View report page

37
it was not possible to obtain samples of the suspected meal for examination
nor arrange for the taking of faecal specimens from those alleged to have
been affected.
(6) An outbreak occurred during the year at a large Hospital involving
24 in-patients, 1 nurse and 1 ward maid. Stools were taken by the
Hospital authorities from all patients and from some salmonella typhimurium
was isolated. By the time the outbreak was recognised as food
poisoning some time had elapsed since the suspected meal was eaten
and in consequence no food remained from this meal for examination.
A cook who had been unwell for some 2 or 3 days before the outbreak was
suspended from duty in case he was a carrier, but rectal swab and faecal
specimens taken from him all proved negative.
(7) Notification was received from the Medical Officer of Health of
a suburban authority of two persons residing within his area who were
suffering from suspected food poisoning after allegedly eating a meal in
a Westminster restaurant. The patients were suffering from the usual
symptoms associated with food poisoning. The restaurant was visited
and found satisfactory; no food remained from the suspected meal.
The staff were interviewed and it was found that the Chef and some of
the Restaurant staff had been unwell two or three days previous to the
outbreak. Faecal specimens were taken but these were negative, except
that one did grow bacilli of a salmonella type, but this was obtained from
a non food handler.
The innumerable factors involved in nearly every food poisoning
outbreak necessitate thorough and patient investigation.
Early notification on the slightest suspicion that a case might be food
poisoning remains perhaps the most important factor in reaching a
satisfactory conclusion. It often enables the investigation to commence
before vital evidence as to the source of the infection has been obliterated
for all time.
It is only by discovering the source of the infection that effective steps
may be taken to prevent its recurrence.