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

View report page

Wimbledon 1909

[Report of the Medical Officer of Health for Wimbledon]

This page requires JavaScript

I was informed by a number of the general medical practitioners
in the Borough that there were a large number of
suspicious cases which were kept under close observation and
then found not to be Scarlet Fever.
It was noticed in the investigations of the various cases
that in houses having the same milk supply and on the same
milk round, no cases occurred where the milk was boiled before
use.
Comparing the outbreak with an ordinary one, it was
much less infectious from person to person than usual. Not
a single secondary case occurred in any house from which a
patient was removed to the Hospital or nursed at home.
The total number of cases notified was 60, and were
received as follows:—
Thursday 17th June 1
Friday, 18th June 13
Saturday, 19th June 19
Sunday, 20th June 6
Monday, 21st June 11
Tuesday, 22nd June 5
Wednesday, 23rd June 4
Saturday, 26th June 1
Forty-eight of these cases were clearly traced to the milk
supply. Of these 19 were males, 8 being under 5 years of age,
4 over 5 and under 14 years of age, and 7 over 14 years of age.
There were 29 females, 8 being under 5 years of age, 8 over 5
and under 14 years of age, and 13 over the age of 14.
Fifteen of the patients attended private schools and colleges
within the Borough and 4 Public Elementary Schools.
Twenty-two cases were removed to the Isolation Hospitals
at Gap Road and Durnsford Road. Thirty-five were nursed
at home, whilst three were removed by special arrangements
to the London Fever Hospital.
Immediately a case was removed to the Hospital the bedding
and other articles in the room likely to retain infection
were disinfected by the Staff of the Sanitary Department; during
the period of the outbreak 48 rooms were fumigated, and
some 45 loads of bedding, etc., comprising 86 beds and 1,487
other articles were disinfected. In this connection I would
observe that the work of disinfection was carried out promptly
and thoroughly.
I would express my praise of the commendable promptitude
and tact with which Mr. Johnson and his staff dealt with
the outbreak. They all worked with that unanimity of purpose
which spells success, and there is not the slightest doubt
that their unstinted efforts prevented a very serious outbreak,
the results of which can only be left to conjecture.
As local outbreaks occurred in Westminster, Chelsea and
Wandsworth (parts of the County of London), and in Epsom
4