View report page

WELbeck 7766
Public Health Department,
Town Hall,
St. Marylebone, W.l.
To the Mayor, Aldermen and Councillors of the Metropolitan Borough of St. Marylebone.
Mr. Mayor, Ladies and Gentlemen,
I have the honour to present to you my Annual Report on the health of the Borough for the year
1958.
The vital statistics for the year, in general, shew no variations which can be considered significant
when compared with 1957 and they are not unfavourable in relation to those for London as a whole,
except in respect of the infant mortality rate. This rate has been somewhat higher than usual for
the last two years; 31.29 per thousand live births for 1957 and 33.42 for 1958; but even so this could
be, and probably is, due to chance alone since examination of the average infant mortality rates
for the two five-year periods prior to 1958 shew a downward trend.
The incidence of the notifiable diseases was on the whole low during the year. There was one sharp
outbreak of food poisoning which is fully reported on page 23 involving two schools in which 62
pupils and staff were affected. The cases were spread over 17 local authorities and the investigation
was further complicated by the fact that apart from verbal notification of the original case only three
of the remaining 61 cases were notified. These figures may well be indicative of the proportion of
such cases which normally come to official notice and if so they serve to emphasize the amount of
undisclosed ill-health which results from this cause. Many of those infected do not seek medical
attention and in the case of those who do it seems probable that notification is confined in the main
to the more severely ill among them. The degree of severity of symptoms has no relation to the
infectiousness of the patient; in fact the mild case which continues to move freely in the population
is a greater danger than the severely ill patient confined to bed. In the outbreak which I have
described it was possible to trace all those who had been affected. Had it occurred as a result of food
eaten in a restaurant it may well have gone undetected or, at best, the investigation may have linked
together the four notified cases. This is especially true of restaurants and hotels in St. Marylebone
where few of the customers live locally. If the premises upon which I have based my argument are
accepted then it is obvious that the control of detected cases of food poisoning and their contacts,
though essential, is much less likely to be effective than a direct attack on the source of the infection
by the close supervision of every place where food is produced, prepared, handled or eaten to ensure
that every precaution is taken against its contamination. In this Borough, with approximately
1,341 food premises, including some 740 restaurants, hotels, canteens and clubs, feeding a considerable
proportion of the visitors to London in addition to the local population and those who work here,
this work is of paramount importance.
Since anyone can open a food business without informing the Council, the utmost vigilance is
necessary to keep track of the numerous small restaurants, coffee bars and clubs which are constantly
springing up. Again, the introduction of deep-frozen foods is tempting many small shopkeepers to
sell these commodities as a sideline.
The registration of all food premises is long overdue and it is a sad commentary on the present
state of the law that while one shopkeeper selling packaged ice-cream from a refrigerator is required
to register with the local authority, his next door neighbour selling frozen foods is not required to
do so. Many of these foods such as made up meat and fish dishes, some of which may be prepared
as far afield as Italy, are, if not stored properly, potentially at least as dangerous as ice-cream and are
much more liable to contamination during manufacture.
During the year there has been a rise in the number of complaints of noise from the many building
sites in the Borough. With greater use of mechanisation, although the total time required to erect a
building may be reduced, noise level is considerably increased. In addition there is a tendencyto work
longer hours and at weekends to exploit the expensive mechanical equipment to the full. In most
cases the firms concerned have been co-operative and have been willing to adopt measures suggested
for the reduction of noise or have limited working hours so that it has been possible for residents in
the neighbourhood to have a reasonable- period of quiet each day. It has also proved helpful to advise
building contractors to keep local residents, the police and the Public Health Department informed
of the circumstances should it be necessary to carry out any particularly noisy operation or when
continuous working is essential for a limited period. Most people will tolerate a fair degree of noise if
they feel that the firm concerned is aware of their discomfort and that the operation is one designed
to shorten the total length of the job or is the result of an emergency which could not be foreseen.
Even more important is that they should know how long the nuisance will last.