Читать книгу Studies on Epidemic Influenza: Comprising Clinical and Laboratory Investigations онлайн

9 страница из 69

Burns, writing of the epidemic of 1831, mentioned that in 1810 the disease was very widespread in China and Manila, and also emphasized the fact mentioned in many works that certain epidemics prevailed among animals at the same time, stating that in 1831 these diseases were of choleric nature. This epidemic began in 1830 in the East, reached Paris in the summer of 1831, reappeared in Europe in 1833, following the same route that cholera had taken in 1832. In the epidemic of 1833, Hingeston also laid great stress on the fact that horses were often affected. These features, as mentioned by Burns and Hingeston, are frequently quoted by authors, and such observations seem to have been widely accepted.

One of the greatest epidemics of influenza began in 1836 and extended until 1837, and was called at this time epidemic catarrh. It began in England in January, spread to France, and during all the time that it was in Paris there were continual penetrating rains with cold and humidity. At Montpelier on February 20, 1837, the thermometer passed from 12 to 15 degrees above to 2 and 3 degrees below zero, and it was then that La Grippe appeared suddenly. In reply to the circular letter sent out by the Council of the Provincial Medical Association of England, comprising 18 questions, the following opinions prevailed. The disease was greatest from September to February; the great prevalence of the epidemic in all parts of the kingdom was recognized—attacks were irrespective of age, sex or temperament; it was milder in children, and the aged suffered most from it. Further, the disease was extensive in all neighborhoods; the mortality was 1 in 50, old age predisposed to fatal termination, and the duration of the disease occupied two periods, one terminating in 4 or 5 days and one in 5 to 14 days. Also relapses were frequent; those exposed to employment in the open air were not more liable to the disease than others; there was no proof of the disease being communicated from one person to another, and influenza aggravated an existent pneumonia or pulmonary phthisis. And finally previous attacks of influenza offered no protection; the symptoms were uniform; the most common of unusual symptoms were those of meningitis, inflammation of the lungs and syncope, and aside from ordinary care and treatment, general venesection was not endorsed. Evidence of fine weather and good telluric conditions were at this time also appended. The same symptoms and complications, particularly those of the lungs, occurred irrespective of seasons, civilization or place. It was believed and stated that the plague described in Homer was probably influenza. For the first time there is noticed here a point well worth consideration—the association of other epidemics with influenza, either anticipating, following or superseding. That some such association may follow the present pandemic is not to be entirely ignored. For example, cholera is already reported as prevailing abroad, following an earlier influenza outbreak. During the period, as if anticipating bacteriology, one writer explained the epidemic in an article called “The Dust of Regular Winds,” and Groves (1850) wrote on “Epidemics Examined, or Living Germs as a Source of Disease.”