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

View report page

Kensington 1884

[Report of the Medical Officer of Health for Kensington]

This page requires JavaScript

77
difficult of explanation by those who support the aërial dissemination
theory. There are other public institutions in the same
(Hackney) district, which appear to have enjoyed a similar
practical immunity from small-pox, although within what would be
called "striking distance" of the contagium generated by the sick
in the hospital. Instances of this kind, moreover, are not confined
to London, for, as the result of inquiries instituted by the Society
of Medical Officers of Health, in connection with the discussion
on Small-pox Hospitals above referred to, Dr. Alfred Hill
(Birmingham), Mr. Armstrong (Newcastle-on-Tyne), Dr. Vacher
(Birkenhead), Dr. Davies (Bristol), and others, referred to
examples of immunity from small-pox, in the case of public
institutions, in circumstances where there should have been no
immunity could the contagium leap over walls or enter at
windows at the distances to which, according to the "long
diffusionists," the disease may be spread.
There was a very general consensus of opinion among medical
officers and others, who took part in the discussion, that the socalled
“convalescent” stage of small-pox is as infectious as the
“acute” stage; a point of some importance, Mr. Power having
expressed a different view, contending, as the facts in regard to his
inquiry with respect to the Fulham Hospital seem both to warrant
and to require, that there was no evidence of the spread of small-pox
by aerial dissemination of contagium, so long as only convalescent
cases were under treatment at that hospital. But if the views
expressed by the different speakers, which will be found in the
Society's Transactions for the Session 1884-5, in regard to the
infectiousness of the convalescent stage, are well founded, a greater
difficulty than ever will have been interposed to the acceptance of
Mr. Power's attractive theory.
The discussion led to no definite conclusion, ascertained by
vote, but the balance of opinion was adverse to the hypothesis of
distal aerial infection, and it was felt that the indictment against
the hospitals, based on that theory, had not been sustained. For
my own part, I am still in the position of being unable to accept
Mr. Power's views, and am still of opinion that the "graduated