The first laboratory work on this subject was that of Froelich in 1912, who showed that guinea-pigs could be protected by an exclusive diet of fresh milk, and that raw milk is more effective than heated milk. In his work, the amount of milk taken by the animals was not measured, so that it is impossible to glean from it more than these general conclusions. In the following year, as a result of some quantitative experiments, Funk stated that he was able to protect guinea-pigs with 50 c.c. of fresh milk in addition to an oat diet. This estimate, as subsequent workers showed, is too low. Chick, Hume and Skelton were the first, however, to investigate the antiscorbutic potency of milk in a systematic and convincing manner. They demonstrated that if the daily consumption of fresh milk was less than 50 c.c., a guinea-pig died almost as quickly as if it received no milk; if the daily quota varied from 50 to 100 c.c., a greater or less protection from scurvy was observed, varying proportionately with the amount consumed; if 100 to 150 c.c. were taken daily, which practically amounts to a complete milk diet, satisfactory growth and development occurred, and no symptoms of scurvy were observed. This represents in a general way the present conception of the antiscorbutic power of milk. In passing, it may be remarked that it is not altogether clear why 50 c.c. of milk do not afford partial protection, and prolong the life of the animal for a definite length of time. The authors conclude that "milk is evidently a food poor in the antiscurvy accessory factor, and a ration large in comparison with that of other antiscorbutic materials is necessary to afford satisfactory protection from scurvy." The error must be avoided, however, of regarding milk as a standard article of diet containing a definite and specific amount of vitamine per cubic centimetre. It will be shown later that this point of view cannot be taken in regard to vegetables, and it is probable that it cannot be assumed for milk.