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 Hornchurch]
This page requires JavaScript
39
SECTION F.
PREVALENCE OF AND CONTROL OVER INFECTIOUS
AND OTHER NOTIFIABLE DISEASES
Infectious and Other Notifiable Diseases, 1959.
Disease | Total cases notified | No. of Cases hospitalised |
---|---|---|
Dysentery | 10 | 7 |
Erysipelas | 11 | 5 |
Food Poisoning | 22 | 3 |
Infective Hepatitis | 11 | 4 |
Measles | 2,590 | 19 |
Ophthalmia Neonatorum | 2 | 0 |
Pneumonia | 35 | 3 |
Poliomyelitis (non-paralytic) | 3 | 3 |
Scarlet Fever | 246 | 8 |
Typhoid Fever | 1 | 1 |
Whooping Cough | 63 | 1 |
The main feature of the year was possibly the absence of cases
of paralytic Poliomyelitis and a reduction in non-paralytic cases from
8 to 3.
It being a Measles epidemic year the number of cases increased tenfold
as compared with 1958 and the incidence of Scarlet Fever almost
doubled. Measles has lost much of its sting and with its complications
controlled as they now are even an epidemic creates no alarm. This,
however, is a disease as yet uncontrolled by any preventive inoculations.
Scarlet Fever in my view is overdue for removal from the list of
infectious diseases. Should circumstances change it could well be
restored. At present it is merely a particular type of infection, the
incidence of which is in no wise reflected by the number of notifications
since a vast number of streptococcal sore throats are never brought
to medical notice. Its control is made well nigh impossible because
of the impracticability of maintaining a bacteriological check on the
cases and because of the absence of any logical minimum isolation
period (not to mention the fact that many so called isolation arrangements
are to say the least of doubtful adequacy). Like some other
infectious diseases, it is an example of the theoretical and the practical
control being incompatible.
It is gratifying to note the year's findings on Poliomyelitis, although
with a disease so unpredictable, the figures represent exactly what they
stand for, i.e., the record for one year, and cannot be interpreted in
terms of further outlook.
It is also pleasing to see that at any rate sporadically keen public
interest is being shown in immunisation. I believe that public health
staffs enquiring into cases and interviewing close contacts should have
been given a really practical degree of priority in protection. I cannot