View report page

Appendix 3.
FINAL REPORT ON OUTBREAK OF FOOD POISONING—
GARFIELD ROAD SCHOOL.
Submitted to the County Medical Officer on 7th October, 1947.
The Central Public Health Laboratory which investigated this
outbreak, reported as follows: "None of the usual pathogenic
organisms were isolated from specimens of food and faeces from the
Southgate outbreak but a particular strain of paracolon bacillus
which was isolated from 17 of the 28 (60%) faeces specimens examined
from patients and 1 of 8 specimens from members of the kitchen
staff are being further investigated with regard to pathogenicity and
serology".
The bacteriologist who carried out the investigation goes on to
remark that, as paracolons have not been too seriously considered in
this country in relation to food poisoning outbreaks, the laboratory
considers that the case against this particular organism should be
clarified as soon as is possible by further laboratory work, before
any more definite statement is made. It will be noted that the
number of faeces examined by the laboratory is higher than was
stated in the Preliminary Report. This is due to the fact that
second specimens were taken from a nutnber of selected cases and
sent for examination. Specimens of blood were also collected from
six selected children and one member of the kitchen staff. These
bloods will be used to investigate the serology of the suspected
paracolon. It should also be recorded that six members of the laboratory
staff inoculated themselves with a culture of the paracolon to
which reference has been made. One of the individuals so inoculated
developed signs and symptoms typical of those exhibited by most of
the children affected during, the outbreak. The attack lasted for
approximately 48 hours, followed by speedy recovery.
So far as we know, the total number of children definitely known
to have been associated with the outbreak, which was first reported
on 12th September 1947, remains as set out in my Preliminary
Report (45). Recovery has been complete in all instances, no aftereffects
having been reported or discovered. The available evidence
would make it appear that the paracolon bacillus referred to in the
laboratory report was responsible for the outbreak. It is unfortunate
that this bacillus was not recovered from any of the food-stuffs
60