View report page

68
(2) That this disease differed greatly from ordinary catarrhal
sore throat or follicular tonsilitis, being of a septic
character, and suggestive of being caused by some
article of diet.
(3) That nearly all the cases of sore throat in question brought
to my knowledge bad occurred in the households supplied
by a particular milk vendor.
(4) That this milk supply was "X's."
(5) The inference I draw from the above conclusions is that in
some way the milk supplied by "X" was the cause of
the septic sore throat disease.
How milk could obtain septic properties I am unable to offer any
suggestion, but those familiar with dairy operations in country
districts are well aware how easily milk might be infected with septic
matter before consignment to London.
During the progress of my enquiries, I found here and there some
doubt had been expressed as to milk being the cause of the throat
illness, and a tendency to attribute it to other causes. The following
have been advanced against the infected milk explanation:—
(1) It has been stated that sore throat illness prevails all over
London, and, therefore it cannot be due to an infected
milk supply. In reply to this, I have to state, that my
enquiries prove, that the special form of disease under
enquiry did not even extend over the whole of Hackney,
but was confined to its Northern portion, and I have failed
to get any proof of the statement that it prevails in any
other part of London.
(2) It has been suggested the disease was due to influenza.
From those medical practitioners who have had the most
cases to treat, I am informed that the disease bears noresemblance
to influenza, or any of its complications.