Greymouth Evening Star. AND BRUNNERTON ADVOCATE. TUESDAY, JUNE 28TH, 1921. PUBLIC HEALTH.

Greymouth Evening Star, 28 June 1921, Page 4

Greymouth Evening Star. AND BRUNNERTON ADVOCATE. TUESDAY, JUNE 28TH, 1921. PUBLIC HEALTH.

It is very pleasing" to learn that so far, ' eases of diphtheria in Greymouth are not numerous, and all will hope that this good fortune will be maintained. Northern Canterbury, judging by re-

ports, is seriously perturbed by the spread of the disease, and as the majority of visitors to the Coast come from Christchurch, residents of these parts have a real interest in the health of Canterbury, especially where contagious diseases are concerned. It would be folly to give way to undue timidity, but it would be a crime not to take all necessary

precautions. The water and drainage systems of Grey mouth are not so perfect that further' risks can be run, and it is the duty of all to assist in preventing any spread of diphtheria. Experts declare that the disease, arises mainly from contact with infected persons, isolation being the best remedy. Children are very liable to catch and spread the disease, and parents should coi _ -n. I „„,1

operate unit Mie JIWUiViU men aim teachers by keeping any suspected case at home, and quite away from other children in the house, until a doctor has given permission to the contrary. Dr Telford, Chief District Health Officer, states that heart failure is one of the things particularly to guard against after an attack of diphtheria. At least a fortnight should elapse before a patient who has had the disease should be allowed to get up and go about his ordinary affairs. Parents are apt to allow their

children to get up before the proper time, and not a few fatalities are due to that cause. Diphtheria, if dealt with in time, is not a difficult disease for doctors and nurses to cope with, but “time is the essence of file contract.’’ We direct special attention to the comments on the subject by Dr Owen Johnson and Mr A. W. Nicol, published to-day in another column, and we appeal to all readers to act on the very valuable advice given. Whilst dealing with the subject of public health, we hope that the local authorities concerned will, take notice of the ' complaint of a townsmah, published in yesterday’s “Star,” regarding what he termed the “disgraceful and insanitary state that exists in some of the" best and most thickly populated residential areas of the

town.” He gave details unnecessary to repeat here, but if what he says is true (and, of course, we know nothing to the contrary), there has been neglect of important duty on somebody’s part. It is useless asking average men and women to take the trouble to maintain a high standard of domestic sanitation if outside their doors, they see regular evidence of official neglect of elementary cleanliness. Well-kept street channels, and regular and frequent clearance of refuse, should be as first principles in local administration, the example set by public bodies being the best incentive to private householders to go and do likewise. Disease is always costly, and if only from the viewpoint of economy, prevention is better than cure. Whore public health is concerned, the little things really count, but are too often overlooked becapse of their seeming* insignificance.

HOW NOT TO DO IT. Amendment of something besides by-laws is required by the Grey Hospital and Charitable Aid Board, judging- by the developments at last evening’s meeting of the Board, convened to revise the b.v-laws. The proceedings were rendered abortive through the attitude adopted by one member who, when the vote of _tlie majority went against his wishes, left the room. The required quorum was, therefore, not available, and no more business

could be transacted. We suggest that no member should display petulance of that kind, with so little cause. The majority must rule, and if it became a custom for a member of any local body to use the “big stick” of Avithdrawal when his proposals were not favoured a very unsatisfactory condition of affairs would arise. It cannot be denied that far too much “committee” work is done by local bodies —the Hospital Board is not the only offender, — ami efforts to check this undue secrecy .are to be encouraged, generally. The revision of by-

laws, however, we think, is a suitable subject for committee work. Some may hold the contrary opinion, and are, of course, within their rights to oppose those wlio believe otherwise,' but there is no justification to “refuse to play” like a spoilt child might when one’s own way cannot be obtained. It must be annoying to those giving their time to public affairs to have an evening wasted for no real reason, and if the Hospital Board members do not object to such occurrences, we do, that is, if we are requested to send a reporter to the particular (gathering. Last evening’s procedure was an instance of how not tv do it. The public would have learned in good time what they were entitled to know, and the only “suspicion,” the average ratepayer is likely to have, is that some of the members forget the duty they have to each other, in their zeal to proclaim to the public their thirst for publicity.