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

View report page

St Mary (Islington) 1892

[Report of the Medical Officer of Health for Islington, Parish of St. Mary ]

This page requires JavaScript

117
There is a slight discrepancy between the figures of these two
tables, amounting to 9 in all, which is due to the fact that the first
table (XI.) contains the record of cases after due enquiry had been
instituted, while the second table (XII.) contains a return of the certificates,
duplicates excluded, received by the Medical Officer of Health.
In connection with these tables, it should be mentioned that 59
cases, principally erysipelas, were persons who had come into Upper
Holloway for treatment at a hospital or public institution. The monthly
record of cases is printed now, for the first time, in order to show the
rise and fall of the diseases in the different seasons of the year.
Small-pox first made its appearance in the 4th, 5th, and 6th weeks
of the year, again in the 7th, and remained quiescent until the 12th
week. In each of these weeks one case was reported. Then in the
13th, 14th, and 15th weeks, 3, 2, and 1 cases, respectively, were
notified. For a fortnight afterwards no case was reported, but in the
18th and 19th weeks, 2 cases and 1 case were made known. After only
one week's rest, 2 cases were reported in the last week of May (21st of
the year), and again 4 cases came under observation in the succeeding
week. In the 23rd, 24th, and 25th weeks individual cases sprang up,
and then from this last period (5th week of June) no case was heard of
until the 2nd week of October, when one case was notified. There was
another break then until the 46th week (the 3rd week in November),
when 12 new cases arose. In the following week (47th) the cases fell to
3, then rose to 4 in the 48th week, and fell again to 1 in the 49th week.
In the last three weeks of the year no cases were notified.
Scarlet Fever,—In the early part of the year there was nothing
in the notification of this disease to portend the virulent attack it was
destined to make later on. It is true that thrice in the beginning
of the year, namely, in the 3rd and 4th weeks of January, and
in the 2nd week of February, the notifications exceeded the
average weekly returns (13.5) of the preceding year; but as in the
succeeding month, March, the disease was considerably below this
average, no particular attention was attracted to it. In the first week