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

View report page

Southgate 1952

[Report of the Medical Officer of Health for Southgate]

This page requires JavaScript

carried out at a younger age than was previously considered desirable.
Our main object is to arrive at a time-table which will allow
a child to be fully protected against pertussis, either alone or in
conjunction with diphtheria, at an early age; and will also allow
us to carry out vaccination without disturbing the sequence. In
other words, we are trying to ensure that the administrative and
family difficulties associated with immunisation and vaccination
are so spaced and smoothed out, that a parent can take advantage
of the facilities offered without disturbance of the child or family,
and with the maximum degree of protection at the age when
protection may be most required.
We have not yet had sufficient time to judge the efficacy of
our present programme, having regard to all the aspects involved.
I hope, however, to be able to report further on this matter within
12 months.
I would again state that, although immunisation is a process
which is carried out in Southgate by the County Council, the
Public Health Committee has very rightly expressed a keen and
continuous interest in this phase of our work. It is for this reason
that the details set out above have been supplied.
Scarlet Fever
Scarlet fever notifications during 1951 were higher than those
received for the previous year (188 as against 99). The disease
was again extremely mild, so much so that it would appear quite
safe to say that notifications do not by any means represent the
total number of cases which actually occurred. I have reminded
general practitioners on several occasions of their statutory obligations
in the matter of notification. It is still a fact that quite a
number of mild cases of scarlet fever are almost certainly never
seen by a doctor. As complications and sequelae are now extremely
rare, this state of affairs is no longer as serious as would have been
the case before the war. In short, the disease which we know as
"scarlet fever" has a very different significance today.
Although this is the case, we still have to carry out the standard
procedure in regard to the exclusion of cases and contacts from
school, a procedure which rests with the Public Health Department,
working in conjunction with the family doctor. Fortunately, we
have considerable latitude in this respect, a latitude which I never
have the slightest hesitation in putting into practice. One might
go so far as to say that each case has to be treated on its own
merits as regards exclusion, so that a proper balance can be struck
between safeguarding the patient, reducing the risk of infection
and eliminating unnecessary absence from school. So long as
scarlet fever retains its present mild form, we can, 1 think, be
satisfied that our present policy is adequate.
32