EDITORIAL

Eugene Underhill

In Philadelphia Medicine for February 27, 1943, appears an editorial entitled Race Consciousness and the Blood Bank. We quote:.

 

It seems that for some time the blood of Negroes was unacceptable for the blood bank. Later this exclusion of the Negro was modified to the extent that his blood would be accepted but kept segregated for use in Negroes only. One wonders if the most rabidly white conscious mother would rather see her boy die in the far off Solomons or Africa than see him saved by Negro blood! It is shameful of us that like the Hitlerites, some of us should feel that the blood of a Negro, of a yellow man, or of any other healthy individual would pollute us.

Let us really practice what we preach–the brotherhood of man. If there was ever a breech presentation of the subject of brotherly love, the above is undoubtedly it. We can well afford to leave such maudlin sentimentality to the perverts who appear to enjoy its thrills.

The only question is this: Is the blood safe to use indiscriminately or is it not? Medical science may or more likely may not be competent to answer this question. If there is any doubt whatsoever then segregation of racial blood in the blood banks is of extreme importance.

In consideration of the possible effect of the adoption of delivery of milk every other day it appeared desirable to ascertain what the change in the bacterial content of milk might be from day to day in a modern refrigerator at 40 F. Both Grade A milk pasteurized and Grade B milk pasteurized had undergone such an increase in bacterial growth that their use might have caused diarrhoea and enteritis in young children. But certified milk pasteurized conformed to the bacterial standards for that grade of milk and was still perfectly safe to use.–New Eng. Jour. of Med., July 30, 1942.

From the above we deduce the following:.

1. Pasteurization is not as much protection as its advocates claim for it.

2. Certified milk, either raw or pasteurized, must conform to certain standards as to bacterial content. Therefore the conclusion is inevitable that there is no substitute for cleanliness in the production and distribution of milk.

Formerly all certified milk was raw milk. Now one may specify either certified raw or certified pasteurized. From a nutritional standpoint there is no advantage in certified pasteurized over ordinary pasteurized milk. The best milk on the market today, both from a nutritional and hygienic standpoint, is undoubtedly certified raw milk.–E.U., JR.

Leave a Comment