Need for a Working-Factor in Evaluating Freezing Point Results on Raw Milk Samples 1

The legal upper base for taking action in cases of water adulteration of milk is generally accepted as - 0.525°H. Henningson (2), in a study of 660 samples of milk known to contain no added water and representing 22 states in the U.S. and four Canadian provinces, found (at the 95% confidence limit)...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of food protection 1979-02, Vol.42 (2), p.110-112
Main Authors: Packard, V S, Ginn, R E
Format: Article
Language:English
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by
cites
container_end_page 112
container_issue 2
container_start_page 110
container_title Journal of food protection
container_volume 42
creator Packard, V S
Ginn, R E
description The legal upper base for taking action in cases of water adulteration of milk is generally accepted as - 0.525°H. Henningson (2), in a study of 660 samples of milk known to contain no added water and representing 22 states in the U.S. and four Canadian provinces, found (at the 95% confidence limit) only 1% probability of a naturally-occurring milk sample falling above that level. Yet at a mean value of - 0.540°H, as noted in this same study, such base allows for 3% added water for the "average" dairy farm. The present study, made on samples without knowledge of their purity (lack of added water), tends to confirm this potential. At the same time it suggests the likelihood that, on a practical basis, a "working factor" set at some lower value could be useful to the dairy industry in coping with the problem of added water in milk.
doi_str_mv 10.4315/0362-028X-42.2.110
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2187025892</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2187025892</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-p564-9b89a4d0ec5eac5b5c6d0741fe3161d8e9d6db7873835e4f53606011027996833</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNo1UEtLw0AYXASxtfoHPMgevaR--8zuUUqrQn1QC3oLm-wXic3LbKLorzdiPc0wDMPMEHLGYC4FU5cgNI-Am5dI8jmfMwYHZMqslJEFG0_IcQhvAMAt10dkIsAwLqScku09oqd501FHn5tuV9Sv0cpl_SgUNV1-uHJw_SjSVYf4_Usem6Lu6QbDUPaBNjXduE96V5Q7-uSqtsRA2Qk5zF0Z8HSPM7JdLbeLm2j9cH27uFpHrdJjsdRYJz1gptBlKlWZ9hBLlqNgmnmD1mufxiYWRiiUuRIaNIzLeGytNkLMyMVfbNs17wOGPqmKkGFZuhqbISScmRi4MpaP1vO9dUgr9EnbFZXrvpL_I8QPxhtcAQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2187025892</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Need for a Working-Factor in Evaluating Freezing Point Results on Raw Milk Samples 1</title><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Packard, V S ; Ginn, R E</creator><creatorcontrib>Packard, V S ; Ginn, R E</creatorcontrib><description>The legal upper base for taking action in cases of water adulteration of milk is generally accepted as - 0.525°H. Henningson (2), in a study of 660 samples of milk known to contain no added water and representing 22 states in the U.S. and four Canadian provinces, found (at the 95% confidence limit) only 1% probability of a naturally-occurring milk sample falling above that level. Yet at a mean value of - 0.540°H, as noted in this same study, such base allows for 3% added water for the "average" dairy farm. The present study, made on samples without knowledge of their purity (lack of added water), tends to confirm this potential. At the same time it suggests the likelihood that, on a practical basis, a "working factor" set at some lower value could be useful to the dairy industry in coping with the problem of added water in milk.</description><identifier>EISSN: 1944-9097</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.4315/0362-028X-42.2.110</identifier><identifier>PMID: 30812344</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States</publisher><ispartof>Journal of food protection, 1979-02, Vol.42 (2), p.110-112</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27903,27904</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30812344$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Packard, V S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ginn, R E</creatorcontrib><title>Need for a Working-Factor in Evaluating Freezing Point Results on Raw Milk Samples 1</title><title>Journal of food protection</title><addtitle>J Food Prot</addtitle><description>The legal upper base for taking action in cases of water adulteration of milk is generally accepted as - 0.525°H. Henningson (2), in a study of 660 samples of milk known to contain no added water and representing 22 states in the U.S. and four Canadian provinces, found (at the 95% confidence limit) only 1% probability of a naturally-occurring milk sample falling above that level. Yet at a mean value of - 0.540°H, as noted in this same study, such base allows for 3% added water for the "average" dairy farm. The present study, made on samples without knowledge of their purity (lack of added water), tends to confirm this potential. At the same time it suggests the likelihood that, on a practical basis, a "working factor" set at some lower value could be useful to the dairy industry in coping with the problem of added water in milk.</description><issn>1944-9097</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1979</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNo1UEtLw0AYXASxtfoHPMgevaR--8zuUUqrQn1QC3oLm-wXic3LbKLorzdiPc0wDMPMEHLGYC4FU5cgNI-Am5dI8jmfMwYHZMqslJEFG0_IcQhvAMAt10dkIsAwLqScku09oqd501FHn5tuV9Sv0cpl_SgUNV1-uHJw_SjSVYf4_Usem6Lu6QbDUPaBNjXduE96V5Q7-uSqtsRA2Qk5zF0Z8HSPM7JdLbeLm2j9cH27uFpHrdJjsdRYJz1gptBlKlWZ9hBLlqNgmnmD1mufxiYWRiiUuRIaNIzLeGytNkLMyMVfbNs17wOGPqmKkGFZuhqbISScmRi4MpaP1vO9dUgr9EnbFZXrvpL_I8QPxhtcAQ</recordid><startdate>197902</startdate><enddate>197902</enddate><creator>Packard, V S</creator><creator>Ginn, R E</creator><scope>NPM</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>197902</creationdate><title>Need for a Working-Factor in Evaluating Freezing Point Results on Raw Milk Samples 1</title><author>Packard, V S ; Ginn, R E</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-p564-9b89a4d0ec5eac5b5c6d0741fe3161d8e9d6db7873835e4f53606011027996833</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1979</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Packard, V S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ginn, R E</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of food protection</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Packard, V S</au><au>Ginn, R E</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Need for a Working-Factor in Evaluating Freezing Point Results on Raw Milk Samples 1</atitle><jtitle>Journal of food protection</jtitle><addtitle>J Food Prot</addtitle><date>1979-02</date><risdate>1979</risdate><volume>42</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>110</spage><epage>112</epage><pages>110-112</pages><eissn>1944-9097</eissn><abstract>The legal upper base for taking action in cases of water adulteration of milk is generally accepted as - 0.525°H. Henningson (2), in a study of 660 samples of milk known to contain no added water and representing 22 states in the U.S. and four Canadian provinces, found (at the 95% confidence limit) only 1% probability of a naturally-occurring milk sample falling above that level. Yet at a mean value of - 0.540°H, as noted in this same study, such base allows for 3% added water for the "average" dairy farm. The present study, made on samples without knowledge of their purity (lack of added water), tends to confirm this potential. At the same time it suggests the likelihood that, on a practical basis, a "working factor" set at some lower value could be useful to the dairy industry in coping with the problem of added water in milk.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pmid>30812344</pmid><doi>10.4315/0362-028X-42.2.110</doi><tpages>3</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier EISSN: 1944-9097
ispartof Journal of food protection, 1979-02, Vol.42 (2), p.110-112
issn 1944-9097
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2187025892
source Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals
title Need for a Working-Factor in Evaluating Freezing Point Results on Raw Milk Samples 1
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-27T14%3A09%3A05IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Need%20for%20a%20Working-Factor%20in%20Evaluating%20Freezing%20Point%20Results%20on%20Raw%20Milk%20Samples%201&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20food%20protection&rft.au=Packard,%20V%20S&rft.date=1979-02&rft.volume=42&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=110&rft.epage=112&rft.pages=110-112&rft.eissn=1944-9097&rft_id=info:doi/10.4315/0362-028X-42.2.110&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2187025892%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-p564-9b89a4d0ec5eac5b5c6d0741fe3161d8e9d6db7873835e4f53606011027996833%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2187025892&rft_id=info:pmid/30812344&rfr_iscdi=true