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

View report page

Coulsdon and Purley 1936

[Report of the Medical Officer of Health for Coulsdon]

This page requires JavaScript

In the second half of the year there were only 10 cases, and these
were scattered over the District, while more than half of them probably
contracted the disease outside the Urban District. This number corresponds
approximately with the average incidence of the disease in this
Urban District, and it is hoped that 1937 will present not more than
the normal number of cases for the whole year.
Meanwhile consideration has been given to the establishment of
a Diphtheria Immunisation Scheme in the Urban District, the local
demand for such a facility having increased.
While it is realised that the recent wave of Diphtheria has now
subsided, and that a small demand for immunisation may be experienced
at first owing to the comparatively few cases of the disease failing to
stimulate public interest, it has been decided that a start should be
made.
The Council decided early in 1937 to establish a Clinic at 89, Brighton
Road, Purley, where children from 1 to 5 years of age could be immunised
free of charge, and children over 5 years of age at a small charge to cover
the cost of materials. The reason for this differentiation is that it is
highly desirable from the point of view of the health of the District,
as opposed to that of the individual, for a good percentage of toddlers
to be immunised rather than the older children. While more cases
are apt to occur among school children, partly owing to there being
more of them than of children under school age, and partly to their more
intimate contact with other children, it is the toddlers who suffer more
severely when infected. Persons immunised may still carry virulent
germs, and if, as is apt to happen, a much larger proportion of older
children are first immunised they may well carry the disease to the
younger children. On the other hand, the toddler is less likely to spread
disease owing to its comparative immobility.
It is hoped that the general practitioners of the District will also
co-operate in the work of immunisation, and that the foundation of
a Scheme may be wisely laid, capable of extension as and when required.
While it is unlikely that the response, and numbers which can be
immunised, will influence the incidence of the disease in the District
for some time, and a rise may be experienced in the interval, the means
will be available for those who desire to protect their children, and
ultimately it is hoped that few cases will result. From the point of
view of the individual who accepts the full course of treatment, at least
9 out of 10 can expect to be immune within six months, and remain
immune for some years, while almost all can feel assured that death
from Diphtheria will be avoided after the initial period. The fact that
immunity does take several weeks or months to develop is, of course,
an additional reason for not delaying treatment, but having it done
early although there may be but little of the disease about,
17