The Reports of the Massachusetts State Board of Health give a number of cases of the same sort, all showing that milk is easily infected by persons suffering from even mild attacks of typhoid fever, attacks so slight as perhaps not to be recognized or to be worth submitting to a physician, but which are responsible for bacteria passing from the hands or mouth to a can cover or ladle, and so to the milk. _Diphtheria._ Diphtheria seems to be well established as a disease transmissible by milk, although its occurrence is not so frequent as that of typhoid fever. Not long since, the writer was much interested in an epidemic of this sort described by a physician who was convinced that the bacteria responsible for the mild form of the disease occurred largely in the nose and throat passages. He noted that as the result of these growths a constant exudation from both passages was present, and that a man with this disease, working over the milk, might easily allow the milk to be polluted by this exudate dropping from his nose. The result was a general distribution of a mild form of diphtheria among those using the milk. _Scarlet fever._ Many examples have also been given of the distribution of scarlet fever through the agency of milk, the specific contagion probably being discharged by the patient from his nostrils, mouth, or from the dry particles of skin so characteristic of this disease. Unfortunately, mild cases of scarlatina are very apt to occur, so mild that a physician is not called in, and the only positive proof of the disease consists in the subsequent "peeling," although the nasal passages may have been alive with germs. _Tuberculosis._ So far as tuberculosis is concerned, nothing seems to be definitely proved. There is little fear of milk becoming infected from tuberculous patients or of the disease being transmitted through milk from one person to another, as with the three other diseases mentioned. The possibility of infection here lies in the fact that a cow, like man, is susceptible to tuberculosis as a disease, and undergoes the same course of prolonged suffering and death. The interesting question is whether the disease may be transmitted from a cow to a man through the cow's milk. With all the refinements suggested by science as to the virulence of the disease thus transmitted, with a study of the comparative symptoms of the two diseases, of the progress of the disease in the cow when the germs are found in the milk, and of the possibility of eliminating these germs by heating or otherwise, the danger from diseased cows is still unsettled.