View report page

32
and 20 were vaccinated owing to the outbreak. Among these 34 (14
and 20) one mild case occurred in a nurse whose re-vaccination was
ten years old. Six of the 40 nurses appear to have been imbued with
anti-vaccination opinions, and refused re-vaccination. Only one of
the six now needs any protection against Small-pox. Five of them
took it and one died.
In their Annual Report for the year 1900, the M.A.B. state that
in their report for the year 1892 they pointed out that nurses and
other members of the hospital staff could be brought with almost
absolute impunity into contact with Small-pox provided they are
properly protected by vaccination, and they add "the evidence of each
succeeding year has confirmed us in that opinion."
The fact is, therefore, that, in spite of the loathsome nature of
Small-pox in its severer forms, the disease is one of the safest to the
nurses and other members of the Asylums Board's staff whose duty
brings them in close contact with the cases; and here be it noted that
no similar immunity from the fevers, including diphtheria, admitted
to the institutions of the Board is obtainable, for not a year passes
without the loss of valuable lives in this connection from such
diseases contracted by nurses or others in the performance of their
duty.
In all his large experience derived from a study of 11,724 cases
in the Metropolitan Asylums Board's Hospitals, Dr. MacCombie has
never seen a case of Small-pox in a person who had been efficiently
vaccinated—meaning by this term a person who showed one-third of
a square inch or more of well-foveated primary vaccination surface
and who showed also marks of re-vaccination. This is evidence that
cannot be successfully controverted by platform faddists who have
probably never seen a single case of Small-pox. Were it not for the
protection afforded by vaccination and re-vaccination against Smallpox,
it would have been impossible in the past, and it would be
impossible in the future, to obtain nurses and others for Small-pox
Hospitals.