 1908 by the Toronto chapter of the Pure Milk League. There, half-pint bottles of certified milk could be purchased for two cents (roughly the same price as milk elsewhere). Those who couldn't afford that price were given the milk for free. That same year, around the corner at the Hospital for Sick Children, on, founder of the rival Toronto Telegram, funded the installation of the first milk-pasteurization plant in a Toronto hospital.Not to be outdone, Atkinson stepped up his coverage of the Pure Milk campaign and started up the Infant's Pure Milk Fund. It was regularly covered in the Daily Star, including solicitations, shout-outs to donors, and funding totals, which were printed on the front page of the daily at least twice a week. In 1910, the Daily Star reported the establishment of a "pure milk depot" run by the Canadian Household Economic Association at the Jewish Free Dispensary on St. and the imminent opening of two more. Atkinson's fundraising had been crucial to the establishment of all three. Just as important was the change in public opinion that Atkinson's support had helped to effect. Hastings would win his seven-year war, and it would become mandatory that all milk in Toronto be pasteurized but for two certified raw-milk dispensaries. Yet the medical community remained divided, as some experts are now. On March 23, 1915, amidst headlines such as "Shells dropped from the clouds like fireworks" and "Narrows' Forts are still intact at Dardanelles," there was a Star news story about opposition from Dr. J.B. Fraser, who lamented the lack of raw milk for his sick patients. Said Fraser: "Instead of giving us the standard of butterfat, we get the standard of bugs." These arguments, however, held little weight in the court of public opinion and even less in the mayor's office, which was by then held by Tommy Church. As soon as Mayor Church had been reassured that Louis Pasteur was not German but French, he sided with Hastings – and his standard of bugs. Seven years and two successors after Mayor ph Oliver expressed it, his vision of public health in Toronto was becoming a reality.Nov 23, 2008 04:30 AM Comments on this story (1) Sismondo Special to the Star