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

View report page

Hackney 1903

Report on the sanitary condition of the Hackney District for the year 1903

This page requires JavaScript

The following Table sets out these facts :—

Duration.No. of Cases of Enteric Fever notified.No. of Cases where definite information respecting food was obtained.No. of Watercress Cases.Percentage of Cases presumably infected by Watercress.Remarks.
1st PeriodJune 6 to July 25.48452964.1
2nd PeriodJuly 26 to Aug. 2962582848.2
Total PeriodJune 6 to Aug. 291101035755.3

In order to fully estimate the value of the above evidence, it is
necessary to obtain some idea of the proportion of the public in
Hackney who are watercress eaters. To this end, I had enquiries
made at 124 houses in those parts of the Borough invaded by enteric
fever, and ascertained that the inmates of 34 only were watercress
eaters. This figure includes not only the regular consumers of this
vegetable, but also the occasional consumers, the remainder not
eating watercress. Thus the watercress eaters may be taken at 27.5
per cent. and non-watercress eaters at 72.5 per cent. of the population;
but the incidence of enteric fever on watercress eaters compared
with non-watercress eaters during this epidemic was as the figures
64:36. Therefore it will be seen by an easy calculation that watercress
eaters suffered 4.6 times more than non-watercress eaters
during the A period, more than twice as much during the B period,
and over three times as much during the whole epidemic. There is
no essential reason why watercress eaters should be selected, except
for the reason that this article of food was specifically infected.
b. Source of Watercress.— Enquiries as to where the watercress
had been purchased led to the following facts. The outburst of the
A period led me to believe that the watercress must have been