Search results

1 – 10 of 210
Article
Publication date: 1 December 2004

Harold W. Webb and Linda A. Webb

The development and testing of an instrument for obtaining user feedback on the overall quality of B2C electronic commerce Web sites, SITEQUAL, is discussed. Using…

5403

Abstract

The development and testing of an instrument for obtaining user feedback on the overall quality of B2C electronic commerce Web sites, SITEQUAL, is discussed. Using previous research in information quality and service quality as a springboard, a conceptual model and an instrument to measure Web site quality were developed. A factor analysis was conducted which suggested that four minimum Web site quality factors and seven desired Web site quality factors are important to consumers in the retail music industry. The use of Web site quality factors for measurement of consumer expectations and perceptions, determining Web site requirements, and guiding the testing process is suggested.

Details

Journal of Enterprise Information Management, vol. 17 no. 6
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1741-0398

Keywords

Book part
Publication date: 10 June 2015

Russell Cropanzano, Marion Fortin and Jessica F. Kirk

Justice rules are standards that serve as criteria for formulating fairness judgments. Though justice rules play a role in the organizational justice literature, they have…

Abstract

Justice rules are standards that serve as criteria for formulating fairness judgments. Though justice rules play a role in the organizational justice literature, they have seldom been the subject of analysis in their own right. To address this limitation, we first consider three meta-theoretical dualities that are highlighted by justice rules – the distinction between justice versus fairness, indirect versus direct measurement, and normative versus descriptive paradigms. Second, we review existing justice rules and organize them into four types of justice: distributive (e.g., equity, equality), procedural (e.g., voice, consistent treatment), interpersonal (e.g., politeness, respectfulness), and informational (e.g., candor, timeliness). We also emphasize emergent rules that have not received sufficient research attention. Third, we consider various computation models purporting to explain how justice rules are assessed and aggregated to form fairness judgments. Fourth and last, we conclude by reviewing research that enriches our understanding of justice rules by showing how they are cognitively processed. We observe that there are a number of influences on fairness judgments, and situations exist in which individuals do not systematically consider justice rules.

Details

Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-1-78560-016-6

Keywords

Article
Publication date: 1 January 1954

Aarhus Kommunes Biblioteker (Teknisk Bibliotek), Ingerslevs Plads 7, Aarhus, Denmark. Representative: V. NEDERGAARD PEDERSEN (Librarian).

Abstract

Aarhus Kommunes Biblioteker (Teknisk Bibliotek), Ingerslevs Plads 7, Aarhus, Denmark. Representative: V. NEDERGAARD PEDERSEN (Librarian).

Details

Aslib Proceedings, vol. 6 no. 1
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0001-253X

Article
Publication date: 1 April 1941

Until after the war of 1914–18 the development of the knowledge of food chemistry lagged behind in this country, but furthermore the utilisation by the medical profession…

Abstract

Until after the war of 1914–18 the development of the knowledge of food chemistry lagged behind in this country, but furthermore the utilisation by the medical profession of the knowledge available also lagged behind. This, whilst being deplored, is understandable, for the scope of the training of the members of the medical profession is so extensive that specialised knowledge, until it becomes general knowledge, cannot be incorporated in the scope of their training. One unfortunate aspect of the situation is that members of the medical profession, rightly regarded by the public as their advisers on food matters, have tended, often inadvertently, to mislead on such questions. To illustrate this point I will quote two flagrant instances. In one of the large democracies a trade feud began between the manufacturers of two kinds of baking powders. One of the powders contained aluminium in the form of alum, the other did not. Both financial groups were powerful and employed many scientific advisers, either directly or indirectly. All evidence for and against aluminium was collected and distributed to anyone who showed the slightest interest in the matter. An English physician became impressed by the argument against the use of aluminium for cooking vessels and circulated his opinion widely, giving evidence of many patients he had cured by cutting out the use of aluminium cooking utensils. This was characterised by a writer to the British Medical Journal as an interesting example of “ faith healing.” There is no scientific evidence that the trace of aluminium that may be dissolved from an aluminium saucepan is in any way harmful. Naturally one cannot argue for the few people who have certain idiosyncrasies, and perhaps it has been the fortune of that physician to meet a large proportion of these among his patients. The whole question was discussed in detail some years ago but, although invited, the physician did not attend. A point, not without significance, is that the analytical figures on which the condemnation of aluminium cooking vessels was based, were proved to be wrong. Had they been correct, a stewpan would only last twenty stews before it was all dissolved away! The second example is that of “digestive” teas. Advocates of so‐called digestive teas base their criticism of ordinary teas on the fact that they contain “tannin” which they aver has some extraordinary effect on the stomach lining and on the process of digestion. Naturally the public believe this, and, presumably remembering that the tanning of hides yields a product, leather, they assume that the stomach by analogy becomes tanned; some members of the medical profession also accept the claim of the vendors of the so‐called digestive teas. It is, of course, well known that there is a large group of substances, in many cases with ill‐defined structure, classed as “tannin,” and among these is the tannin from tea which, however, could not be used for the production of leather from hides. Dr. Roche Lynch was very categorical with regard to the absence of clinical evidence at a meeting some little time ago. He stated that he did not believe that post mortem examination had ever revealed any changes of the stomach which could be associated with heavy consumption of tea. The vast majority of these digestive teas have been examined and the point to be specially noted is that the tannin content of these “special” teas is well up to the average of that for ordinary blends of tea, and in certain cases above the average. The Public Analyst for Birmingham has made some scathing comments on “Tanninless” teas. As he said, the inference from the advertisement matter was that the tea would be “more digestible,” would “promote digestion,” or in one case would “cure indigestion.” Other misleading statements are that “Young tips” have been used, but these, in fact, are higher in tannin content than the normal picking of leaves; and that “stalk” has been eliminated, whereas stalk is lower in tannin content than the leaves themselves. It is, of course, well known that sufferers from digestive disorders are very prone to the effect of “suggestion” and one can assume that the clever advertisements have been the cause of the improvement in the patient's condition. The nations most prone to be influenced by considerations of the effect of food eaten on the functions of the body are the Americans and Germans, the former possibly because methods of advertisement have been developed to a higher pitch of efficiency than anywhere else, and the latter because as Hitler has said of the Germans, they are as a nation most gullible. I have mentioned the collection of data in the case of aluminium, and I will deal later with the development of food chemistry as reflected by the amount of published work. There is an ever increasing flow of papers dealing with this aspect of science. During the war of 1914–1918, there was a remarkable falling off of published work, and doubtless we shall experience a similar diminution during the present war, for food chemists, in common with other chemists, are deflected from their ordinary course, urgent practical problems taking precedence over the more fundamental investigations, the results of which are normally published. Our thoughts naturally turn to the general question of the provision of food in war time in this country. We have had that admirable little book “Feeding the People in War Time,” by Orr and Lubbock, just published; we have had lectures, broadcast talks and discussions, but, whilst practical in some senses, the general scope of these discussions has dealt with the subject from a somewhat academic standpoint—certainly not from the angle of the people who have to produce the food. During a period of war the total nutritional value of any food becomes of paramount importance. It is important to remember, however, that the findings of the dietitian have to be translated into factory practice, and until this has been done academic conclusions do not become effective. One cannot commend too highly the idea that there should be certain foods, basic rations, available in large quantities. Orr and Lubbock suggest that these should be: milk, potatoes, oatmeal, vegetables, bread, sugar and either butter or vitaminised margarine. As far as our knowledge goes at present, such a list of basic foods taken in requisite quantities would not only give sufficient calories but those other constituents of food essential to good health. That these should be available to the housewife is apparent, but unless they are relieved by a proportion of the less essential foods, the diet would become deadly dull; many of us remember our experiences in the army in the last war, how spirits flagged when the bare necessities alone were available, and how, moreover, the addition of those little “extras” would raise the morale of the soldier.

Details

British Food Journal, vol. 43 no. 4
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0007-070X

Article
Publication date: 1 September 1944

This Order, which is made under Regulation 2 of the Defence (Sale of Food) Regulations, 1943 (S.R. & O. 1943 No. 1553; item No. 1605), and will come into force on January…

Abstract

This Order, which is made under Regulation 2 of the Defence (Sale of Food) Regulations, 1943 (S.R. & O. 1943 No. 1553; item No. 1605), and will come into force on January 1st, 1945, specifies the information which must be given on the labels of pre‐packed foods when sold by retail. These requirements also apply on sales otherwise by retail but alternatively the food must be sold unlabelled and the purchaser supplied with a statement giving the required information. Special requirements apply to the disclosure of the vitamin or mineral content of food for which claims are made in labels or advertisements. The Order also provides appropriate defences in cases of infringement, including a defence similar to that provided by the Food and Drugs Act, 1938, where some other person is responsible for the commission of the offence charged. Retail Labelling Requirements.—Subject to the exemptions specified in the First Schedule, pre‐packed food must not be sold (or displayed for sale) by retail unless the label bears a true statement as to the matters mentioned below. The label must be marked on the wrapper or container or securely attached to it. The statement must be clearly legible and placed in a prominent position on the label. If the food is pre‐packed in more than one wrapper or container, the label must be placed on the inner package. A second label must be placed on the outer wrapper or container if the first label is not clearly legible throughout it. (a) Name and Address of Packer or Labeller.—The statement must specify the name of either the packer or the labeller and one of his business addresses. The name and address of another trader may be substituted if the food is packed or labelled for him or on his instructions and he carries on business at any address in the United Kingdom. The above requirement may also be satisfied by placing a trade mark (but not a certification trade mark) prominently on the label. The trade mark must be one of those entered on the Trades Mark Register kept under the Trade Marks Act, 1938 (1 & 2 Geo. 6, c. 22), for that food and the words “Registered Trade Mark” must be associated with it on the label. Table A of the First Schedule provides that the following foods shall be wholly exempt from this requirement: beef or pork sausages or sausage meat and slicing sausage (other than canned); sugar; yeast; unfermented apple juice and soft drinks in solid, semi‐solid or powder form. (b) Names of Foods and Ingredients.—The statement must also specify the common or usual name (if any) of the food and of each ingredient, if the food is made of two or more ingredients. The ingredients must each be given a specific, not a generic, name and must be named in the order of the proportion in which they were used. The ingredient used in the greatest proportion (by weight) must be the first on the list. If the food contains an ingredient made from two or more constituents, the statement must specify those constituents and it will not be necessary to name the ingredient. [See also (vi) below.] It is not necessary to state that the food contains water. The following exemptions from this requirement are given in Table A of the First Schedule: (i) Spices and flavouring essences, whether pre‐packed for sale as such or forming an ingredient of another food, may be designated as spices, etc., without further specifying their common or usual name or their composition. This exemption also applies to colourings, except those pre‐packed for sale as such. (ii) In the case of speciality flour, whether pre‐packed for sale as such or forming an ingredient of another food there is no need to specify ingredients or constituents which are authorised ingredients of National or “M” flour. (iii) Preservatives, as defined in the Public Health (Preservatives, etc., in Food) Regulations, are wholly exempt if the label complies with the requirements of those Regulations, whether the preservatives are pre‐packed for sale as such or form an ingredient of one of the foods specified in paragraph 1 of the Second Schedule to the Regulations. (iv) It is not necessary to specify the ingredients used in the foods specified in Table C. The food must, however, be pre‐packed for sale as such and must comply with the composition requirements of the relevant Control Order listed in the Table. Table C specifies the following foods: Foods for which a standard is prescribed under a Food Standards Order; specified canned fruit; Christmas puddings; fish cakes; jam and marmalade; meat or fish paste; meat roll or galantine; canned ready or prepared meals; canned soup; beef or pork sausages or sausage meat and slicing sausage (not canned); standard saccharin tablets; and sweetening tablets. (v) There is no need to specify the ingredients of the following foods when pre‐packed for sale as such; biscuits, condensed milk as defined by the Public Health (Condensed Milk) Regulations, 1923 and 1927; curry powders; pickles and sauces (except salad cream, mayonnaise and sandwich spread). (vi) When a food mentioned in (iv) or (v) above or in Table B (see below) forms an ingredient of some other food, it may be designated by its common or usual name, without specifying the ingredients. (c) Minimum Quantity.—The statement must also specify the minimum quantity of food in the wrapper or container. This quantity must be expressed according to trade custom in terms of net weight, measure or number. In cases where Section 4 of the Sale of Food (Weights and Measures) Act, 1928, permits the weight of the wrapper or container to be included in the weight sold, the above provision may be complied with by specifying the minimum weight of the food with its wrapper or container. Table A of the First Schedule provides that the following foods shall be wholly exempt from this requirement: biscuits, when sold by the packet or piece at not more than 3d. per unit; condensed milk, as defined above; and dried milk, as defined by the Public Health (Dried Milk) Regulations 1923 and 1927, including sweetened or modified dried milk but not compounded dried milk. (d)Exemptions.— The above provisions do not apply to: (i) foods packed by a retailer for sale on the premises, but there must be no reference to the food on the wrapper or container or on any label printed on, attached to or given with it; (ii) food imported on Government account which is still in the original container or wrapper; (iii) food packed specially for consumption by H.M. Forces or the Forces of H.M. Allies or Co‐Belligerents; (iv) assortments of foods packed for sale as a meal and ready for consumption without cooking, heating, etc.; (v) food intended for export or for use as ships‘ stores; (vi) foods specified in Table B of the First Schedule when pre‐packed for sale as such. Table B specifies the following foods: bread (not including breadcrumbs); butter and milk blended butter; cakes; cheese (including processed cheese, blue vein, soft curd or cream cheese and cheese made from milk other than cow's milk); compound cooking fat; intoxicating liquor, i.e., spirits, wine, beer, porter, cider, perry and sweets and other fermented, distilled or spirituous liquors which cannot be sold with‐out an excise licence; liquid milk; margarine (not including vegetarian butter); meat pies; National Flour and “M” flour; soft drinks if specified in Part I of the First Schedule to the Soft Drinks Order, 1943; still spa water; sugar confectionery, chocolate and chocolate confectionery. (e) Small Packages.—If the wrapper or container holds less than ½ oz. or ½ fluid oz. and, owing to insufficient space it is not reasonably practicable for all the above particulars to be given on the label, it will only be necessary to give those particulars which it is reasonably practicable to specify. The particulars required in (b) must be specified first and those required in (c) must be specified next, in order of priority. The foods specified in Table B of the First Schedule (see above) are exempt from this provision when pre‐packed for sale as such. Labelling Requirement on Other Sales.—On sales of pre‐packed food otherwise than by retail, the seller must either: (a) deliver the food labelled in the manner prescribed for retail sales; or (b) deliver the food unlabelled and furnish the purchaser an invoice or other document within 14 days of delivery. The invoice, etc., must contain a statement of any particulars that may be necessary to enable a retail trader to comply with provisions (b) and (c) of the retail labelling requirements (see above). Pre‐packed food will be regarded as unlabelled only if there is no reference to it on the wrapper or container or on any label printed on or attached to it. The food will not, however, be regarded as labelled merely because the wrapper or container has been marked at packing with reasonable words or marks of identification. This provision, however, does not apply to foods exempted from the retail labelling requirements, including foods specified in Table B of the First Schedule (see (d) above). Defacement of Labels.—Statements on labels placed on a wrapper or container under the above provisions must not be removed, altered or defaced. It will, however, be a defence for the defendant to prove: (a) that the food was in his possession otherwise than for sale; and (b) that there was no intent to deceive. Claims for Vitamins and Minerals in Food.—(a) General Claims: No one, except under certain conditions, may (i) sell any food with a label making a general claim that vitamins or minerals are present in it; (ii) stock pre‐packed food with a similar label; or (iii) publish, or be a party to publishing, an advertisement making a general claim as above. The above provisions apply whether the label is attached to or printed on the wrapper or container or not. The conditions referred to above are as follows: (i) If a claim that vitamins are present is made, the food must contain one or more of the substances specified in Part I of the Second Schedule, i.e. Vitamins A, B1, B2 (Riboflavin), C and D; Carotene; or Nicotinic Acid, Nicotinic Acid Amide and the active derivatives. (ii) If a claim that minerals are present is made, the food must contain one or more of the substances specified in Part II of the Second Schedule, i.e., Calcium, Iodine, Iron or Phosphorus. (iii) The label or advertisement must specify the minimum quantity of each substance in each oz. or fluid oz., expressed in the appropriate units specified in Parts I and II of the Second Schedule. (b) Particular Claims.— The Order also provides that no one shall: (i) sell any food with a label which claims or in any way suggests that a particular substance specified in the Second Schedule is present in it; (ii) stock pre‐packed food with a similar label; or (iii) publish, or be a party to publishing, an advertisement making a particular claim or suggestion as above. These claims or suggestions may, however, still be made if the label or advertisement specifies the minimum quantity of each substance contained in each oz. or fluid oz., expressed in the appropriate units specified in the Second Schedule. The above provisions apply whether the label is attached to or printed on the wrapper or container or not. (c) Exemptions.—These provisions do not apply to: (i) fruit or vegetables, excluding those which have been canned or bottled or those preserved otherwise than by freezing, gas or cold storage or other storage methods; (ii) food served by a caterer as a meal or part of a meal; (iii) food imported on Government account which is still in the original wrapper or container. In case (iii), however, the provisions relating to advertisements are still applicable. (d) Defences.—In proceedings relating to the publication of an advertisement, it will be a defence for the defendant to prove that his business is to publish or arrange for the publication of advertisements and that he received it for publication in the ordinary course of business. In similar proceedings against the manufacturers, producers or importers of the advertised food the onus of proving that he did not publish, and was not a party to publishing, the advertisement is on the defendant. In proceedings for a failure to specify the required particulars in an advertisement, it will be a defence for the defendant to prove that he took all reasonable steps, by pre‐packing, to see that it would not be sold without an appropriate label. Deficiencies of Weight or Measure.—In proceedings for infringement of the labelling requirements relating to the weight or measures of pre‐packed articles of food, the Court must disregard inconsiderable variations in the weight or measure of single articles and take into account (a) the average weight or measure of a reasonable number of other articles of the same kind (if any) sold or stocked by the defendant on the same occasion and (b) all the circumstances of the case. In similar proceedings relating to weight, measure or number, it will be a defence for the defendant to prove: (a) that the offence was due to a bona fide mistake or accident or to other causes beyond his control and that he took all reasonable precautions to prevent it; or (b) that the alleged deficiency was due to unavoidable evaporation, although due care had been taken to avoid it. Proceedings for a deficiency in the weight or measure of any pre‐packed food or in the number of articles in a wrapper or container may be instituted, in England, by the local Weights and Measures Authority, and, in Northern Ireland, by the Ministry of Commerce. Inaccurate Statements, etc.—In prosecutions relating to the inaccuracy or omission of a particular required to be shown on a label or statement, it will be a defence for the defendant to prove: (a) that he bought the food in the wrapper or container in which it was sold from a person carrying on business at an address in the United Kingdom, and that the wrapper or container had remained unopened; (b) that the particular in question was shown on (or omitted from) the label or statement at the time of purchase; and (c) that he had no reason to believe that there was any infringement. The defendant, within fourteen days of the service of the summons (or in Scotland, the complaint), must send the prosecutor a copy of the label or statement with a notice stating that he intends to rely on it and giving the name and address of the person from whom he received it. A similar notification must be sent to the person who gave him the label or statement and he is entitled to appear in Court and give evidence. A defendant who is an employee may also rely on the above defence. Act or Default of Another.—A defendant who is prosecuted under the Order may allege that the offence was due to the act or default of another person. He is entitled to make this person a party to the proceedings but must first lay an information and give at least three clear days' notice to the prosecution. If the original defendant's allegation is proved, the second defendant may be convicted of the offence. The original defendant will then be entitled to an acquittal if he can prove that he used all due diligence to comply with the provisions in question. Both the prosecution and the second defendant will have the right to cross‐examine the original defendant and his witnesses and to call rebutting evidence. The Court may make any order it thinks fit for payment of costs by one party to another. If the Minister or other enforcing authority is reasonably satisfied that an offence for which one defendant might be prosecuted is due to the act or default of a second defendant and that the first defendant could establish the above defence, he may prosecute the second defendant without taking a preliminary prosecution against the first. The second defendant may then be convicted of the offence with which the first defendant might have been charged and may be awarded similar punishment. Special provision is made for a similar procedure under the Law of Scotland. Analysts' Certificates.—In proceedings for infringement, the production by one of the parties of a certificate from a Public Analyst or the Government Chemist will be sufficient evidence of the facts stated in it, unless the other party requires that the Analyst shall be called as a witness. A copy of the Analyst's certificate supplied by one party to the other is admissible in evidence without further proof. If the prosecution intends to produce a certificate, a copy must be served with the summons (or, in Scotland, the complaint). A defendant who intends to produce a certificate or require the Analyst to give evidence must give the other party at least three clear days' notice of his intention. The Court is entitled to adjourn the hearing on such terms as it thinks proper if there is any failure to comply with these requirements. In Northern Ireland, “Government Chemist” means the Government Chemist for Northern Ireland. Other Provisions.—The Order also contains various provisions for securing its application under the law of Scotland and Northern Ireland. The provisions of the Order are subject to any directions, licences or authorisations given by the Minister. Holders of licences or authorisations must comply with every condition imposed. The Order will come into force on January 1st, 1945. Definitions.—“Food” means any article used as food or drink for human consumption and includes any substance intended for use in the composition or preparation of food, any flavouring, sweetening matter or condiment and any colouring matter intended for use in food. An article is not to be deemed not to be food merely because it can also be used as a medicine. Save as otherwise provided, the description or definition of food given in an Order of the Minister will apply for the purposes of this Order. If described or defined in more than one Order, the description or definition given in a Price Control Order will be applicable. “Pre‐packed” means packed or made up in advance ready for retail sale in a wrapper or container. Wrapped or packed food found on premises where that food is packed, kept or stored for sale will be deemed to be pre‐packed unless the contrary is proved. The contrary cannot, however, be proved merely by showing that the food had not been labelled in accordance with the provisions of the Order. “Pre‐pack” is to be correspondingly interpreted. “Retail Sale” means any sale to a person buying otherwise than for resale but does not include a sale to a caterer for his catering business or a sale to a manufacturer for his manufacturing business. “Advertisement” includes any notice, circular, label, wrapper or other document and any public announcement made orally or by a means of producing or transmitting light or sound. References to a label marked on a wrapper or container include references to any legible marking, however effected. “Food Imported on Government Account” means food imported into the United Kingdom for defence purposes, which was the property of, or consigned directly to, His Majesty or a Government Department, or their agents. “Public Analyst” has the same meaning as in the Food and Drugs Act, 1938, [and the corresponding Acts in force for Scotland and Northern Ireland.] References to Orders or Regulations refer to those Orders or Regulations as subsequently amended or replaced.

Details

British Food Journal, vol. 46 no. 9
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0007-070X

Article
Publication date: 1 April 1993

Peter B. Webb and Harold L. Bryant

Emphasizes one of the two basic types of technology, Kaizen technology, which was principally conceived in Japan. Also discusses the relationship between Kaizen technology…

Abstract

Emphasizes one of the two basic types of technology, Kaizen technology, which was principally conceived in Japan. Also discusses the relationship between Kaizen technology and the second type, innovative technology. Kaizen technology is one of the principal reasons for Japan’s economic success. Asserts here that if American businesses are to compete successfully in international trade in future years, they must integrate and apply Kaizen technology. Presently, the prevailing managerial philosophy in the US, Taylor’s “scientific management”, impedes this integration and application. This philosophy, based on Frederick Taylor’s ideas, is contrasted with Kaizen technology. Finally, recommendations are presented to assist US firms in the transition from Taylor methods to quality management and Kaizen technology.

Details

Journal of Organizational Change Management, vol. 6 no. 4
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0953-4814

Keywords

Article
Publication date: 1 November 1946

The outbreak of typhoid fever which had been traced to a “carrier” of the fever germs may be given as a reason for the following note on the regulations relating to the…

65

Abstract

The outbreak of typhoid fever which had been traced to a “carrier” of the fever germs may be given as a reason for the following note on the regulations relating to the manufacture of ice cream. This brief re‐statement of the regulations will serve to indicate the nature of the control exercised by the health authorities over a widely spread trade. It need hardly be pointed out that cream in the usually accepted sense of that term or its substitute containing a certain proportion of milk powder or skim milk is peculiarly liable to act as an agent in the dissemination of certain types of disease. “New regulations, the “Ice Cream (Heat Treatment) Regulations, 1946,” at present in draft, but operative from May 1st, 1947, deal with the sterilisation of the raw material and the retail sale in the finished and frozen state. Registration of premises, inspection by the local authority, combined with the goodwill of the trade, are obvious safeguards. The term “ice cream” possibly suggests to the average consumer a frozen mixture of cream—as that word is usually understood to mean—flavoured with the fresh juice or fresh‐fruit pulp of the name fruit. Such a mixture, if made from wholesome materials under hygienic conditions, would be a good, palatable luxury, and from the nature of the case seasonal. Most of us at some December midnight have had something called strawberry ice. The name stands, but the composition is rather a matter for speculation by the uninitiated. The term “cream” has been for many years applied to substances which though wholesome in themselves are not cream—vegetable fats, milk powder and the like—but they form the basis, so to speak, either in whole or in part of ice cream. There is in fact no official standard to define what is meant by ice cream, and the definition which we have ventured to offer must obviously be extended to apply to a large number of substances that do not of necessity consist either partly, still less wholly, of cream or of any substance whose origin is to be found in fruit of any kind. Ice cream, in fact, is a substance whose composition it seems may vary within wide and undefined limits. Thus the Ice Cream (Prohibition of the Manufacture and Sales) Order, 1942, says “‘Ice cream’ includes water ices.” The Ice Cream Transport Order (No. 305, March 22nd, 1945), prohibiting the export of ice cream to Great Britain from Northern Ireland, says: “Ice cream includes water ices and any article, whether frozen or chilled, and under whatever description it is sold, which is sufficiently similar to ice cream as to constitute a substitute for ice cream.” The statements just quoted seem to imply that ice cream may be made of almost anything as long as price, temperature and taste suit the requirements of the consumer. However, our concern is less to do with its composition as with regulations that have to do with the hygienic requirements of its manufacture. It may be pointed out that as things stand at present registration relates to premises and not to persons employed therein. Anyone can be employed in an ice cream factory, as he can be employed in any other kind of food factory. The matter of engaging him is left to the heads of the factory. They, as commonsense business people, with the interests of their business at heart, are not likely to engage anyone who is at sight obviously unfitted for the job. On the other hand, habits and health, especially the latter, become of peculiar importance when such a substance as ice cream is the object of manufacture. To make regulations as to the registration and inspection of premises, is one thing. It is not too easy to enforce such regulations. In the case of persons it is more delicate and difficult. If the offence be of habit it can be readily detected and dealt with. If of health, it becomes a matter for the Medical Officer of Health and his professional colleagues. Under Section 14 of the Food and Drugs Act, 1938, which came into force on October 1st, 1939, all premises in which ice cream is sold, manufactured, or stored must be registered with the local authority. The purpose for which registration is sought—sale, storage, or manufacture—must be stated, and also the nature of other business, if any, that may be carried on on the premises. If the premises appear to the local authority to be unsuitable, registration may be refused, or, if previously granted, may be cancelled. Notice of the refusal to register, or to cancel registration, must be served on the applicant or tenant of the premises by the local authority, giving reasons for the act, and the applicant or tenant may then, if he wishes, request the local authority to show cause, for the reasons given by them, why they should refuse to register or wish to cancel registration.” It need hardly be pointed out that the sole reason for registration is to enable the local authority to satisfy themselves that hygienic conditions are complied with, such as cleanliness, light, ventilation, adequate water supply and sanitation in general. Though the conditions may be complied with there is still the more serious danger that may arise from “milk‐borne diseases,” a danger that is admittedly peculiarly acute when such a substance as ice cream is the subject of manufacture or storage. The Medical Officer of Health must therefore be informed by the manufacturer if any milk‐borne disease has occurred among persons living or working in or about the premises. We may hazard the guess that it may not always be easy for the manufacturer to obtain such certain knowledge. “Milk‐borne disease” means enteric fever (including typhoid or paratyphoid), dysentery, diphtheria, scarlet fever, acute inflammation of the throat, gastro‐enteritis, and undulant fever—a formidable list—and any other disease that may be declared milk‐borne by the Minister of Health. With the best will in the world on the part of everybody concerned the enforcement of this Order, and there can be obviously no half measures in doing so, presents difficulties that can only be adequately appreciated and discussed by medical practitioners who are conversant with the nature of the disease in general and with the particular conditions that led to its occurrence. Apart, however, from its purely medical aspect, and if we consider the manufacturer we find that if he has done his duty in this respect he may have his business brought to a standstill, or at least a part or even the whole of his stock destroyed. The Medical Officer of Health is very rightly empowered, in the interests of public health, which override all other considerations, to prohibit the use for human consumption of any substance likely to convey milk‐borne disease and to order either its removal or its destruction. Compensation can be paid to the manufacturer if the Medical Officer of Health, after further enquiry, be satisfied that the suspected substance is not injurious. His notice for destruction or removal must then be withdrawn. On the other hand, compensation will not be paid if the suspected substance was actually injurious, or was made on the premises while the order of the Medical Officer was still in force. If a person feels aggrieved by the decision of the local authority he may appeal to a court of summary jurisdiction. Any change in the occupation of registered premises must be notified to the local authority by the ingoing tenant if he intends to use such premises for the purpose for which they were registered. If at the commencement of the Act of 1938 a local Act was in force dealing with the conditions for registration of premises it may remain in force unless the Minister, at the request of the local authority, declares the 1938 Act, 14 (1), to be in place of it. The use of unregistered premises renders the offender liable to a fine not exceeding £20, and for a second offence a maximum penalty of £100 and for three months imprisonment. Every street seller of ice cream must have his name and address on the barrow or container. It may be added that hotels, clubs and inns are exempt from registration, and theatres, music halls and the like are also exempt unless they manufacture ice cream on the premises. The Order of 1942 prohibited the manufacture of ice cream in catering establishments or in institutions, meaning by these terms premises previously authorised to do so by licence from the Ministry of Food or by a Food Control Committee. Institutions or households were exempt from this Order if the ice cream manufactured was to be consumed on the premises. This Order was rescinded by an Order of November 16th, 1944, and manufacture was resumed from that date. This was certainly not due to any marked increase in the milk supply. The trade demand was and is at least in part met by a permitted substitute.

Details

British Food Journal, vol. 48 no. 11
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0007-070X

Book part
Publication date: 13 August 2018

Robert L. Dipboye

Abstract

Details

The Emerald Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-1-78743-786-9

Article
Publication date: 1 November 1921

Van Helmont considered he had found it in water, and thus records his famous Brussels experiment:

Abstract

Van Helmont considered he had found it in water, and thus records his famous Brussels experiment:

Details

British Food Journal, vol. 23 no. 11
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0007-070X

Article
Publication date: 1 March 1934

5a. Oil of cinnamon, oil of cassia, oil of cassia cinnamon, is the lead‐free volatile oil obtained from the leaves or bark of Cinnamomum cassia (L.) Blume, and contains…

Abstract

5a. Oil of cinnamon, oil of cassia, oil of cassia cinnamon, is the lead‐free volatile oil obtained from the leaves or bark of Cinnamomum cassia (L.) Blume, and contains not less than 80 per cent. by volume of cinnamic aldehyde.

Details

British Food Journal, vol. 36 no. 3
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0007-070X

1 – 10 of 210