181

a large series of cases of acute and chronic bronchitis it also 1proved valuable. "In the acute bronchitis of children,"says the author, " its employment is followed by promptamelioration of cough and it apparently moderates the iseverity of the attack. In chronic bronchial catarrh itseems to have a positive curative value." In measles, whenthe bronchial irritation is a prominent symptom, nothing elsewas found so serviceable as heroin in suitable doses (fromand to th of a grain per dose) to tranquillise the per-sistent cough. A solution of heroin for hypodermic injection,prepared by the addition of a small amount of acetic acid,was found equally as efficacious as morphia and less objec-tionable in certain cases of spasmodic asthma. Maximum

doses of heroin produce gastric disturbance similar to thatfollowing the administration of morphine, but in a lesserdegree, and its desired effects can usually, in Dr. Fulton’sopinion, be obtained by smaller doses without causing anyderangement of the digestive functions.

INFLUENZA IN DOVER : IMPORTANT ACTION OFTHE TOWN COUNCIL.

AT a recent meeting of the Managing Committee of theTown Council of Dover the medical officer of health, Dr.Robinson, in an interesting report alluded to the prevalenceof influenza among the inhabitants. He characterised thedisease at the present time as a veritable plague demandingsome attempt to check its ravages. He very properlypointed out, as we tried to do last week, that the

chief factor in the distribution of the disease isthe infectious person of those who suffer from it. On two

previous occasions the Town Council of Dover have issuednotices warning the public of the infectious nature ofthe disease. The later of the two was a quotation from thepronouncements of the Local Government Board and in-cluded the following advice with regard to precautions thatshould be taken :-(1) The sick should be separated from thehealthy; (2) the sputa should be received into a vessel

containing disinfectants; (3) unnecessary assemblages of

persons should be avoided ; and (4) buildings and roomsin which people congregate should be well ventilated. Dr.Robinson advised the closure of the public schools for threeweeks and his advice was adopted.

PRESERVATIVES IN FOOD: A QUESTION OFPROCEDURE.

Now that the subject of preservatives in food is bsing verydefinitely investigated by a Government Committee with aview to formulating a precise scheme of legislation it is

surely vexatious on the part of vestry authorities to perseverein instituting proceedings based on the assumption that boricacid and other antiseptics are injurious to health. How is it

possible for a magistrate to express a positive opinion that acertain preservative is injurious to health when admittedlythe question is trying the utmost abilities of all leadingexperts to arrive at a pronouncement on this most importantpoint t We must not be represented as saying that theaddition of preservatives to food in an indiscriminate

way should be tolerated, but it is our opinion that untilknowledge is more exact upon the point of injury to healthit is not reasonable to push a case for prosecution on thisground. The question of injury to health is sub judice, anduntil this is decided by the Corimaittee on Food Preserva-tives now sitting it is premature to raise the issue in court.Yet several cases of the kind have been brought beforethe London courts under the Sale of Food and DrugsAct lately. The procedure can do no good and is likely todefeat the well-meant intentions of the prosecuting parties.It is desirable, we think, that the vestries should wait untilthey receive from the Government Committee a pronounce-ment as to what is and what is not permissible in regard to

the use of preservatives in food. The Food and Drugs Act onlywarrants these authorities taking action on the ground thatboric acid and other preservatives are injurious to health,and while there remains a doubt as to the fact legal action isunfortunate. We may once more state that the publicanalyst is not qualified to speak on the question of injuryto health, and the fact of his assuming that r6le onoccasions only gives strength to the argument that such

appointments should be held by medical men exclueively.We trust that some patience will be maintained by thosewho seem particularly vigilant on this question until thelaw enables us to view the practice of adding preservativesin a clearer light all round, and especially from the pointsof view of injury to health. No real good can be doneby instituting proceedings on the lines which we haveindicated. On the contrary, time and money are wasted andnot a little ridicule is bred.

___

THE ANNUAL (1898) REPORT OF THE MEDICALOFFICER OF HEALTH OF LONDON: THE

LONDON MEAT-SUPPLY.

THE report of the medical officer of health of theAdministrative County of London for 1898 has just beenissued by the London County Council. It deals with manysubjects of the first medical interest, to the consideration ofwhich we shall return in a future issue. Meanwhile we

briefly indicate some of the more important matters con-tained in the report. Thus we find considered the questionof diphtheria in elementary London schools, the influence ofantitoxic serum on case-mortality in the county, and theoccurrence of plague, glanders, and anthrax, of which lastdisease there were five cases admitted into Guy’s Hospital,which all recovered after operation. In Part II. are considered,besides other subjects, those of overcrowding and the seasonalvariation in age incidence and fatality of infectious disease.In Part 111. we find discussed the regulation of houseslet in lodgings, and various subjects connected with foodsupplies, such as unsound food, upon which hangs not looselythe question of the provision of public slaughter-houses.Only a small amount of meat was seized as unsound in

London, but this "is no doubt due to the fact that much ofthe meat which is consumed in London is not inspectedat the time of slaughter." " The conditions existingin London give ample opportunities for the admission intothe metropolis, and for its sale, of meat which cannot besold in other parts of the country. With respect to.

meat killed in London it is obvious that there can be

no efficient inspection of meat at the time of

slaughter while the killing is conducted in numerous privateslaughter-houses. The report then goes on to refer to thereport presented by the Public Health Committee of theCouncil. This report is printed as Appendix II. It detailsthe objections raised by those interested in privateslaughter-houses so far back as 1873 when the subjectwas under the consideration of a Select Committee of theHouse of Commons. Most of the objections have practicallyceased to exist owing to changes in circumstances duringthe last 25 years. After dealing with these objectionsthe report goes on to point out that the crying need forpublic slaughter-houses rests upon the necessity for a strictsystem of meat inspection. At the present time meat

sold in Smithfield is inspected, while meat from the foreigncattle market at Deptford and from private slaughter-housesin the Islington Market is not systematically inspected.Exclusive of the private slaughter-houses in Deptfordand Islington cattle markets, and of the six or eightsuch places in the city, the number of private slaughter-houses in London in 1897 was 467. The report suggeststhat six public slaughter-houses be provided-three on

the north and three on the south side of the Thames.