Hints from the Health Department. Leaflet from the archive of the Society of Medical Officers of Health. Credit: Wellcome Collection, London
[Report of the Medical Officer of Health for London County Council]
This page requires JavaScript
Report of the Medical Officer of Health
31
The following table shows the measles death-rate (a) at ages 0-5 obtaining in the several sanitary districts of the County of London during the year 1910.
Metropolitan borough. | Death-rate per 1,000 children living aged 0-5, 1910. | Metropolitan borough. | Death-rate per 1,000 children living aged 0-5, 1910. | Metropolitan borough. | Death-rateper 1,000 childrenlivingaged 0-5,1910. |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Paddington | 4.69 | Stoke Newington | 2.14 | Bermondsey | 8.81 |
Kensington | 3.61 | Hackney | 2.64 | Lambeth | 3.52 |
Hammersmith | 4.90 | Holborn | 2.96 | Battersea | 3.41 |
Fulham | 3.03 | Finsbury | 5.94 | W andsworth | 1.21 |
Chelsea | 3.34 | London, City of | - | Camberwell | 4.23 |
Westminster, City of | 1.67 | Shoreditch | 5.75 | Deptford | 4.37 |
St. Marylebone | 2.62 | Bethnal Green | 3.31 | Greenwich | 4.15 |
Hampstead | 2.08 | Stepney | 2.69 | Lewisham | 0.65 |
St. Pancras | 5.85 | Poplar | 2.02 | Woolwich | 1.33 |
Islington | 4.36 | Southwark | 9.25 | London | 3.79 |
The following table shows the measles mortality under five years of age in five groups of districts, arranged in order of "social condition. The figures show that there is marked parallelism between measles mortality and "social condition":—
Number of group of boroughs in "order of social condition." (b) | Measles death-rate atages 0-5 per 1,000 living 1901-10. (a) |
---|---|
I. | 2.28 |
II. | 3.38 |
III. | 3.59 |
IV. | 4.15 |
V. | 5.02 |
Measles
mortality in
relation to
"social
condition.''
If the London measles death-rate be compared with the death-rates of the following large English towns, it will be seen that in the quinquennium 1905-9, the London death-rate was exceeded by the death-rates of Liverpool, Manchester, Birmingham, Sheffield, West Ham, Nottingham, Salford, and Leicester, and in the year 1910 exceeded that of all except Liverpool and Bradford.
Town. | 1905-9. | 1910. | Town. | 1905-9. | 1910. |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
London | 0.41a | 0.44a | West Ham | 0.59 | 0.34 |
Greater London | 0.36 | 0.32 | Bradford | 0.20 | 0.50 |
Liverpool | 0.50 | 0.62 | Newcastle-on-Tyne | 0.36 | 0.32 |
Manchester | 0.53 | 0.41 | Hull | 0.33 | 0.27 |
Birmingham | 0.51 | 0.07 | Nottingham | 0.48 | 0.20 |
Leeds | 0.34 | 0.36 | Salford | 0.63 | 0.36 |
Sheffield | 0.64 | 0.26 | Leicester | 0.43 | 0.06 |
Bristol | 0.31 | 0.09 |
Measles
death-rates
in large
English
towns.
The following table shows that the London measles death-rate, in the quinquennium 1905-9 and in the year 1910 was higher than that of any of the undermentioned foreign towns except St. Petersburg and Rome.
Town. | 1905-9. | 1910. | Town. | 1905-9. | 1910. |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
London | 0.41a | 0.44a | St. Petersburg | 0.88 | 1.07 |
Paris | 0.18 | 0.27 | Berlin | 0.20 | 0.13 |
Brussels | 0.15 | 0.10 | Vienna | 0.33 | 0.33 |
Amsterdam | 0.37 | 0.20 | Rome | 0.46 | 0.81 |
Copenhagen | 0.17 | 0.05 | New York | 0.20 | 0.16 |
Stockholm | 0.07 | 0.38 |
Measles
death-rates
in foreign
towns.
(a) See footnote (c) page 8.
(b) See footnote (a) page 24.