Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T21:45:32.877Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Distribution of the Diphtheria Bacillus and the Bacillus of Hofmann in the Throats of “Contacts” and Normal Persons

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

G. S. Graham-Smith
G. S. Graham-Smith
Affiliation:
(From the Pathological Laboratory of the University of Cambridge.)
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

1. Diphtheria bacilli have been found in a considerable proportion of persons who have come into contact with cases of diphtheria or with other infected persons.

2. Such persons have been shown to be a grave danger to public health, especially when frequenting schools or institutions, and to constitute the usual channel by which the disease is spread.

3. Very satisfactory results have followed on the isolation of convalescents from the disease and of infected “contacts,” where two or more consecutive negative examinations have been required before release.

4. Carefully conducted investigations amongst healthy persons, who have not at a recent date been in contact with diphtheria cases or infected “contacts,” have shown that virulent diphtheria bacilli are very seldom (3 examples amongst 1511 persons) present in the mouths of the normal population. This fact renders the discovery and isolation of infected persons a practicable possibility and offers a fair prospect of discovering and isolating the majority of them in any outbreak.

5. Diphtheria bacilli are usually distinguishable on morphological and cultural grounds, but whenever possible it is desirable that their virulence should be tested.

6. The bacillus of Hofmann is innocuous to man, and is a very common organism in the mouths of the poorer classes. The distribution of this bacillus points to the conclusion that it is carried from mouth to mouth in the same way as the diphtheria bacillus, and therefore its widespread prevalence in schools attended by poorer children is significant, as showing how widely spread and uncontrollable an outbreak of diphtheria may become unless measures are early taken to deal with infected contacts.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Hygiene , Volume 3 , Issue 2 , April 1903 , pp. 216 - 257
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1903

References

REFERENCES

1.Abbott, A. C. “The Etiology of Membranous Rhinitis.” Med. News, 05 13th, 1893.Google Scholar
2.Abbott, A. C. “The results of inoculations of milch cows with cultures of the Bacillus diphtheriae.” Journ. of Pathol. and Bacteriol., vol. II. 1894, p. 35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Abbott, Welch. See p. 452. Sternberg's Textbook of Bacteriology, 2nd edition, 1901.Google Scholar
4.Auden, G. H. Lancet, 04, 1902, Pt. I. p. 1104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.Baginsky. La Semaine Médicale, Nos. 7, 9, 11. 1892. Cited by Ravenel(82).Google Scholar
6.Beaton, R. M., Caiger, F. F., and Pakes, W. “The value of Neisser's stain.” Brit. Med. Journ., 09, 1901, Pt. II. p. 758.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.Bergey, D. H. “Comparative studies upon the pseudodiphtheria, or Hofmann's bacillus, Xerosis bacillus, and Löffler bacillus.” Publications of Univ. of Pennsylvania. New Series, No. 4, 1898.Google Scholar
8.Berry, Washbourn. Paper before Epidem. Soc. of London. Report, Brit. Med. Journ., 01. 1900, Pt. I. p. 198.Google Scholar
9.Biggs, Herman. Scient. Bulletin, No. 1, Health Dept. City of New York. Cited by Cobbett and Phillips.Google Scholar
10.Bissel, W. G. “Bacterial pathology etc. of tonsillar inflammation.” Med. News, 05, 1902.Google Scholar
11.Bond, F. T. Brit. Med. Journ., 01. 1898, Pt. I. p. 19.Google Scholar
12.Bowhill, . Veterinary Record, 04 8th, 1899, No. 561. Cited by Dean and Todd(28).Google Scholar
13.Bullock, W. “The durability of passive diphtheria immunity.” Journ. of Pathol. and Bacteriol., vol. v., 1891, p. 274.Google Scholar
14.Burnett, F. M. Brit. Med. Journ., 07, 1900, Pt. II. p. 90.Google Scholar
15.Cammidge, P. J. Brit. Med. Journ., 10., 1901, Pt. II. p. 1016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16.Carstairs, J. G. Lancet, 09., 1901, Pt. II. p. 765.Google Scholar
17.Chatin, Lesieur. Rev. d'Hygiène, vol. XXII., 1900. Baumgarten's Jahresber. vol. XVI., 1900, p. 196.Google Scholar
18.Cobbett, L. “An outbreak of diphtheria checked” etc. Journ. of Hygiene, vol. I., 04, 1901, p. 228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19.Cobbett, L. “Result of 950 bacteriological examinations” etc. Journ. of Hygiene, vol. I., 04, 1901, p. 235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20.Cobbett, L. “Observations on the recurrence of diphtheria.” Journ. of Hygiene, vol. I., 10., 1901, p. 485.Google Scholar
21.Cobbett, L. “A note on Neisser's test for diphtheria bacilli.” Lancet, 11., 1901, Pt. II. p. 1403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22.Cobbett, L. “Diphtheria in the horse.” Lancet, Pt. II. p. 573, 1900.Google Scholar
23.Cobbett, L. “The origin of antitoxin.” Lancet, 08., 1899, Pt. I. p. 332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
24.Cobbett, L., and Phillips, G. C. “The pseudodiphtheria bacillus.” Journ. of Pathol. and Bacteriol., 12., 1896, vol. IV. p. 193.Google Scholar
25.Concetti, . Archiv. Ital. di Laringol., 1892, Anno XII. Baumgarten's Jahresber. VIII. p. 198.Google Scholar
26.Councilman, Mallory, and Pearce. Review, Philadelphia Med. Jour., 05 4th, 1901, p. 829.Google Scholar
27.Davis, L. D. Proc. of New York Patholog. Soc., 1898, p. 170.Google Scholar
28.Dean, G., and Todd, C. “Experiments on the relation of the cow to milk diphtheria.” Journ. of Hygiene, vol. II., 04, 1902, p. 194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
29.Denny, F. P. Boston Med. and Surg. Jour., 11., 1900, vol. CXLIII. p. 515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
30.Dowson, W. Report of Medical Officers of Health of Bristol, 1895.Google Scholar
31.Eyre, J. W. H. “The bacillus diphtheriae in milk.” Brit. Med. Journ., 09., 1899, Pt. II. p. 586.Google Scholar
32.Eyre, J. W. H. “On the presence of members of the diphtheria group of bacilli etc. in milk.” Brit. Med. Journ., 08., 1900, p. 426.Google Scholar
33.Eyre, J. W. H. “On the Xerosis bacillus.” Journ. of Pathol. and Bacteriol., vol. IV., 1896, p. 54.Google Scholar
34.Fischl, and Wunscheim. Prager medecin. Woch. 1895, ref. Centralblatt f. Bakt. u. Parasit. Bd. XIX. p. 652.Google Scholar
35.Foullerton, Bonney. “Report of meeting of Patholog. Soc. London” Lancet, 01., 1903, Pt. I. p. 237.Google Scholar
36.Gallez, M. Quoted by Gordon Sharp(39).Google Scholar
37.Garratt, Washbourn. Brit. Med. Journ., 04, 1899.Google Scholar
38.Goadby, W. K. Paper before Epidemiolog. Soc. London. Lancet, 01., 1900, Pt. I. p. 236.Google Scholar
39.J, Gordon Sharp. “Contagious catarrh or roup in fowls.” Lancet, 07, 1900, Pt. II. p. 18.Google Scholar
40.J, Gordon Sharp. Brit. Med. Journ., 06, 1898, Pt. I. p. 1451.Google Scholar
41.Graham-Smith, G. S. “The measures taken to check,” etc. Journ. of Hygiene, 04, 1902, vol. II. p. 170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
42.GuÉrin, . “Dipthérie aviaire.” Ann. de L' Instit. Pasteur, vol. xv., 1901, p. 941.Google Scholar
43.Guy's Hospital Gazette, vol. xv. p. 294.Google Scholar
44.Hewlett, R. T. “On Neisser's diagnostic stain” etc. Trans. Jenner Instit. of Prev. Med. 2nd Series, 1899, p. 201.Google Scholar
45.Hewlett, R. T., and Knight, E. “On the so-called ‘Pseudo’-diphtheria bacillus.” etc. Trans. Brit. Inst. Prev. Med., 1st Series, 1897, p. 13.Google Scholar
46.Hewlett, R. T., and Murray, H. M. “A common means of diphtherial infection.” etc, Brit. Med. Journ., 06, 1901, Pt. I. p. 1474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
47.Winslow, Hill H. “On the regulations requiring two consecutive cultures.” etc, Journ. of the Massachusetts Assoc. of Boards of Health, vol. VIII. 10., 1898.Google Scholar
48.Howard, W. T. “The influence of cow's milk in the spread of diphtheria.” Amer. Journ. of Med. Sci., 12., 1897.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
49.Howard, W. T., and Ingersoll, J. M. Amer. Journ. of Med. Sci., 05, 1898.Google Scholar
50.Hunt, J. M. “On the relation of fibrinous rhinitis to diphtheria.”. Brit. Med. Journ., 10., 1898, Pt. II. p. 1249.Google Scholar
51.Jessop, W. H. H. Paper before Ophthalmolog. Soc. of United Kingdom. Brit. Med. Journ., 03, 1902, Pt. I. p. 720.Google Scholar
52.Jump, H. D. “Duration of immunity from diphtheria toxin.” Philadelphia Med. Journ., 01 11th, 1902.Google Scholar
53.Klein, E. “Further report on the etiology of diphtheria.” Annual Reports of Local Government Board, 1889, p. 143, and 1890, p. 219.Google Scholar
54.Klein, E. “The inoculations of milch cows with cultures of Bacillus diphtheriae.” Journ. of Pathol. and Bacteriol., vol. II., 1894, p. 428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
55.Klein, E. “Pathogenic microbes in milk.” Journ. of Hygiene, vol. I., 1901, p. 85.Google Scholar
56.Kober, . Zeitschr. f. Hyg., vol. XXXI. 1899.Google Scholar
57.Lack, L. H. “Fibrinous rhinitis”, etc. Paper before Royal Med. and Chirurg. Soc. Brit. Med. Journ., 10., 1898, Pt. II. p. 1338.Google Scholar
58.Lawson, A. “The bacteriology of the normal conjunctival sac.” Trans. Jenner Instit. of Prev. Med., 2nd Series, 1899, p. 56.Google Scholar
59.Lesieur, C. Review in Med. News, 09. 28th, 1901.Google Scholar
60.Lieven. Münchener med. Woch., 1891. Cited by Ravenel(82).Google Scholar
61.Lister, T. D. Paper before Royal Med. and Chirurg. Soc. Brit. Med. Journ., 10., 1898, Pt. II. p. 1338.Google Scholar
62.Littlejohn, H. D. Brit. Med. Journ., 06, 1900, Pt. I. p. 1512.Google Scholar
63.Lubowski, . Zeitschr. f. Hygiene, Bd. xxxv. p. 87. Quoted by Cobbett(20).Google Scholar
64.Macfadyen, A., and Hewlett, R. T. “A diphtheria-like organism found in pigeons.” Trans. Path. Soc. of London, vol. II. 1900, p. 13.Google Scholar
65.Massachusetts Assoc. of Board of Health. “Report on diphtheria bacilli in well persons,” 1902.Google Scholar
66.Massachusetts State Board of Health. Thirteenth Annual Report, 03, 1899.Google Scholar
67.Meade, Bolton. Cited by Goadby(38).Google Scholar
68.Morse. Cited by Welch (96).Google Scholar
69.Müller, . Deutsche medicin. Woch., 02., 9th, 1891, p. 91.Google Scholar
70.Müller. Cited by Goadby (38).Google Scholar
71.Novy, G. F. “The etiology of diphtheria.” Med. News, 07, 1895.Google Scholar
72.Ohlmacher, A. P. “Observations on the morphologic variations of certain pathogenic bacteria.” Journ. of Med. Research, vol. II. n. s., p. 128. 1902.Google Scholar
73.Orlowsky, . Deutsche medicin. Woch., 1895, p. 400. Cited by Cobbett (23).Google Scholar
74.Pakes, W. Paper before Soc. Med. Officers of Health. Lancet, 02., 1900, Pt. I. p. 311.Google Scholar
75.Park, W. H. (New York) Med. Record, 07 30th, 1892. Cited by Ravenel (83).Google Scholar
76.Park, W. H. Cited by Welch (96).Google Scholar
77.Park, Beebe. Cited by Welch (96).Google Scholar
78.Park, Beebe. (New York) Med. Record, 09. 29, 1894.Google Scholar
79.Park, Morse. Cited by Welch (96).Google Scholar
80.Peck, H. Paper before Sheffield Med. Chirurg. Soc. Lancet, 02. 1901, Pt. I. p. 480.Google Scholar
81.Pugh, T. W. G. “Post-scarlatinal diphtheria.” Journ. of Hygiene, vol. II., 07, 1902, p. 286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
82.Ravenel, M. P. “A contribution to the study of membranous rhinitis.” Med. News, 05 18th and 25th, 1895.Google Scholar
83.Richmond and Salter, A. Guy's Hospital Reports, vol. LIII., 1898, p. 55.Google Scholar
84.Ritter. Ref. Centralblatt f. Bakt., vol. XIX., 1896, p. 662.Google Scholar
85.Roux, Yersin. “Recherches sur la dipthérie.” Ann. de. l'Instit. Pasteur, vol. IV., 1890, p. 385.Google Scholar
86.Salter, A. “The pathogenicity of the pseudodiphtheria bacillus.”, etc Trans. Jenner Institute of Prev. Med., 2nd Series, 1899, p. 113.Google Scholar
87.Shattock, S. G. “Experiments to determine whether sewer air.”, etc. Journal of Pathol. and Bacteriol., vol. V. 1898.Google Scholar
88.Spirig. Zeitschr. f. Hyg., vol. XXX., 1899. Baumgarten's Jahresber., vol. xv., 1899, p. 265.Google Scholar
89.Stamm. Archiv für Kinderheilkunde, Band XIV., 1892. Cited by Ravenel.Google Scholar
90.Stephenson, S. “The diagnosis of diphtheria of the conjunctiva.” Brit. Med. Journ., 06, 1898, Pt. I. p. 1578.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
90a.Symes, J. O. “The presence of diphtheria bacilli in atrophic rhinitis.” Brit. Med. Journ., 02., 1903, Pt. I. p. 484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
91.Townsend. Cited by Welch(96).Google Scholar
92.Trevelyan, E. F. Paper before Massachusetts Pathol. Soc. Lancet, 05, 1900, Pt. I. p. 1345.Google Scholar
93.Vincenzi, L. See Brit. Med. Journ., 05, 1898, Pt. I. p. 1345.Google Scholar
94.Wassermann. Deutsche med. Woch., 1894. Cited by Cobbett (23).Google Scholar
95.Weichardt. Breslau Dissertation. Baumgarten's Jahresber., vol. XVI., 1900, p. 197.Google Scholar
96.Welch, W. H. “Bacteriological investigation of diphtheria in the United States.” Amer. Journ. of Med. Sci., 10., 1894.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
97.Wesbrook, F. F., Wilson, L. B., and McDaniel, O. “Studies on the distribution of certain varieties of the diphtheria bacillus.” Trans. Amer. Public Health Assoc. 1899, vol. XXV. 1900.Google Scholar
98.Wesbrook, F. F., Wilson, L. B., and McDaniel, O. “Varieties of the Bacillus diphtheriae.” Trans. Assoc. of American Physicians, 1900.Google Scholar
99.White, F. W. Boston Med. and Surg. Journal, 08., 1901.Google Scholar
100.Wolff. Cited by Howard and Ingersoll (49).Google Scholar
101.Woodhead, G. S. “Report on the bacteriological diagnosis, etc. of cases admitted to the hospitals of the Metropolitan Asylums Board”, 1895, 1896.Google Scholar
102.Wright. Quoted by Welch (96).Google Scholar