Orange juice (OJ) was treated with a continuous high‐pressure carbon dioxide (HPCD) system, and the quality parameters pH, Brix, titratable acidity (TA), cloud, pectinesterase (PE) activity, color, and sensory attributes were determined. Treatment pressures were 38, 72, and 107 MPa, and CO2/juice (w/w) ratios were from 0.40 to 1.18. Residence time was kept at 10 min. Cloud increased between 446% and 846% after treatments. There were no significant changes in pH and Brix (α= 0.05). TA of the treated juice was found to be significantly different from that of control (α= 0.01). PE was not completely inactivated. There was a small, but significant increase in juice L‐value (α= 0.01) and a decrease in a‐value for color. There was no significant change in b‐values (α= 0.05). Statistical analysis for the sensory data showed no difference between fresh, frozen control juice and treated juice after 2 wk of refrigerated storage at 1.7 °C.

: A continuous high‐pressure carbon dioxide system, run at ambient conditions, was tested on its performance in reducing both natural and inoculated microbial loads. The prototype system continuously processes orange juice with carbon dioxide (CO2) at high pressures. A central composite design was originally used to examine the variables of pressure, residence time, and CO2/juice ratio. For microbial reduction, residence time was the major factor followed by pressure. The CO2/juice ratio showed no influence on microbial load, and in this equipment, was difficult to control. The unit was able to cause a 5‐log reduction of the natural flora in spoiled juice, and could attain a 5‐log decrease in numbers of pathogenic Escherichia coli O157:H7, Salmonella typhimurium, and Listeriamonocytogenes. No viable cells of E. coli O157:H7 orS. typhimurium were cultured after the treated juices were stored at room temperature (22 °C) for 14 d. Thus, non‐thermal pathogen reduction is possible with this system.

istry and that cuts across its entire field. Laboratory periods would be devoted to a new type of experiment that would be explanatory in nature rather than qualitative or quantitative. I am not aware that such a course is now offered at the college level. The Director of Military Training, A.S.F., and the Director of the School Division (formerly Army Specialized Training Division), Office of the Director of Military Training, A.S.F., would appreciate any suggestions you might care to submit concerning a course as just outlined. The suggestions would be

to the S, S. White Dental Manufacturing Company. Compositions commonly used for making dental impressions are plaster of Paris, thermoplastic molding substances, modeling compositions having resinous bases, and hydrocolloidal compounds.The composition described in the present patent is asserted to be a distinct improvement over all of the above, and usable in industry wherever there is need for accurate impressions of articles to be copied.The elastic base ingredient in the composition is algin in the form of sodium or ammonium alginate. Algins are extracted from various seaweeds. They form colloidal solutions which may be gelled by adding salts of many bivalent metals. Calcium citrate and borate are suitable salts for causing gelation.

ALTHOUGH,for the most part, it is only the people most concerned who are aware of it, at present history is being made in our patent system. After several years of comparative inactivity, much legislation concerning the patent system has recently been considered by Congress. More soon will come up for discussion. Some of this is an outgrowth of certain moves made by the Department of Justice in exposing "international cartels" and "patent pools" both at home and abroad. As usual, the patent system itself was confused with the monopolies formed by a few large corporations allegedly violating our anti-trust laws. It looked for a time as though the Department of Justice, or certain elements of it, wanted to uproot the whole patent system or at least emasculate it.Here is how American industrialists and scientists reacted to the attack on our patent laws.Robert E. Wilson, a well-known industrial chemist, now president of Pan American Petroleum and Transport Company, New York City, devoted his speech to the problem upon being awarded the Perkin Medal January 8, 1943. He begins thus: "While the subject of my address is rather unusual for a Perkin Medallist, I feel sure that no apology is necessary for devoting my time to a matter which gravely threatens the whole future of industrial research and our national welfare. I refer to the recent widespread and unfair attacks upon our patent system. Unless we, as scientists, help to educate the lay public as to the facts of the situation, ill-considered legislation may be adopted which would prevent the prompt and free exchange of new information, destroy the market of the independent inventor, and discourage the continuance of American industrial research of which we are so justly proud."1 Mr. Wilson went on to explain in more detail how American progress had been aided by patents. He also 1 Wilson, "Research and patents," Jnd. Eng. Chem., Ind. Ed., 35, 177-85 (Feb.. 1943).' development if he is faced with the possibility that he may at any time be forced to give a competitor a license on terms which are unpredictable..."Proposed Prohibition of Restriction in Licenses. This refers to restrictions such as those of price, quantity permitted to be manufactured, geographical limitations, and limitations as to the use to be made of patents.He stated that he could not argue strongly against restrictions as to price or quantity permitted to be manufactured under a license because his industry was tending away from those restrictions, itself. "... However, even such prohibitions would tend to discourage licensing or force up royalty rates in certain cases where a patent, owner feels that such restrictions on first sale are necessary for his self-preservation.

United States Patent Office and the unique system of which it is the very heart have had few press agents in their long history. Probably no other government agency has contributed so much to the American way of living and has had so little recognition in return as has the Patent Office. As a result, the education of most chemists does not include any information on either the use of patents as chemical literature or on the patent system and how to make use of it. The average American's information concerning the Patent Office is about as follows:Many great inventors have taken out patents. The term of a patent is 17 years. We have copyrights to prevent pirating of publications. If you can think up a good gadget and get a patent on it you can make a million dollars easily. If you want a mechanical patent you must submit a working model of your invention. Lots of articles have the mysterious expression "Pat. Pending" on them.Right here let us refute that statement about models. An inventor is not required to submit a model and has not been so required since 1880. The office has no room to store thousands of models. However, if an inventor thinks he has made a perpetual motion machine he must submit a model and prove that it will do all he claims for it. For some reason the Patent Office is suspicious of perpetual motion machines! As for the words "Pat. Pending" there is no law which prevents anyone, whether he has a patent application 1 "Outline of the history of the United States Patent Office,'' J.

The book would be much more useful as a reference book if the number of references to the original literature were greatly expanded and an author index included. Even without these things this is one of the best books in the field and every inorganic chemist should own and use it.

No abstract