Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T04:22:19.844Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Scarlatina Immunity In Hong Kong

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

L. J. Davis ,
J. S. Guzdar  and
F. S. Fernando
L. J. Davis
Affiliation:
From the Department of Pathology, the University of Hong Kong
J. S. Guzdar
Affiliation:
From the Department of Pathology, the University of Hong Kong
F. S. Fernando
Affiliation:
From the Department of Pathology, the University of Hong Kong
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.

1. In Hong Kong, where scarlet fever is extremely rare, the Dick reactions of a random sample of 921 Chinese were ascertained. Positive reactions were obtained in 19·1 per cent. The distribution of positive reactors in different age groups is recorded; it bears a general similarity to those recorded by various observers in Europe and the U.S.A.

2. A haemolytic streptococcal carrier rate of 6·6 per cent, was determined by nasopharyngeal swabbing of 1600 Hong Kong Chinese. The frequency of haemolytic streptococci was higher during the cooler months of the year and among the younger age groups.

3. Erythrogenic toxin production and fibrinolytic activity were demonstrated in a number of the strains of streptococci isolated from apparently normal throats.

4. The significance of these findings is discussed.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Hygiene , Volume 35 , Issue 2 , May 1935 , pp. 161 - 168
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1935

References

REFERENCES

Asbelew, W. N. and Margo, A.A. (1932). Zentralb. f. Sakt. Abt. I. Orig. 126, 212.Google Scholar
Bourn, J. M., Carpenter, H.M. and McComb, E. (1933). Amer. J. Hyg. 17, 761.Google Scholar
Bristol, L. D. (1923). Amer. J. Med. Sci. 166, 853.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castellani, A. (1919). Manual of Tropical Medicine. New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coburn, A. F. (1931). The Factors of Infection in the Rheumatic State. Baltimore.Google Scholar
Coburn, A. F. and Pauli, R.H. (1932). J. Exp. Med. 56, 609.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooke, J. (1927). Proc. Soc. Exp. Biol. and Med. 24, 314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glenny, A. T., Pope, C.G. and Waddington, H. (1928). J. Path, and Bact. 28, 133.Google Scholar
Grace, A. W. and Grace, F.B. (1931). Researches in British Guiana. London.Google Scholar
Hare, R. and Colebrook, L. (1934). J. Path. and Bact. 39, 429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heller, S. (1927) Med. Klin. 23, 320.Google Scholar
Hsii, K. L. (1934). Personal communication.Google Scholar
Lai, D. G. (1931). China Med. J. 45, 749.Google Scholar
Milam, D. F. and Smillie, W.G. (1931). J. Exp. Med. 53, 733.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Okell, C. C. (1932). Lancet, i, 222, 761, 815 and 867.Google Scholar
Parr, L. W. and Avery, M. S. (1927). J. Prev. Med. 1, 529.Google Scholar
Paul, J. H. and Freese, H. L. (1933). Amer. J. Hyg. 17, 517.Google Scholar
Pilot, I. and Davis, D.J. (1919). J. Infect. Dis. 24, 386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rogers, L. (1908). Fevers in the Tropics. London.Google Scholar
Smits, E. (1927). Geneesk. Tijdsc. Nederl.-Ind. Batavia, 57, 651.Google Scholar
Tillet, W.S. and Garner, R.L. (1933). J. Exp. Med. 58, 485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tomcsik, J. (1929). Paris Conference, League of Nations, 06, 1929.Google Scholar
Topley, W. C. C. and Wilson, G. S. (1929). Principles of Bacteriology and Immunity. London.Google Scholar
Wellington, A. R. (1933). Personal communication.Google Scholar
Wells, J. R. (1933). Amer. J. Hyg. 18, 629.Google Scholar
Williams, A. W., Nevin, M. and Gubley, C. R. (1921). J. Immunol. 6, 5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zingher, A. (1924). Amer. J. Publ. Hlth. 14, 955.CrossRefGoogle Scholar