View report page

77
diphtheria 'carriers,' 3 of whom proved to be virulent, and were appropriately
treated. As subsequent re-swabbing yielded negative results on
four occasions, they were allowed to return to school. Four months
later further cases of Diphtheria occurred, and it was then found that two
of the former 'carriers' again yielded Diphtheria Bacilli on swabbing
and were evidently the source of infection. It was therefore decided to
exclude them again, and to protect the children by Schick-testing and
immunisation. Help from Dr. Lethem, of the Ministry of Health, was
obtained. A meeting of parents was summoned and addressed by the
Chairman of the Health and Education Committees, by Dr. Lethem,
and Dr. W. Stott, the Medical Officer of Health for Lowestoft. Owing to
the enthusiastic address of the Chairman of the Education Committee, a
well-known anti-vaccinator, the response by parents was regarded as
extremely satisfactory, 50 per cent. presenting their children for
immunisation. The work of testing was done at the end of September,
and 173 children were tested and yielded as many as 130 Schick-positives
(75 per cent.)—23 out of 24, aged 1—5; 79 out of 99, aged 5—10; and
28 out of 50, aged 10 years and over. In all, 122 were immunised, 8 having
failed to attend. Dr. Stott writes that, up to the present date (October
12th, 1926), it is interesting to note that no further cases of Diphtheria
have occurred in this school or even in the district in which it is situated."
(2) "In Lowestoft a school outbreak was checked by immunisation
in 1925. Last year Diphtheria again broke out, but in another school,
and in spite of all precautions soon spread to different parts of the town.
None of the 173 children treated in 1925 took the disease, although cases
occurred in that school among unprotected children. Acting on the
experience gained two years ago, the Council are now offering immunisation
to all children in Infant Departments, and have also opened a
Clinic at the Child Welfare Centre."
Conclusions and Recommendations:—
From the above short report it will be gathered that where a large
proportion of the susceptible people in a district are immunised, the disease
is more or less quickly eradicated, thus proving the value of immunisation.
It is uncertain as to the length of time a person remains immune,
and as the process is new it is impossible to give any exact idea on the
subject. It is, however, known that people who have been immunised
in school age have remained immune for 15 to 20 years afterwards, and
it is possible there may be immunity for life.
I would, therefore, recommend the Committee to continue this work
of immunisation with increased vigour, and beg to suggest that:—