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

View report page

Poplar 1951

[Report of the Medical Officer of Health for Poplar, Metropolitan Borough]

This page requires JavaScript

To the Mayor, Aldermen and Councillors
of the Metropolitan Borough of Poplar.
Mr. Mayor, Ladies and Gentlemen,
I have the honour to submit the Annual Report on the health of the
Borough during the year 1951.
The report is mainly confined to factual matters because the work
of the department was carried out under the direction of my predecessor,
Dr. W. T. Donovan, whose untimely death occurred in October, 1951.
Tribute must be paid to Dr. Donovan's untiring energy and zeal in
the interests of the health of the citizens of the Borough, particularly in
connection with housing and food hygiene.
The general standard of health throughout the Borough remained
satisfactory, and there were no outbreaks of the more serious infectious
diseases. The total number of cases of infectious disease was high,
mainly on account of the large number of cases of measles.
Only one case of diphtheria was confirmed during the year, and this
happy condition was undoubtedly due to immunisation against this
disease. It cannot, however, be stressed too much that diphtheria has
not been eradicated, but is merely being held in check, and that any
serious falling off in the proportion of infants being immunised will result
in further and possibly very serious outbreaks such as have occurred
both in this country and abroad.
The Registrar-General's estimate of the population of the Borough
was 73,260, a decrease of 790 as compared with the previous year. The
Birth Rate was 17.3 per 1,000 of the population as compared with 16.7
for the previous year, and with 15.5 for the country as a whole.
The Infantile Mortality Rate was 31.5, which was 3.9 above that for
the previous year, and 1.9 above that for the country as a whole. It
must be remembered, however, that when dealing with small numbers
the rate varies considerably from year to year, and the figure given cannot
by itself be regarded as an accurate indication of the standard of child
care.
6