“That Virol has food value cannot be denied, but that it has sufficient value to warrant the claims of the manufacturers is not evident. Virol cannot be considered a complete food, as the advertising literature reiterates, or an ideal food for infants. The amount of protein is far too low in comparison with the carbohydrates to warrant this view. The dosage recommended is not large. Thirty gm. a day would furnish only about 1 gm. of protein and 4 gm. of fat. The 3 teaspoonfuls a day recommended for children would furnish protein and fat even below this.
“If employed alone it cannot be a complete or sufficient food, and if employed along with other articles of diet—milk and bread, for example—it is not easy to see wherein lies the efficacy of the small weights of fat and protein added in the form of Virol. Here the demand made on our credulity is too great, as the protein in the preparation is the familiar protein of eggs, meat and malt, and the fat largely that from the egg-yolk and marrow, according to the claims. It is not known that any specific virtues reside in these bodies, or in the egg-shells, also claimed as present.
“In the opinion of the present referee there is nothing in the composition of Virol to justify the claims made for it. The judgment and recommendations of the first referee follow from the facts and must be accepted by the Council.”
The Council directed that the previously prepared report be allowed to stand and that it be published along with a suitable reference to the report of the second referee.—(From The Journal A. M. A., Feb. 20, 1915.)