View report page

64
A comparison of the figures of different localities in a matter of
this kind, where local conditions count for so much, should he
approached with great caution, and deductions made from them should
only be of the broadest and most general kind. In the above table
the figures for London represent very accurately the fluctuations in the
diarrhcea death rate that have taken place in the country generally
during this series of years and these, in their turn, have been marked,
for the most part, by corresponding meteorological fluctuations, as
shown in table I. Edmonton's figures for the ten years present a
similar variation. Even in the good years they were considerably
higher than those of London, due largely, no doubt, to the peculiar
constitution of our population, the inflammable nature of which is
seen in the high comparative increase that occurred in such bad
years as 1897, 1898 and 1899. This inflammability is the result of
our high birth rate and consequent large proportion of children of a
susceptible age.
Allowing much for local conditions of population, however, it
certainly would seem that in years like these, if not, indeed, in the
whole series, there is some justification for assuming that an excessive
mortality from summer diarrhcea has been a feature in the
past history of the district.
Before entering on that part of my report which deals with the
question locally, it will be of interest to examine briefly the conditions,
as shown in the returns of the Registrar General, that have prevailed
elsewhere during the period under consideration. In London the
mortality from diarrhceal diseases during the third quarter of the
present year was the highest recorded in this quarter for the last
thirty years, and is in striking contrast with the death rate for the
same period of 1903. The following table shows the figures for
London, together with the temperature and rainfall observations
during the two periods in question:—