London's Pulse: Medical Officer of Health reports 1848-1972

View report page

Deptford 1950

[Report of the Medical Officer of Health for Deptford Borough]

This page requires JavaScript

14
Of the total examined 1,348 men and 2,210 women were private
residents, the remainder being from various works or organisations in the
district. Dr. F. D. Beddard the Medical Director of the Unit when
supplying the figures stated: “There is no very striking figure in these
results and they seem to follow the usual pattern in other Boroughs. The
figures given under the column “ Probably Tuberculosis ” are, of course,
based on the X-ray findings alone and a proportion of these turn out on
follow up to be inactive lesions. The more important figure is only
obtainable after many months when follow up has revealed the true
active cases.”
Towards the end of 1950 there was a suggestion that the Tuberculosis
Regulations of 1930 should be replaced by new regulations which would
maintain the necessity for notification, but would otherwise largely
remove the powers and duties of the local authorities concerning tuberculosis.
It must be admitted that the powers given to local authorities
under the existing regulations have not been used to any great extent by
many authorities; that the responsibility for treatment now rests on the
Regional Hospital Boards and that the Local Health Authorities have
powers under the National Health Service Act, 1946, to take steps to
prevent the spread of tuberculosis.
On the other hand, few people would deny that the hospitals are far
more concerned with treatment and a rapid turnover than with prevention
and with the reduction in the numbers of both patients and beds, that the
importance of environment in the spread of tuberculosis is as great if not
greater than in any other disease and that local sanitary authorities can
deal with environmental work both more cheaply and more expeditiously
than those local health authorities which are county councils.
There can be no doubt that the prevention of tuberculosis is of far more
importance than the cure of this disease but that from sentimental or
mock-humanitarian reasons this principle is not generally carried into
practice. There is a tendency to be very proud of curing or helping to
cure an actual case of tuberculosis, but a disinclination to accept any
personal blame for any new case that occurs.
There is also no doubt that the activities of a local authority are strictly
limited by the auditor's interpretation of the legislation. Should local
sanitary authorities be denied the power to spend any necessary sum for
the special purpose of preventing the spread of tuberculosis, the result is
likely to be financially wasteful and medically deplorable.

The following figures concerning the Deptford Chest Clinic have been kindly supplied by the Chest Physician, Dr. J. P. V. Rigby:— Cases on Chest Clinic Register at 31.12.50 :—

Definite809
Observation48
Consultation between Practitioners and chest physician1,081
Visits of Chest Physician to homes663
Visits of T.B. Health Visitors to homes2,244
Number of Contacts examined
Seen for First time496
Reattenders142
Total attendances of Patients and Contest at Chest Clinic6,557
X-ray examinations made in connection with Chest Clinic Cases4,056
Total specimens of sputum examined1,361