DIPHTHERIA

Evening Post, Volume CIV, Issue 4, 5 July 1927, Page 11

DIPHTHERIA

MAKING CHILDREN IMMUNE

"THOUSANDS OF LIVES SAVED"

In a letter to "The Post" a correspondent, "Diura," draws attention to an article on diphtheria contributed by the Pepartment of Health, and published on the 25th nit. "Diura" states that in that article "certain claims are made for the benefits accruing from the inoculation of children with toxin antit xin; and* the statement is made that usually no ill-effects follow this treatment, and that it has proved itself safe. "To prove that this serum," says ''Diura," "is neither safe nor infalliblein its action and effects, the following incidents clearly show." "Diura" then quotes statements, including one made b. Dr. Hadwen, M.D., of Gloucester, and concludes: "That the average doctor is doing his utmost to combat disease with the means at his disposal cannot be gainsaid, but extravagant claims for .this so-called immunising agency are calculated to deceive parents and make them willing to subject their childrenato inoculation."

Another correspondent writes in reference to an article headed "God's Law," giving the substance of an unusual petition to Parliament against what the correspondent describes as "forced medical examination by a specific medical trust."

Inquiries have been made in regard to the statements in these letters, and attention has been drawn to the following remarks of medical authorities on the points raised:—

The Director, Bureau of Child Hygiene, Department of Health, New York City (S. Josephine Baker, M.D.), in an article on "Unnecessary Diseases of _ Childhood," says: "Thousands of children's lives have been saved through the use of diphtheria antitoxin. As a curative measure, antitoxin is of enormous value, and should always be. used as soon as we are sure that a case is one of diphtheria. Diphtheria toxin anti-toxin is given 'to children in just the way that the ordinary diphtheria anti-toxin is given, but it has much more far-reaching effects. Now-a-days the use of the Schick test to see whether a child is susceptible or likely to get .diphtheria, followed by the injection of toxin anti-toxin, if the child is found not to be immune, has opened the way for the protection of all children in the country. There is no danger, and practically no discomfort, either in making the Schick test or in injecting toxin anti-toxin. In fact, any reaction that the child may have is usually hardly noticeable. The results, however, are of the greatest importance, as we know now that with tho use of this toxin anti-toxin we can protect everyone from diphtheria just as easily as we can protect everyone from small pox by tho use of the ordinary vaccination." The few mischances quoted by "Diura," and the reference to the president of the Union for the Abolition of Vivisection, and one of the leaders of the anti-vac-cination movement, does not, in the opinion of medical practitioners, weigh much against the overwhelming evidence in favour of the remedy. Dr. William H. Park, one of the medical officers who have done splendid work iv fighting diphtheria in New York, says: "Tho results of our investigations show that the number of cases of diphtheria has decreased one-third between 1919 and 1925. The present prevalence of diphtheria (1925) is due not to the failure of toxin anti-toxin to immunise, but to the fact that toxin anti-toxin is not used often enough.." In regard to the procedure in New Zealand, many thousands of school children have now been given protective treatment for diphtheria, with beneficial results. It should be underwood that no child is ever treated by, the school medical officers without written consent being first obtained from the child's parents.. ....