PDF (Whole thesis) - UTas ePrints - University of Tasmania

237
influenza \'las more fatal to the aged than it was to the young ;
secondly,
it was very severe during the fourteen days between July 10 and July 23.
Hall believed these facts could be explained by the data of the
meteorological phenomena at the time.
The weather, particularly from
July 10 to July 23 1
was characterized by continuously high atmospheric
pressure , wide daily variations and extremes of temperature, high solar
intensity , little rain, numerous fogs and high spontaneous evaporation ,
all of which were detrimental to health since they lowered the resistance
of the body to disease .
Fortunately, the amount of ozone recorded was
very great, being from 5 to 9 on the Schonbein scale.
Hall argued that
the high death rate in the aged was due to the combination of the effects
of influenza and the effects of the high atmospheric pressure which exerted
a pressure on the body of about four hundred pounds in excess of the
ordinary rate for July;
this produced congestion of internal organs and
ruptures of diseased blood vessels, resulting in death.
However, in the
younger _ age groups, better able to withstand the high atmospheric pressures,
the great amount of ozone in the,atmosphere mitigated the worst effects of
the influenza .
In short , Hall claimed for the climate of Tasmania
advantages that had a powerful influence in decreasing the mort ality from
epidemic disease.
Indeed, his opinions were confirmed by the Report of
the Registrar-General of Victoria which &ated that in Melbourne , where the
amount of ozone was far less, the mortality was as heavy amongst children
as amongst adults and old people.
Thus, of the 319 deaths from influenza
in Melbourne in July, as many as 153 were of children under 5 years of
age, whilst in Hob arton, out of 114 only 17 were under 5 years , although
the proportion of children to adults in Hobarton was much greater than in
Victoria.
Therefore, Hall reasoned that the theory which had been
advanced by some European medical practitioners, that influenza was caused
by an· atmosphere largely abounding in ozone, was not borne out by his
investigations.
Nevertheless, he was prepared to admit that a large amount
of ozone in the air with high, cold, dry winds, might irritate the mucous
membranes of the air pass_ages, nose, larynx, bronchial tubes and the 1 ike ,
and so produce one of the prominent symptoms of influenza, as well as of
ordinary catarrh .
I cannot, on the other hand, help concluding that our large
amount of ozone, as compared with English observations, or
even with those in the cities of continental Australasia,
was the means of mitigating the severity of the late epidemic
and enab ling the young and the healthy to escape from its
attacks comparatively unscathed. If Dr Prout 's idea - that
.,