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

View report page

Wimbledon 1909

[Report of the Medical Officer of Health for Wimbledon]

This page requires JavaScript

"G.L. was still feeble; he had a sore throat and enlarged
tonsils. His wife had a sore throat, but it was almost normal
again; she looked and said she felt poorly."
The farm "X" at which G.L. was employed consisted of
two farmsteads, "XI" and "X2," with two separate herds
of cows and cowhouses. G.L. was carter for both and acted
as auxiliary milker at both when necessary."
At farmstead "X2" the condition of three of the cows
excited suspicion and suggested the necessity for veterinary
inspection, which was carried out by Mr. Dunbar, the London
County Council's Veterinary Inspector. The evidence appears
conclusive that milk from farm "X" was infected.
The report adds:—
"It is not possible to say exactly when the milk
derived from Farm "X" ceased to be infective. The
supply was discontinued after June 18th; certain precautions—wholesale
pasteurising, etc.—had already been
taken a day or two before this. An abrupt cessation of
the prevalences in the several districts involved followed
upon the discontinuance of the infected supply."
As to the original cause of the outbreak, the report
says:—
"The question whether the outbreak was human or
bovine in origin must now be discussed.
"Inquiry at the farms, at the milker's cottages, and
at school revealed only two possible sources of human
contagion."
These were considered, but all the evidence was negative,
and the following was the conclusion arrived at:—"That the
cases in this milker's family were caused by drinking infected
milk from Farm 'X'; in fact, that the milk infected the
milker and not the milker the milk."
Further, the report says:—
"The circumstances are highly suggestive of a
special pathogenic quality of the red heifer's milk which
may possibly have caused first the death of her calf, and
then on the distribution of the milk in London and
Surrey, produced Scarlet Fever among consumers in those
Counties. It would appear that June 7th, the day on
which the red heifer's milk first came into use, was the
day on which the milk on the farm first showed evidence
of being infective. It is probable that for two or three
days the property of infectiousness was confined to the
milk of the red heifer; but the roan and white heifers,
with which the red heifer had then for some days past
6