CAUSE OF FEVER.

Auckland Star, Volume XIX, Issue 54, 5 March 1888, Page 2

CAUSE OF FEVER.

(To the Editor.)

Sir, —Inspector Goldie has been making a tour around W Tallace-street and that immediate neighbourhood, seeking to detect the cause of fever which now abounds there. He says that the yards are comparatively clean, but that some of the houses infected arc densely covered with trees, which hinders the sun from penetrating the surroundings of the homes. Ho is otherwise puzzled that so healthy a district is now tilled with fever germs. How is it that Inspector Goldie forgets that close to thetram stables, on that big tract of land in Jervois road, owned by an absentee, are new lying the stinking remains of about 100 load* of rotten oranges ? This is the cause of all the fevers. Instead of only a warning being given to the carter, who persisted in depositing the rubbish, a summons should have been issued to teach him that such acts against the health- of the district would not be tolerated.—l anij etc.,

Resident.

(To tho Editor.)

Sir, —I noticed a few evenings since an account in your paper of the number of cases pf fever in the Ponsonby district. I also noticed in a recent issue that you state that "' the Inspector has inquired into the cause of the outbreak of fever in Ponsonby, but he is unable to give any reason, as the public drainage is said to be all right." Now, herein is certainly some information, viz., that the drainage is all right, and also a point that requires some information, how anyone having eyes and nose can take a walk round the back streets of Ponsonby and not discover the cause or probable cause. If open drains alongside of the footpath reeking and stinking by every open window and door are a proof that the "public drainage is all right," then in Ponsonby we have perfection. Surely there is not much wonder that wo have thG fever with us, with our disgusting and abominable system of closets, worthy only of the ignorance of bygone ages. They can be counted in Ponsonby eight, or nine within a radius of a few yards, and in some cases within a fow feet of the front door of neighbours. Let one case of fever occur in such a spot, and you have a prolific source established. If those who have had the handling of the public money, instead of spending it on roads, and enriching a few by raising the value of their property, had spent the same amount in a thorough system of drainwge, many would havo been benefited and they would have deserved our praise.—l am, etc., Poxso.vuy Residknt.

(To the Editor.)

Sir, —The discussion of the causes and cures of this disease may perhaps _be thought to belong more to a medical journal than to a newspaper: but the numerous cases that have occurred during the past few weeks must be my excuse for referring to the matter. And ab the outset wo are met with difficulties, the first of which is that tho cause of tho malady has not yet been definitely and specifically ascertained. The fever appears to occur us rruch in sanitary as in insanitary region?. Wallace-street would surely nob be set down as a dirty street, and yet there are reported to bo iive cases there. (This, by tho way, is no excuse for bad drainago ; for even though typhoid may not be specifically caused by defective sanitation, it and every other disease must be aggravated by filthy surroundings.) With v regard to. the cure of typhoid also, we are confronted with a difficulty, for on the one hand tho medical faculty as a whole maintain that tho disease must go through certain protracted stages, when a change for the better or worse will occur ; while, on the other hand, there are some persons of experience who assert that tho disease may be " hurried up," as it wore, and the patient be brought round in the course of a very few days. In the first case, the disease has to run a lingering period of four or iive weeks ; in tljo second, as I have said, only a few days. Now, ib is certainly desirable that we should know for certain whether tho disease can be shortened, and there is at least very considerable testimony that it can. About a year ago several letters appeared in your columns in favour of a method called the " wet-pack." The writers urged bhac they had actually tried the plan and found it thoroughly successful. Smedley also, of hydropathic repute, maintains tho same, and adds that he never lost a case that he dealt with. (" Sinedley's Hydropathy.") Under this method the patient is wrapped up carefully in an ordinary sheet that has. been dipped in cold water and then wrung partially dry; under the sheet are a couple of blankets, and above and all round as many more as the patient can comfortably bear. Careful nursing and attention us to diet are of course necessary also. The plan is so simple and inexpensive that it would be a great boon to manj a home afflicted with typhoid if it could be conclusively demonstrated .that the method is really what ib is claimed to be. Now, would it nob be well if the plan were put to actual test, and the results published ? At the present rate, the mortality among typhoid patients is very considerable—something like one in seven I believe—and there is no doubt that some would be willing to be treated on the " wet-pack " principle. At any rate, the question should, in the interest of the general public, be definitely settled, and now would seem to be a suitable time.

These remarks are made with the sole object of advancing, if possible, the scientific treatment of disease, and with no desire to find fault with the medical faculty. I believe, however, that even doctors make mistakes, and that it is possible for them, either through habit or tradition, to follow one method of treatment when there are better.—l am, yours, etc., Inquirer.