Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T15:26:36.780Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Sources of Infection in Food Poisoning Outbreaks

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

William G. Savage
Affiliation:
County Medical Officer of Health, Somerset
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.

Compared with 20, or even 10, years ago our present knowledge of food poisoning outbreaks is extensive and in certain directions fairly complete. In spite of this greatly extended knowledge there are some aspects in regard to which we are yet lacking in fundamental information. This is particularly the case as to the precise sources of infection. It may be accepted as a demonstrated fact that most outbreaks of food poisoning are due to infection of the food eaten with one or other member of the Gaertner group of bacilli. The present paper is only concerned with the outbreaks associated with this group of organisms. A study of the individual outbreaks usually supplies evidence which definitely incriminates a certain article of food, and for most of the recent outbreaks further evidence is forthcoming that this has been infected with one or other member of the Gaertner group of bacilli. Tracing the matter a step further back it is only in a quite small minority of outbreaks that the recorded facts show how the food has become so infected. In a proportion of cases, perhaps more than half for continental recorded outbreaks but in only a small fraction of the British outbreaks, it is true that definite evidence is forthcoming showing that the meat was derived from an animal itself suffering from general or local disease caused by Gaertner group bacilli. Even, however, for these cases our recorded knowledge ceases with this information, and we do not know how these animals became infected or whether they represent isolated cases or are part of widespread epidemics amongst the animals affected.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1918

References

REFERENCES

Annual Report (1914) of Chief Veterinary Officer of the Board of Agriculture, 51.Google Scholar
Baumgarten's Jahresbericht (1896), XII. 496. Contains a good account of several Psittacosis outbreaks.Google Scholar
Böhme, (1906). Zeitschr. f. Hyg. lii 97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eberson, F. (1915). Journ. of Inf. Diseases, xvii 331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grabert, (1907). Zeitschr. f. Infektionskr. der Haustiere, iiiGoogle Scholar
Jensen, (1913), in Kolle and Wassermann, Handbuch der pathogenen Microorganismen, VI. 121, Article “Käberruhr.”Google Scholar
Joest, (1907). Bericht über die tierärztliche Hochschule zu Dresden für 1906. Dresden, 1907, S. 110. Quoted by Zwick, Zeitschr. f. Infektionskr. der Haustiere, 1908, IV. 33. (I have been unable to obtain the original reference.)Google Scholar
Joest, (1914). Zeitschr. f. Infektionskr. der Haustiere, L. 307.Google Scholar
Jordan, E. O. (1917). Journ. of Inf. Diseases, xvii 331.Google Scholar
Kerr and Hutchens (1914). Proc. Royal Soc. of Med. VII. Epidemiological Section 171.Google Scholar
Klein, (1893). Journ. of Path. and Bact. ii 214.Google Scholar
Manninger, (1913). Centralbl. f. Bakt. l Abt. Orig. lxx 12.Google Scholar
McWeeney, (V. 1909). Brit. Med. Journ. i 1171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meissner, and Kohlstock, (1912). Centralbl. f. Bakt. l Abt. Orig. lxv 38.Google Scholar
Meyer, and Boerner, (1913). Journ. of Med. Research, xxix 325.Google Scholar
Meyer, K. F. (1916). Journ. of Inf. Diseases, xix 700.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
M'Gowan, (1915). Pathology and Epidemiology of Swine Fever. Report to Edinburgh and East of Scotland College of Agriculture.Google Scholar
Mohler and Buckley (1902). 19th Annual Report of the Bureau of Animal Industry.Google Scholar
O'Brien, (1910). Journ. of Hygiene, x 231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petrie, and O'Brien, (1910). Journ. of Hygiene, x 287.Google Scholar
Reinhardt, and Selbold, (1912). Centralbl. f. Bakt. l Abt. Orig. lxvi 59.Google Scholar
Riemer, (1908). Centralbl. f. Bakt. l Abt. Orig. lxvii 169.Google Scholar
Savage, and Gunson, (1908). Journ. of Hygiene, viii 601.Google Scholar
Savage, (1912). Journ. of Hygiene, xii 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Savage and Read (1913). Journ. of Hygiene, XIII 343. This paper gives a number of references not included here of human outbreaks from rats and mice.Google Scholar
Savage, (1913). Report to the Local Government Board on Bacterial Food Poisoning and Food Infections. New Series, No. 77. Wyman and Sons. London.Google Scholar
Schmidt, (1908). Deutsche tierärztl. Wochenschr. xvi 685.Google Scholar
Selter, (1916). Zeitschr. f. Hyg. lxiii 387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomassen, (1897). Ann. l'Instit. Pasteur, xi 523.Google Scholar
Titze, and Weichel, (1909). Deutsche tierärztl. Wochenschr. (1909), also Arb. a. d. Kais. Gesundheitsamt. (1909–10), XXXIII. 516.Google Scholar
Torrey, and Rahe, (1912). Journ. of Med. Research, xxvii 291.Google Scholar
Uhlenhuth, , Hübener, , Xylander, and Bohtz, (1908). Arb. a. d. Kais. Gesundheitsamt. xxvii 425.Google Scholar
Uhlenhuth, and Haendel, (1913), in Kolle and Wassermann, Handbuch der pathogenen Microorganismen, VI. 325, Article “Schweinepest und Schweineseuche.”Google Scholar
United States Department of Agriculture (1893), Bureau of Animal Industry Bull. No. 3, 49 and 53.Google Scholar
Van, Heelsberger (1914). Centralbl. f. Bakt. l Abt. Orig. lxxii 38.Google Scholar
Van, Heelsberger (1914). Zeitschr. f. Infektionskr. der Haustiere, xvi 195.Google Scholar
Winzer, (1911). Zeitschr. f. Fleisch-und Milch-Hyg. xxii, 81.Google Scholar
Zeller, (1909). Zeitschr. f. Infektionskr. der Haustiere, v 361.Google Scholar
Zingle, (1914). Zeitschr. f. Infektionskr. der Haustiere, xv 268.Google Scholar
Zwick, (1909). Centralbl. f. Bakt. xliv Ref. Beihaft, 132.Google Scholar
Zwick, and Weichel, (1910). Arb. a. d. Kais. Gesundheitsamt. xxxiv 391.Google Scholar