|
The Middle-Class
Plague:
Epidemic Polio and
the Canadian State, 1936-1937*
By Christopher J.
Rutty, PhD
96 Durie
Street, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, M6S 3E9
http://www.healthheritageresearch.com
hhrs@healthheritageresearch.com
© Christopher J.
Rutty, 1999
Originally published
in the Canadian Bulletin of Medical History 13 (1996): 277-314
ABSTRACT:
During the pre-Salk
era, paralytic poliomyelitis was one of the most feared diseases of
twentieth-century North America. This perception, held most strongly by
the middle class -- polio’s principal target -- shaped a unique Canadian
response to it based on comprehensive, standardized and unconditional
programs of "state medicine" at the provincial level. Of Canada’s four
major waves of provincial polio epidemics, the second struck Ontario to
an unprecedented degree in 1937, generating a similarly unprecedented
response from the Ontario government in its control, treatment,
hospitalization and after-care measures. As this article discusses, the
severity of this epidemic led the provincial, and other Canadian public
health authorities, to face a central question: How far should
governments be compelled to go to ensure the advantages of modern
treatment for their people? This article helps place the social impact
of, and political and scientific response to, epidemic polio within the
context of Canada’s evolving public health and state medicine
infrastructure at the time.
POLIO IN THE
CANADIAN CONTEXT
Until the Salk
and Sabin vaccines were introduced in 1955 and 1962, respectively,
paralytic poliomyelitis was one of the most feared diseases of
twentieth-century North America. Indeed, during the two or three decades
before 1955, parents told their children to "to regard [polio] as a
fierce monster that lurked in the damp hollows of their experience," and
personified the disease as "a grim terror... more menacing, more
sinister than death itself."(1) This frightening imagery, generated and
magnified each summer -- "polio season" -- by the popular press, shaped
a unique Canadian response to this disease. In fact, polio’s dramatic
threat and associated paralysis striking otherwise healthy middle class
children was more significant to its public management than its actual
prevalence relative to other, more deadly, diseases of the period.
Indeed, as Richard Carter stressed in his study of American voluntary
health organizations, one could reassure the public that polio was "a
comparatively rare disease hardly worth all the razzmatazz... but you
could not convince them, because they knew from experience that nothing
was more frightening or tragic than a polio epidemic."(2)
This climate of
fear was reinforced by the sharply rising incidence of epidemic polio
during the first half of the century, especially among middle class
families living in the "better areas," and by the fact that little to
nothing could be done to prevent "the crippler" until polio vaccines
were widely used. There is still no cure for polio’s paralytic effects,
nor for the post-polio syndrome that is now forcing many polio survivors
to fight the disease, physically and psychologically, all over again.(3)
In a context of celebrated success in combating many other infectious
disease by the early decades of the twentieth, the Canadian medical
profession frequently acknowledged a profound helplessness with respect
to polio. For example, in 1936, an article in the Manitoba Medical
Association Review declared that "There is no disease over which the
public is more apprehensive and in which both the laity and the medical
profession feel so helpless than Epidemic Poliomyelitis."(4) Thus,
despite medical science -- and, ironically, because of improving public
health and personal hygiene standards that delayed what had earlier been
an endemic, invisible, harmless and almost universal gastrointestinal
infection -- during the first half of this century epidemics of
paralytic polio escalated throughout the industrialized world. For
geographic, demographic and epidemiological reasons, Canada was
particularly vulnerable.
The many serious
polio epidemics that have occurred between the late 1920s and early
1950s have received minimal historical attention. Most studies of this
disease have focused on the American scene surrounding the Salk vaccine
story;(5) on the major epidemics of earlier decades, especially the
great 1916 Northeastern U.S. epidemic;(6) or on the personal experience
of polio victims, especially the most famous one, Franklin D.
Roosevelt.(7) Until quite recently, no comprehensive national study of
polio had been attempted, nor had many Canadian studies been written.(8)
This article forms part of a national study that places the social
impact of, and public response to, epidemic polio during the 1930s
within the context of Canada’s evolving public health and state medicine
infrastructure before the development public hospital and medical
insurance.
The nature of the
state’s response to polio was mitigated, in general, by recognized local
and national traditions of public health activity, the relationship of
governments and public health authorities with the medical profession,
and the level of activity among voluntary organizations and
individuals.(9) In the United States, the emphasis was on philanthropic,
individual, and especially voluntary support for polio victims, and not
on governments. This direction was reinforced by Roosevelt’s experience
with polio in 1921 and, after his 1932 election as President, his
establishment of the National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis, or
"March of Dimes in 1938."(10) In the same period, however, and in many
ways in reaction to the American approach, an opposite strategy to the
polio problem developed in Canada.
Figure
1
The evolution of
a government-focused Canadian response to epidemic polio began in
1927-28 when the first major epidemics hit western Canada and provincial
governments, especially in Alberta, responded aggressively. In most provinces, and to varying degrees, provincial
polio strategies expanded during serious epidemics with the development
of specific preventive, treatment and hospitalization services that were
freely available to all polio cases, regardless of income. No other
disease generated such a broad and unconditional response from Canadian
governments during this period -- and with the blessing and cooperation
of the medical profession. In the absence of any effective treatments
for polio, the assumption of responsibility by provincial governments
helped to relieve some of the extraordinary frustrations and pressures
polio increasingly placed on private physicians. Bearing the brunt of
Canada’s worst epidemics, Alberta, Ontario, Manitoba and Saskatchewan
developed the most sophisticated and generous polio policies in this
period.
Underlying and
reinforcing this Canadian response to the polio problem were several
distinctive public health and political factors. Most significant were
the close institutional and personal links between leaders in local,
provincial, and federal health departments, in the medical profession,
and in public health education, research and the centralized,
non-commercial production of biological products -- all through the
University of Toronto’s Connaught Laboratories and the School of
Hygiene. In the first half of the century, these two intimately linked
institutions, under the leadership of Dr. Robert D. Defries (1889-1975),
stood at the centre of Canada’s public health network and the evolution
of Canada’s scientific, political and public health response to polio.
Most provincial and federal deputy ministers of health were trained at
the School of Hygiene, and thus shared a common professional education
and active public health vision disseminated through Defries and
Connaught’s founder, Dr. John G. FitzGerald (1882-1940); as well,
Connaught’s comprehensive polio research efforts after 1947 proved
essential to the development and large-scale production of the Salk
vaccine.(11) In many ways, between 1914 and mid-1930s, these close
relationships played a similar role in the Canadian management of
diphtheria, a dangerous and much-feared childhood disease that shared
several features with polio until an effective immunizing toxoid was
widely tested and freely used by the early 1930s -- largely through
Connaught’s and the Ontario government’s pioneering leadership.(12)
The establishment
and expansion of provincial polio programs closely followed conjunctions
between major epidemics in Canada and the emergence of new polio
therapies on which public hopes and dramatic publicity focused, and
often despite medical controversy over their effectiveness. Striking
conjunctions occurred in 1927-28, 1936-37, 1941-42, 1952-53, 1953-54 and
1959-60. Each involved different polio treatments, ranging from a human
immune, or convalescent serum, in the late 1920s and early 1930s, to
prophylactic nasal sprays in the mid 1930s, to the unorthodox physical
therapy methods of Sister Elizabeth Kenny in the 1940s, to gamma
globulin in 1952-53, and finally to two different polio vaccines in the
mid 1950s and early 1960s. The enthusiasm surrounding these "polio
weapons" largely originated in the United States and created significant
political pressures north of the border for their expedited use. In an
effort to appear to be doing something against the ravages of polio,
most provincial governments, and eventually Ottawa, assumed direct
control of the financing and production of such therapies and
distributed them freely and unconditionally.
The severity of
Canada’s second epidemic wave, which peaked in 1937, brought the
medical, public health, technological and political pressures of polio
in Canada to a dramatic new level. This second wave involved two
major provincial epidemics: Manitoba in 1936, and Ontario in 1937. The
management of the Ontario epidemic by the provincial government marked
the most comprehensive and unconditional preventive, treatment,
hospitalization and after-care program yet deployed against any
infectious disease in Canada. Each of these aspects of the 1937 Ontario
epidemic will be discussed below.
Nationally, the
seriousness of the 1937 Ontario polio epidemic helped focus the
attention of the Ontario Department of Health and other Canadian public
health authorities on an central question: Just how far should any
government be compelled to go to ensure the advantages of modern
treatment for its people? The Ontario government’s high level of
financial involvement in polio treatment and after-care support during
and after this epidemic reinforced the growing value of "state
medicine," and set important precedents in its subsequent expansion,
especially in the face of worsening polio epidemics in the 1940s and
1950s across Canada.
Second Wave
Epidemics and the Provincial Public Health Response
After the rise
and fall of the first epidemic wave that, in turn, hit British Columbia
and Alberta in 1927, Manitoba in 1928, Ontario in 1929 and 1930, and
Quebec in 1931 and 1932, during the "polio seasons" of 1933 and 1934
Canadian polio incidence remained low. Alberta was hardest hit in 1935,
while in 1936 the disease was confined mainly to Manitoba. However, in
1937 alarming epidemics struck Alberta, Manitoba, New Brunswick,
Saskatchewan, and most severely in Ontario. Nationally, 1937 was the
second worst polio year in Canadian history with a reported case
notification rate of 35.4 per 100,000, representing some 4,000 cases and
200 deaths across the country. Only 1953 was worse when a national case
rate of 60 was reached, the highest national polio case rate ever
recorded in North America, and among the highest in the world.(13) The
majority of the 1937 cases occurred in Ontario, although the seriousness
of the Alberta and Saskatchewan situations provoked similar provincial
responses.
During the summer
and fall of 1936 paralytic poliomyelitis was a "disease of outstanding
importance" in Manitoba, and was worse than the epidemic of 1928, when
434 cases and 37 deaths were reported. Then, according to a prominent
doctor, the disease incited "a terror" in Winnipeg comparable to the air
raids of World War I.(14) In 1936, a total of 525 cases and 37 deaths
were reported across the province, with most rural areas involved.(15)
One major difference from 1928 was that the Manitoba Department of
Health and Public Welfare was under the leadership of a new Deputy
Minister, Dr. Fred W. Jackson, who held a Diploma of Public Health (D.P.H.,
1929) from the University of Toronto School of Hygiene.(16) He assumed a
much broader and more direct role in the management of the epidemic in
terms of strict disease control measures, diagnosis, prophylaxis and
after care. By contrast, the 1928 epidemic was managed largely through
the use of convalescent serum under the direction of a University of
Manitoba Research Committee with the financial support of the provincial
health department.(17) Convalescent serum, an immune serum prepared from
the blood of recovered polio cases, was the great medical, popular and
government hope of Canada’s first wave of epidemic polio. Despite
increasing and largely American scientific controversy surrounding the
serum’s real value in minimizing paralysis, most provincial governments
prepared and supplied it free to all diagnosed polio cases starting in
1928.(18)
In 1936, under
Jackson’ direction, Manitoba’s provincial health department implemented
a broader approach against polio. An epidemiologist was appointed to
work in the hardest hit area of Boissevain. He was given the "power to
insist on rigid observance of quarantine regulations" and act as a
diagnostic consultant for the affected area. As the situation
deteriorated more special investigators were appointed to expand these
services across the province. Public Health Nurses were also assigned
for an intensive education program to urge parents to call a doctor
quickly in the event of symptoms of the disease appearing. Some
municipal governments passed local by-laws to prevent "the ingress of
individuals from the infected areas." Despite such strict measures,
Jackson felt they "do not seem to be of great value, at least such would
appear to be the case."(19)
Despite the
debate about its value, convalescent serum remained central to the
Manitoba government’s polio strategy. The medical community, and
especially the public, demanded that the serum be used, "whether or not
[it] is of value...."(20) However, early in the epidemic, physicians
remained overly dependent upon spinal tap confirmation before giving the
serum. With no simple diagnostic test available for polio comparable to
the diphtheria schick test, the only diagnostic method was the lumbar
puncture, or spinal tap. An examination of the spinal fluid for
characteristic cell counts indicated polio, although this was often done
after the appearance of paralysis. Waiting for a spinal tap often led to
"disastrous results" and Jackson stressed to doctors that a clinical
diagnosis alone was enough to justify immediate serum administration,
even though until weakness or paralysis was evident, the clinical
symptoms of polio were difficult to differentiate from many other common
childhood ailments. Further bolstering confidence in the serum, however,
many physicians claimed that the general clinical results obtained from
it were "quite comparable to those secured when diphtheria antitoxin is
given in a case of diphtheria."(21)
The most
significant problem Jackson’s Department faced in managing the 1936
epidemic was its severity in the "dried-out area[s]" of the province in
the midst of the Depression. Many parents delayed or refused to call a
doctor simply because they could not afford to pay for their services.
As the serum’s effectiveness was thought to depend upon its early
administration, if parents could not afford to see a doctor, it became
"very apparent that something had to be done to ensure that everyone in
the district who became ill had medical attention at the earliest
possible moment."(22) Through Jackson’s personal efforts, the local
governments of each of the affected areas were convinced to provide free
diagnostic and treatment facilities unconditionally to every resident,
with the municipality paying the doctor’s fee. Physicians were paid a
special scale of fees which was about two-thirds the normal charge.
Special resolutions were passed by local governments to offer and also
widely advertise this service. The municipal by-law read:
On and after this
date any resident of this municipality who believes he or any member of
his household may be developing infantile paralysis, the symptoms of
which are upset stomach, headache, fever, rapid pulse and stiffness in
the neck or back, has the right to call his own doctor at the expense of
the municipality to make a visit to decide what the illness is. If it
should be infantile paralysis the municipality will also be responsible
for the cost of any further medical attention required.(23)
As the epidemic
spread this program was expanded into other municipalities, with "truly
remarkable co-operation on the part of the Municipal officials."(24)
This was a unique achievement, particularly as the province did not
cover the costs and local governments were under intense financial
pressures for basic relief in one of the worst years of the
Depression.(25)
The 1937 Ontario
"infantile paralysis" epidemic recorded a total of 2,546 cases, at a
case rate of 70 per 100,000, and claimed 119 lives. Of this total, 758
cases and 31 deaths were registered in the City of Toronto (population
648,309) at a case rate of 117.(26) Since the majority of cases occurred
among children under 10 years of age, the age-specific incidence rate in
this group in Toronto was 510. Just over half of the number of
provincial cases exhibited paralytic symptoms, and by the following
March, 839 remained paralyzed to varying degrees.The size, severity and
dramatic intensity of this epidemic came as a major shock to Ontario.
Such an epidemic situation has not been repeated in the province by
polio or any other infectious disease.(27)
As had been the
case in 1929, an epidemic in 1937 was not unexpected because it followed
Manitoba’s in 1936. Using the general Canadian trend of epidemics moving
from west to east since 1927, and an apparent seven year epidemic cycle,
the Ontario Society for Crippled Children (OSCC)(28) predicted a
significant outbreak in 1937 and devoted the entire June issue of its
newsmagazine, The Horizon, to articles on polio.(29) This
striking geographic and epidemiological pattern can be explained by the
relative regional differences in immunity levels to the three distinct
types of the poliovirus. In Canada this situation shifted from west to
east through the first decades of the twentieth century with the
establishment of new and isolated settlements, particularly in the west
and northern regions, along with rising population levels, improving
health and economic standards and increased personal mobility through
the growing use of automobiles and air travel.
The Horizon
issue included articles by the Minister of Health, Dr. J. A. Faulkner,
his Chief Medical Officer of Health, Dr. J.T. Phair, and the Director of
Preventable Diseases, Dr. A.I. McKay. The tone of these and other
articles emphasized the public health value of "the most rigid
quarantine," and the continuing use of convalescent serum.
McKay was
well aware of the serum debate, but argued that "Even ten children
escaping paralysis as the result of the use of the serum certainly
warrants any effort in time and money expended in making it readily
available."(30)
When the epidemic
began, the press coverage of the serum was as hopeful as ever, but as it
quickly escalated, clear and public signs of controversy became evident
among physicians and local health officials over its value.(31) Such
unusually open debate went beyond the serum issue itself, with some
doctors publicly questioning the seriousness of the epidemic itself.(32)
The serum policy outlined by the Minister of Health to every Ontario
physician stressed that "The serum has no value as a preventive agent
and should not be used except for the treatment of children showing the
early signs of the disease."(33) When the serum was given, such cases
were required to be treated as official polio cases and thereafter were
subject to provincial and local health regulations.(34) Later they were
also eligible for free diagnosis, treatment and hospitalized after-care
for a limited period. Once diagnosed, provincial health regulations
required isolation of the patient for three weeks and all family
contacts quarantined; "rigid adherence to the regulations" was
required.(35)
Early in the
epidemic, local medical officers of health (MOHs) requested special
diagnostic consultants from the province. Thirteen full-time physicians
were appointed and given a three-day course on polio’s epidemiology,
diagnosis and the early treatment of paralyzed cases. They were each
assigned a specific region and by August a total of sixteen consultants
provided much needed clinical assistance to MOHs province-wide. They
also gathered considerable statistical and other types of information
which were later used in the most detailed report ever published on a
Canadian polio epidemic.(36)
With three major
daily newspapers in Toronto, in an era when the public relied on
newspapers for the majority of their news,(37) the emerging polio
epidemic was a big story by mid-August. The provincial health department
was determined to provide an extensive public education program about
the disease and was confident that it could control how the press
covered the epidemic. Carrying out both efforts soon proved difficult,
if not impossible. In early August, the Toronto Board of Control,
fearing the economic impact of the epidemic on city business and trade,
instructed the Toronto Board of Health to limit public information and
statistics on the outbreak. Within a day, however, Toronto MOH, Dr.
Gordon Jackson, was forced to lift the ban.(38)
Provincial
health authorities were disturbed by the controversy and assured the
public that there would "be no putting the lid on" information about the
current epidemic.(39) In the Department’s effort to keep the public
informed, "the newspaper publicity was changed to suit the peculiarities
of the editors." A detailed full-page "Statement by the Ontario
Department of Health on POLIOMYELITIS ("INFANTILE PARALYSIS")" was
placed in all daily papers in the province by 30 August.(40)
The
Department also held daily press conferences during the peak weeks of
the epidemic to insure "that accurate information would be available to
the public at all times."(41)
The local
management of the epidemic in Toronto was the focus of further
controversies over the delaying of school openings, the closing of
public pools, parks and churches, and whether or not to cancel
"Children’s Day" at the Canadian National Exhibition (CNE). The issue of
postponing public school openings beyond Labour Day to minimize contact
among children developed into an emotional debate between health
authorities and physicians inside and outside the city.(42) As had been
the case in Alberta during the 1927 epidemic, and elsewhere, this debate
highlighted the uncertainty within the medical community between the
conflicting neurotropic and systemic models of the disease.(43)
By the early
1930s, and since the 1910s, the dominant scientific model of
poliomyelitis was that the poliovirus was completely neurotropic; i.e.
present and pathogenic only in nervous tissues as demonstrated
experimentally in laboratory monkeys. This model focused on the specific
paralytic pathology of the disease with limited attention devoted to its
general clinical course or natural epidemiology.(44) However, this
laboratory model of polio had little practical value for many
physicians, many of whom could not reconcile the acute polio symptoms
they saw in their patients with the idea that only the nervous system
was involved. Another, broader understanding of polio had emerged at the
turn of the century, based on pioneering epidemiological and clinical
work in Sweden that had established the concept that polio was a
generalized systemic infection with paralysis "but an accidental and
incidental occurrence."(45) This inconsistency remained a strong
undercurrent which increasingly surfaced to challenge the orthodox
neurotropic model as North American epidemics grew larger during the
1930s. For example, a report on a 1935 epidemic in Virginia concluded:
We cannot consider
poliomyelitis solely in terms of its neurological manifestations as is
the current medical tendency. We think it proper to consider it a
systemic disease with neurological manifestations in the majority of
instances. To think otherwise precludes the probability of diagnosis of
early abortive and non-paralytic cases and interferes very materially
with a proper conception of its probable incidence.(46)
During the 1937
Ontario epidemic, renewed interest in the systemic model of polio led
some doctors and local MOHs to argue that unless health authorities were
prepared to strictly and consistently apply control measures by
restricting children from all potential places of contact, and in effect
close down the entire city of Toronto, there seemed little hope of
successfully managing the epidemic.(47) It was the economically and
politically charged issue of canceling the popular "Children’s Day" at
the CNE which brought these models into conflict.(48)
This issue first
arose in Toronto Board of Education with a motion officially asking
parents to at least keep their children at home during the CNE.(49) The
motion failed, but the issue was taken up by Dr. R.H. Saunders of the
Toronto Board of Health. Saunders suggested that Children’s Day alone
should be canceled, since schools, public parks, pools, theatres and
churches had already been closed to children during the epidemic. The
Board of Health had been vociferous in its pleas for parents to keep
their children at home, and it seemed that to be consistent, 200,000
children should not be encouraged to mingle freely at the CNE on
Children’s Day.(50) The 1937 edition of the CNE was expected to be
large, particularly to celebrate the Coronation Year of King George VI.
Also, the local economy had recently improved and an extensive
international advertising campaign had been launched to attract the
largest crowds possible.(51) The epidemic had forced the closure or
postponement of smaller local fairs across the province, but any
thoughts of doing the same with the CNE were vigorously resisted by CNE
and city officials. Toronto’s mayor attacked the idea and denounced its
supporters as "unfit representatives of the public." This left MOH
Jackson in a difficult position in advising parents to keep their
children at home and had to admit that he had no power to compel them to
do so.(52)
Children’s Day
went on as scheduled, the CNE actually doing very little to meet
concerns about the epidemic other than canceling its annual Baby Show
Contest and offering free tickets to children good for the duration of
the fair.(53) Nevertheless, parental concerns and the extensive
publicity about "paralysis" had the effect of keeping attendance for the
day down 78,000 less than the previous year, and reduced by 300,000 over
the entire 1937 run of the CNE.(54) The local press, reliant upon
considerable advertising revenues derived from the CNE directly and
indirectly, tried to maintain a positive outlook, although there were
differences evident in how each paper covered the issue.(55)
This controversy
and intense press attention reflected the confused medical and
scientific understanding of polio, the frustrating lack of progress in
developing effective measures to prevent and control epidemics, and the
profound fear "paralysis" generated among parents and the community.
Mothers felt this fear and frustration the strongest and their voices
were frequently heard in the daily press in painful letters to the
editor and through many poignant human interest stories.(56) One front
page story published in the Toronto Star at the peak of the
epidemic dramatically captured this situation. The headline read,
"Mothers of the World Again Must Bear Brunt in War With Paralysis," the
article couching maternal fears in war imagery. "All we can do is wait
until the enemy cracks us down. Then we play stretcher bearers. Just
carrying off the stricken." Although it attempted to ease parent’s
anxieties about the disease, the article admitted that "the truth
unquestionably is that after 57 years, medical science is totally in the
dark" on how infantile paralysis originated, was transmitted, and how
valuable convalescent serum really was. Indeed, in this war, "the front
line troops are not the scientists of the world, but the mothers of the
world."(57)
PREVENTION AND TREATMENT METHODS IN
CANADA
"Paralysis Nose
Spray: Just Squirt and Smile"(58)
During the polio
season of 1936 widespread enthusiasm developed around the prophylactic
potential of nasal sprays based on the prevailing idea that the portal
of entry of the poliovirus was the olfactory nerves of the nose.(59)
Interest in the chemical blockade of the nasal mucosa first emerged in
1934 with attempts to protect white mice against an intranasal
inoculation of equine encephalitis virus with a tannic acid
solution.(60) Similar experiments were conducted with as many as 150
different solutions on mice using the St. Louis type of encephalitis as
a "feeler" for polio research with monkeys.(61) A picric acid solution
was eventually settled on, and in the summer of 1936, Dr. Charles
Armstrong of the U.S. Public Health Service advocated that such a spray
be given a human field trial based on monkey experiments and the
repeated spraying of himself "and a small group of volunteers without
apparent ill effects." That summer a serious polio epidemic in Alabama
presented an opportunity for such a field trial.(62) Federal and state
health officials had hoped it "would be a test by and under the
[medical] profession," but it soon became, "largely through the activity
of the people themselves..., a test by the masses, largely uninstructed,
with all the many variations of method which such a procedure
implies."(63) The U.S.P.H.S. issued a statement on the nasal spray which
stressed that "homemade concoctions are not favored." Also, "early
applications at least should be administered by a physician." This
statement was published in the Manitoba Medical Association Review
in September 1936 during the peak of the province’s polio epidemic.(64)
The U.S.
statement had essentially given permission to Manitoba physicians to try
using the spray. Its use was also encouraged by Public Health Nurses who
had been sent to the affected areas by the provincial department of
health to "[give] instruction where requested, on the use of the nasal
spray."(65) However, the Manitoba government did not seem to pay serious
attention to the spray and made no attempt to control its use or
evaluate its effectiveness. The members of the Dominion Council of
Health, Ottawa’s national health advisory committee made up of the
federal and provincial deputy ministers of health, plus others,
including the Director of Connaught Laboratories and the School of
Hygiene, echoed concerns that only physicians administer the spray;
otherwise the topic generated little discussion.(66) This relative
complacency in Canada lasted until the inconclusive results of the
Alabama trial were published in early 1937.
Controlled field
trials of prophylactics were rare prior to the late 1930s, with random
selection of control groups rarely done systematically.(67) Generally,
however, it was not until after 1940 that "[t]he concept of
randomization gradually gained acceptance in clinical medicine..."(68)
One of the first such field trials took place ten years earlier in
Ontario with diphtheria toxoid. Diphtheria toxoid, prepared from
diphtheria toxin inactivated with formaldehyde, had been discovered in
1923 by Gaston Ramon of the Pasteur Institute in Paris and was quickly
applied in Canada through a close relationship between Ramon and Dr. J.G.
FitzGerald, Director of Connaught Laboratories and the School of
Hygiene. Of particular significance in expediting its use in Canada, and
later in the United States, was the development at Connaught of a
diphtheria "reaction test" by Dr. P.J. Moloney, which became known as
the "Moloney Test." By October 1925 the new toxoid was ready to be given
to children in Canada, with initial studies focused in Hamilton,
Brantford and Windsor. This was followed by an unprecedented scientific,
statistical and public health attack on diphtheria in Toronto involving
36,000 children between 1926 and 1930. The study conclusively proved
that the toxoid reduced diphtheria incidence by at least 90% among those
given three doses. This work represented the first statistical
demonstration of the value of a non-living vaccine in preventing a
specific disease. Subsequently, diphtheria incidence declined sharply in
Canada, dropping effectively to zero cases and zero deaths in many
centres by the early 1930s.(69)
The most
significant problem noted in the 1836 Alabama nasal spray trial seemed
to be technical, with the spray not reaching high enough into the nose
to be effective. A long special tip was thus needed on the atomizer
which could only be inserted by a professional nose-and-throat
specialist. Furthermore, experiments using a zinc sulphate spray on
monkeys reported in June 1937 suggested that this was more effective
than the picric acid spray and was worthy of a human trial.(70)
In Ontario,
parents grew desperate for any kind of preventive measure as the 1937
epidemic spread and news of the potential value of the nasal spray
generated increasing demands that it be given by private physicians.
Such demands were stimulated by widely-quoted press statements from
American spray enthusiasts, such as noted virologist Dr. Thomas Rivers.
In August 1937 he recommended: "If I had a child in an area where
poliomyelitis appeared, I would take my child to a good otolaryngologist
and ask him to apply the spray in the manner set forth by Dr. [Max] Peet,"
who had developed the newer treatment.(71) Despite the caution of some
MOHs, doctors began offering the spray and considered it "both safe and
cheap." A London, Ontario doctor provided the press with the spray’s
formula and application procedure. Newspapers quickly picked up the
spray story and even reported that some desperate parents were spraying
their children’s noses with salt water. Other physicians were not so
sure about the spray, one warning that "until we have definite proof
that children contract the disease through the nose," there was "no
point in using the spray, which [was] difficult to administer,
uncomfortable and possibly dangerous." Despite such controversy,
physicians were soon overwhelmed with calls from parents wanting the
children treated with the spray.(72)
The Ontario
government thus came under intense pressure to provide the spray, but
did not know if it would work or if it was safe. In order to prevent an
"epidemic of spraying,"(73)and more importantly, to be able to offer a
definitive opinion about the spray’s preventive value, the province gave
approval for a plan to carry out a nasal spray field trial. This was
limited to 5,000 Toronto children, in addition to an observed control
group of equivalent size. The control group was obtained by Public
Health Nurses who canvassed each of Toronto’s eight health districts,
which seemed to provide "a reasonably representative group."(74) This
plan was designed to avoid the pitfalls of the Alabama trial, since it
was clear that "unless great care is exercised, no really helpful
information will be likely to come out of such further work."(75)
The Ontario plan
was immediately presented to a group of Toronto otolaryngologists from
the city’s hospitals, who would administer the spray in special
clinics.(76) The trial was financed entirely by the province and carried
out with the assistance of the Toronto Department of Health.
Responsibility for the study was assumed by the Hospital for Sick
Children and the School of Hygiene, with the entire trial under the
supervision of Dr. R.D. Defries, Acting Director of the School and
Connaught. As was noted after the trial, "In few cities has there been
such whole-hearted co-operation on the part of the administrative
authorities, the public, and the press in an undertaking which was
definitely presented as an experiment. To this extent the study was
unique."(77)
The trial was
first publicly announced in the Toronto press on 30 August, its details
outlined with "a very conservative statement" that emphasized the
limited size of the "experiment" and included a consent form for
interested parents to return. A chance to participate in such a hopeful
experiment generated intense public and media interest and within three
days more than 6,000 forms flooded in from parents who clamored for any
kind of protection for their children.(78) Those who could not be
included in the "experiment" demanded the spray from their doctors.(79)
The first clinics opened on 31 August with 5,233 children sprayed by 5
September, and 4,585 children sprayed a second time two weeks later.
The trial
organizers were concerned about how well the public would respond,
particularly since parents had been strongly advised to keep their
children away from crowds. The large response was surprising and
attributed "in no small measure, to the excellent publicity given to the
study by the press who, through suitable articles and news items, kept
the public informed of the purpose and progress of the effort." The
experimental nature of the trial was stressed in the press, "although
some measure of hope was offered,"(80) thus effectively raising public
expectations and demand for the spray, either within the formal
structure of the trial, or on the free market. As was stressed in
newspaper coverage of the trial, here then was a clear chance for
children and their parents to take part in an important scientific
experiment.(81) But such publicity made it difficult to limit the
spray’s use and prevent other communities, and even some private
businesses, from making the spray available to its citizens or
employees.(82)
As was reported
in November 1937, the trial clearly demonstrated that the spray was
ineffective as a polio preventive, and also potentially dangerous to
those treated. Eleven cases of polio were reported among those sprayed,
while nineteen cases occurred in the control group, suggesting that the
differences between the attack rates in each group were not
statistically significant.(83) As was the case with the 1936 Alabama
trial, the Toronto report blamed faulty administration methods for the
failure of the spray. The objective of the nasal spray was to block the
poliovirus from entering the olfactory nerve, and thus a temporary loss
of the sense of smell (anosmia) was expected. When this was tested
during and after the trial, no more than 25 per cent of the children
sprayed reported losing it.(84) Most devastating, however, it was found
that among those children losing their sense of smell and/ or taste soon
after the trial, many had not regained it months later. There was also a
notable case of anosmia among one of the trial organizers, Dr. Donald T.
Fraser, who would not try anything on anybody that he would not try on
himself. He took this self-experimentation in stride, though, noting
later "that his only objection to this loss was that he couldn’t enjoy
his sherry anymore."(85) As well, the practical problems of organizing,
deploying and administering the spray quickly and safely during the
emergency of an epidemic largely undermined enthusiasm for its further
scientific study or use.(86)
Despite its lack
of success, the Toronto field trial marked an important step in polio
research with its relatively high standards of professionalism,
methodology and administrative and public cooperation. This was
reinforced by the close physical proximity between the provincial health
department, the Hospital for Sick Children and the University of
Toronto’s School of Hygiene and Connaught Laboratories, along with the
experience of, and close professional, academic and personal links
between Defries and the others involved. These were features lacking
with the earlier use of the spray in Manitoba, and especially in
Alabama, and with other prophylactics used against polio, such as
convalescent serum and the two rival polio vaccines developed by Brodie
and Kolmer in 1934-35. These were primitive "killed" and "attenuated"
precursors to the Salk and Sabin vaccines, and under the pressures of
major polio epidemics, as well as scientific and commercial rivalry,
were widely and prematurely used in the U.S. with considerable
controversy and some tragic results.(87) In the wake of the Toronto
nasal spray trial it also became clear that "the problem of preventing
human poliomyelitis was not to be easily solved on the basis of evidence
deduced from the experimental disease in the rhesus monkey." Combined
with other evidence, polio historian Dr. John R. Paul argues that "the
experience in Toronto aroused uneasiness about the whole hypothesis of a
nasal portal of entry in man."(88) Indeed, soon after the Toronto trial,
success was quietly reported in the long standing problem of isolating
the poliovirus from human intestinal washings, results which were highly
significant for later epidemiological and immunological research.(89)
"Miraculous Metal
Monsters"(90)
One of the most
serious and unexpected developments of the 1937 epidemic was the large
number of "bulbar" cases of respiratory and/or throat paralysis, which
impaired breathing and swallowing and usually caused death.(91) Polio
mortality statistics averaged about four percent of reported cases, but
the management of bulbar cases represented a major medical and
technological challenge. The image of the "iron lung" was first
ingrained into the Canadian public consciousness during the 1937 Ontario
polio epidemic.
The first "iron
lung" or electric tank respirator designed for severe polio cases was
built in 1928 at Harvard University by Philip Drinker.(92) It was
essentially a metal tank into which all but the head of an individual
was sealed. A motor, or hand crank, operated a set of bellows, and since
the head remained outside of the lung, the negative pressure inside
acted like the human diaphragm and forced the lungs to expand and
contract to allow regular breathing. The first iron lung in Canada was
an original Drinker model that arrived at Toronto’s Hospital for Sick
Children (HSC) in 1930, and it apparently remained the only one in the
country until August 1937.(93) Bulbar cases were rarely mentioned during
earlier epidemics since most died tragically when there was little that
could be done to help them. Death rates from polio varied widely,
between about 4 and 30%, and "tend[ed] to vary inversely with the number
of cases, being relatively low in epidemic years and relatively high in
non-epidemic years"(94)
The Toronto press
focused considerable attention on the need for more life-saving iron
lungs as the 1937 epidemic worsened through August. The emergency was
leaving "little tots struggling for breath" in hospitals.(95) HSC’s
single Drinker machine was used for a small number of mild chest
paralysis cases, but on 21 August, a young girl in critical condition
was placed in the lung, which happened to be open, but it was clear that
she would have to remain in it for a long time. She would then have to
be "weaned" off the iron lung when evidence of recovery was clear and
periods outside the iron lung could then be progressively lengthened.
This situation greatly concerned HSC’s Superintendent, Joseph H.W.
Bower. The City of Toronto had ordered one commercial machine for
Riverdale Isolation Hospital. London and Hamilton had also ordered
lungs. Yet it would be several days at least before Riverdale’s lung
arrived, and it would be ten days to two weeks before another one would
be available.(96)With this news, Bower knew he would have to build
respirators at the hospital for any bulbar cases that might develop.
Meanwhile a
four-year-old boy had been admitted with chest paralysis on the morning
of 26 August. As the Drinker machine was in use, an experimental
respirator for premature infants was modified and coupled with a
quickly-built wooden box in which the little boy was placed and
stabilized. This "emergency-made ‘lumber lung’" "saved" the child’s
life. The boy’s mother then turned to the newspapers to plead for the
"wealthy to buy iron lungs," each of which was worth some $2,000. The
prominent place of this appeal in the Toronto press reflected the
unusual vulnerability to polio among the well-to-do, whose wealth could
not protect them from this disease. Two more commercial "lungs" were
eventually bought, largely through an "Anonymous Donor."(97) Meanwhile,
at HSC, efforts were concentrated on building more lungs. By noon of 27
August, plans were complete and enough parts were ordered and delivered
by the next evening to start assembling the first iron lung. Two days
later this first lung was complete and placed on HSC’s Infectious Floor;
within fifteen minutes a patient was placed in it. By 31 August, four
"homemade" iron lungs had been assembled in the hospital’s basement.(98)
Figure
2
The Deputy
Minister of Health was impressed with the speed of HSC’s iron lung
production. Just as the first four "welded steel" lungs were completed
the Department ordered three more for use by the province, and shortly
increased this order to twelve. With production running 24-hours-a-day,
they were delivered within the next seven days. Financed by the province
at a cost of between $650 to $700 each, HSC assembled 27 iron lungs
under the close direction of Superintendent Bower, who lived in the
hospital for the duration of the epidemic. Most of these lungs were used at HSC or at neighboring
Toronto General Hospital, while the rest were shipped to other hospitals
in the province, as well as to Winnipeg, Regina and Edmonton. The
original "wooden lung" by this time was no longer in use; in response to
an emergency call, the Toronto Star arranged to fly it to Denver,
thus saving the life of a young girl.(99)
The dramatic
story of the "Herculean efforts" at HSC to manufacture iron lungs drew
intense press attention. Soon there were riveting stories in the Toronto
press describing how "Seven Tiny Heads in a Row Tell of Fight With
Disease: Big Steel Monsters Hold Children Battling Bravely to Overcome
Paralysis of Lungs." A month later another story detailed the way
"Massive Iron Lungs Grotesque, Glorious, Coax Life to Tots: Hushed
Rhythmic Action Keeps 7 Tots Alive in Hospital Room: In Gleaming
Row."(100) Over the years the press covered the birthdays and even the
weddings of "famous" polio sufferers who had been confined to iron lungs
indefinitely.(101)
Despite the many
stories of lives being saved by wooden or iron lungs, their efficacy in
preventing bulbar polio deaths remained controversial. During the 1937
epidemic, 63 polio cases were treated in iron lungs, and by the
following March, 40 had died, 12 had recovered and 11 still remained in
respirators, six of whom "will probably continue to require the
respirator indefinitely."(102) Despite this generally grim record, iron
lungs had a significant effect on public perceptions, ranging from
fascination with the hopeful power of science and technology in an
otherwise fruitless war with polio, to terror, as rows of iron lungs
encased polio’s helpless young victims for weeks, months or years. The
iron lung symbolized the disease and its worst possible effects while at
the same time it provided the medical community with a specific and
hopeful technological tool against them. Still, the limited supply and
success of iron lungs, especially during the crisis of an epidemic,
frequently raised the difficult ethical dilemma of having to decide who
to treat and for how long. Nevertheless, the iron lung also gave the
provincial government another opportunity to demonstrate that it was
doing everything possible against the worst effects of this disease.
Standardized
Treatment, Hospitalization, and After-Care
Other than the
efforts of Alberta in 1927-28, where a special polio hospital was opened
in Edmonton,(103) the issue of treatment, hospitalization and after care
of paralytic polio cases was rarely addressed by provincial governments
for the next decade. In the wake of the 1936 Manitoba epidemic the
province took a modest step forward in how it viewed the problem of
after-care and hired an orthopaedic specialist, Dr. A.A. Murray, who at
no charge, assessed every paralytic case outside of the Greater Winnipeg
area, and outlined the required treatment methods to minimize
deformities. This service was recognized as "a new departure in the
Public Health work of Canada."(104) The issue of hospitalization,
however, was rarely mentioned, and was viewed as a last resort for
orthopaedic surgery. But as Murray stressed, patients "should be
discharged to their homes as soon as they feel well following operation,
and so save an enormous amount of public money." He once felt that the
state should freely provide splints, appliances and hospital and medical
care to the indigent, but his polio work seemed to change his mind. Few
such patients took care of free appliances and he thought they were "apt
to lose their independence and capitalize on their disability in order
to live without work."(105) These conservative views, likely hardened by
the Depression, were not shared by such provincial health authorities as
Deputy Health Minister Jackson, whose public health background and
recent experience during the epidemic reinforced a more liberal
approach. He argued that since
the State ultimately
may have to support most of those permanently and totally disabled by
poliomyelitis, it is in the interest of the State that it should make
provision for: 1) Early and adequate diagnostic and treatment
facilities; 2) An adequate supply of immune serum readily available to
every practicing physician; 3) Consultant diagnostic service for cases
of residual paralysis; 4) Corrective treatment and appliances for
indigent persons.(106)
The more serious
polio situation in Ontario in 1937 forced a significant expansion of
such state provisions, particularly in the area of hospitalization, and
beyond just for the indigent. By early September the epidemic emergency
prompted the calling of a special "Symposium on Poliomyelitis" by the
Toronto Academy of Medicine.(107) Of particular interest to many at the
symposium, as the number of cases approached 2,000, was the problem of
"preventing unnecessary crippling" and deformities. Much of the pressure
placed on the government to do something about treating those stricken
by "paralysis" originated with the Ontario Society for Crippled Children
and its Executive Director, Reg Hopper.(108) The OSCC had been founded
under the auspices of the Rotary Clubs in 1922 after a number of similar
societies emerged in the United States. In Ontario, by 1930, the OSCC
recognized that polio was "the most important cause of crippling,
accounting for as much as 40% of the total number of handicapped
children."(109) This percentage grew alarmingly in 1937.
In mid-September,
at the request of the province, the OSCC called a meeting of orthopaedic
surgeons in Toronto. Based on conclusions reached at the earlier
symposium, Dr. D.E. Robertson, Chief Surgeon and orthopaedic specialist
at the Hospital for Sick Children, recommended that:
1) Every case of
muscle weakness or paralysis following poliomyelitis should be placed on
a Bradford frame. 2) Six months is the minimum period of recumbency.
Some cases may require eighteen months or longer. 3) Suitable splints
are to be worn if required on extremities. 4) Massage is to be commenced
when it is not uncomfortable for the patient. 5) Muscle training is to
be begun only after the patient has shown definite and considerable
recovery in power.(110)
Until there was
evidence of muscle recovery, or until the pain had subsided, the
principle of immobilization of the paralyzed limbs and absolute bed rest
was the medical orthodoxy in Canada until the early 1940s.(111) The
"Bradford Frame" was essential to maintaining immobility and consisted
of a rectangular pipe with canvas laced to it. No pillows or cushions
were allowed and patients were nursed and carried around while strapped
to the frame. To insure immobility, splints on the affected limbs were
attached to the frame and "maintained until recovery occurs to a degree
sufficient to permit useful function."(112) In most cases, however, this
state of immobility lasted for months in the hope that when the damaged
motor neuron cells in the spinal cord finally recovered, the affected
muscles and limbs would be free of deformities and fit to be used
again(113).
Figure
3
At the meeting of
orthopaedic surgeons, the province agreed to an aggressive plan to
provide standardized frames and splints "without delay for all cases
showing evidence of paralysis or muscle weakness."(114) These appliances
were manufactured at the government’s expense at HSC, and at Hamilton
General Hospital and London’s Victoria Hospital, and were distributed by
the Department, free of charge, to all paralysis cases.(115) This was
the first time that standardized splints and frames had been prepared
for polio treatment in North America. Previously they had been made to
order, which took days or weeks, but under this system, when an order
arrived giving the size, height, length of leg, or arm, "the frames and
splints are on their way in a few minutes."(116) By late November, with
some 2,531 cases reported in the province, a total of nearly 2,000
splints and frames had been provided free by the Ontario
government.(117) These splints soon became known as "Toronto splints"
and until the early 1940s were the North American standard. In 1939 the
National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis began stockpiling as many as
15,000 of them in New York City, "ready to be flown wherever doctors
demanded them."(118)
The provincial
department went further in their polio policy and recognized that
"deformity arises from too early attempts to get around, from
unsupervised treatment or from no treatment at all." The Ontario
government therefore decided on 16 September,
to provide free of
charge for all such cases, a limited period of care... from one to three
weeks in hospital following isolation... in order that patients may
learn to adapt themselves to the proper use of the Bradford frame and
necessary splints. It is of the utmost importance that not only the
patient but also the patient’s family be fully impressed with the
necessity for prolonged and adequate orthopaedic care if unnecessary
crippling is to be prevented.(119)
This hospitalization
plan was initially available only at HSC, Toronto’s General, Western and
St. Michael’s hospitals, as well as at the general hospitals in most
centres across the province. However, it soon became "apparent that our
children’s hospitals could not handle this large number of cases" and,
consequently, the province took over the old Grace Hospital in Toronto
and placed medical staff and nurses in attendance.(120) The 150-bed
"Ontario Orthopaedic Hospital," as it was newly-christened, officially
opened on 29 September. It was exclusively a children’s hospital,
staffed by HSC, and under the direction of Robertson and Dr. Alan Brown,
HSC’s physician-in-chief.(121) By Christmas 1937, it had "graduated" a
total of 283 polio patients, while in the province as a whole, "650
patients had three weeks" treatment at the Government’s expense."(122)
The principal
purpose of the "Ontario Orthopaedic Hospital" and the orthopaedic wards
in the other designated hospitals, was also to teach patients and their
parents how to manage the effects of "paralysis" at home. During two
days in October they were "personally advised and lectured as to the
paramount importance of keeping the little patients on the frames and in
the splints." Otherwise, parents were barred from seeing their children,
except through glass, while nurses and doctors gave the patients "weeks
of routine, to accustom them and to discipline them, to the steep road
that lies before them."(123)Parents were instructed to carefully massage
the weakened limbs, turn the child regularly and watch for redness of
the skin. They were to occupy their child’s mind, but warned not to
"call attention to his condition, don’t pamper him, don’t tire him, keep
the house quiet, give him plenty of rest and sleep, etc."(124) For many
parents, such a regimen was very difficult, if not impossible, and in
many cases had to continue indefinitely.
Some parents had
difficulty believing in or accepting the prescription of long term
immobility which prevailed in Canada until 1941-42.(125) This view was
evident from a series of historical questionnaires distributed to polio
survivors across Canada.(126) Recovery was "too slow" for many because
they believed immobilization "caused a great deal of muscle
atrophy."(127) Among polio survivors, this type of treatment seemed
insensitive and often led to dissatisfaction, if not rebellion against
medical authority. Objectification was common. One survivor has vivid
memories of feeling like "a prisoner" in the hospital and being "tied to
my bed" on a Bradford Frame with a straight-jacket. "No one treated me
like a person."(128) Frustrated by such treatment, osteopaths were
sometimes resorted to, as were chiropractors, much to the chagrin of
physicians during much of the epidemic era.(129) In one 1937 case, "we
had an osteopath coming in one door while the medical man was going out
the other." A watch was kept in case the doctor returned, in which case
"we’d quickly put the irons back on."(130) This flouting of medical
authority left some paralyzed children confined at home without any
medical attention. This happened to a 14 year-old boy whose parents
constantly turned him over and over again in bed. Fifty years later he
vividly remembered how "he would scream and scream" in pain.(131)
Parents were nevertheless repeatedly warned "against the bad advice of
well-meaning but ignorant relatives and friends and irregular
practitioners."(132)
One particular
irregular practitioner who worried Ontario doctors was Sister Elizabeth
Kenny, an unorthodox Australian nurse. In the late 1930s she had become
a kind of cult heroine based on press reports of her "miraculous" work
for polio patients in Australia and her resultant clashes with
orthopaedic surgeons and physicians. The Canadian popularity of Sister
Kenny and her methods of active massage and heat, preceded her personal
arrival and medical acceptance in North America in the early 1940s.(133)
Sharp conflicts frequently occurred between parents and physicians when
her methods were applied in the home.(134) In one case in 1939 the
mother of a two-year-old boy "asked the surgeon whether the Sister Kenny
approach might be beneficial. He ridiculed her and made her cry -- his
approach was the only one!"(135) Others stricken with polio during the
late 1930s felt that "the Kenny Method should have been used on me right
from the first, then I wouldn’t be so disabled today."(136)
One of the more
vexatious clashes over the Kenny methods took place in Toronto during
the 1937 epidemic. A ten-year-old child suffering from almost total
paralysis lay at the centre of a battle between her mother, described as
a "practical nurse," her family physician, the Hospital for Sick
Children, and the provincial health department. The conflict was driven
by the mother’s "stubborn" insistence on nursing her daughter at home
using the "non-restrictive" methods she had read about that were being
advocated by Sister Kenny. Sparking what became a year-long struggle was
the mother being "forced" to take her daughter to HSC to confirm the
polio diagnosis by spinal tap. According to her daughter, "My mother
refused to let them admit me and we waited there for hours before they
let me go." While at home "My parents let me do whatever I felt I could
do, even if I fell or hurt myself." However, this clash cost her family
financial assistance from the province.(137) Benefits were contingent on
cooperating with the standardized system set up by the government. By
contrast, the father of a nineteen-year-old woman also stricken with
polio in 1937, who borrowed from his life insurance to pay the hospital
bill, was surprised the following spring to receive a government cheque
that "reimbursed him for the hospital bill, which included special
nurses."(138)
The Ontario
Society for Crippled Children cooperated closely with the provincial
government’s hospitalization and treatment plan with transportation and
follow-up services. It also loaned one of its staff to the new polio
hospital, who served as a link between the Department of Health, the
OSCC and other local service clubs throughout the province.(139) The
OSCC executive was concerned, however, that many families might be
unaware, unable, or even unwilling to take advantage of the appliances
and hospitalization offered by the government. Families needed to be
"worked up to demand these free services, as it is apparent that many
physicians will not act promptly, if at all." The Department recognized
the need to protect its not insignificant investment and agreed "that a
follow-up nursing service will be of the utmost importance in conserving
surgical treatment which has been instituted in hospital." The province
was "prepared to spend a considerable amount of money in hospitalizing
children and providing them with the necessary equipment."(140)
The follow-up
nursing program began in early November 1937, the OSCC taking on two
extra public health nurses for a year to meet the demands across the
province at a total cost of $7,000. To meet these extra costs the OSCC
was forced to launch a major fund-raising campaign in December.(141)
This program was reliant upon the Department keeping track of each
paralytic case by using serum records and outlining to the parents and
attending physician of the necessary after-care. If necessary, this
information was forwarded to the local MOH.(142) By May 1938, OSCC’s
nurses had visited some 800 paralytic cases across the province, with
visits continuing for some 500 of these(143)
The visiting
nurses were first required to check with the local MOH and each
patient’s private physician in order to get permission to visit and
assist with each case.(144)While this procedure generally met with
cooperation from the medical profession, the zeal of some nurses, and
especially the press statements from OSCC’s Reg Hopper, generated
conflict with some physicians. Hopper made his concerns public in press
statements in December "with respect to the individual patients he had
found without proper after-care." To McGhie, the Deputy Minister of
Health, such statements were "a little dangerous," and he worried that
"physicians who have been responsible may not react kindly."(145)
One such upset
physician was none other than Dr. D.E. Robertson, Chief Surgeon of HSC,
who was quite "disturbed" about Hopper’s suggestion that the OSCC was
responsible for the treatment of convalescent patients. Robertson, who
until this point served on OSCC’s Board of Directors, was offended when
an OSCC nurse approached him for permission to visit one of his private
patients. He refused, and as he explained to McGhie, a "voluntary
organization can never do a thing as well as a Government Department
such as yours did with the polio epidemic last autumn."(146) However,
Hopper was clearly told by the government just what the OSCC’s role was
in its follow-up work: 1) continue to uncover unreported cases; 2)
gather as much data regarding known cases; and 3) avoid entering the
field of treatment. To avoid further embarrassment, all material used
for publicity and appeal purposes had to be reviewed by the
Department.(147)
All this was
carefully done without upsetting the Department’s close relationship
with the OSCC and their important and useful follow-up program.
While some
individual physicians may have been upset with the aggressiveness of the
OSCC, this follow-up program and the Ontario government’s overall
handling of the epidemic, generally received strong and enthusiastic
praise from all who were closely associated with it.(148) Federal health
officials in Ottawa were "greatly impressed" with McGhie’s detailed
report on the epidemic to the Dominion Council of Health. The Federal
Director of Public Health Services, Dr. John J. Heagerty, suggested that
"a copy should be sent to the League of Nations for their information,"
since he felt that the province’s efforts during the epidemic were the
"most comprehensive that has ever been undertaken anywhere."(149)
Ontario’s
experience with polio in 1937 reinforced a significant shift in the
Department of Health’s larger approach to "state medicine." At a
December 1938 meeting of the Dominion Council of Health, Ontario’s new
Minister of Health, Harold J. Kirby, posed the difficult question, "How
far does the responsibility of the Provincial Department of Health go in
the treatment of disease?" He reported that recently almost all of his
Department’s total budget was "spent on activities that are in the main
treatment." It seemed increasingly clear to the Minister there was
strong public and professional support for the idea that the government
might properly assume responsibility for the expense of the more costly
methods of recognized treatment. "Frankly, the therapeutic aspect of the
public health program is swamping the prophylactic." His report outlined
his government’s expenditures on biologicals and other direct treatment
agents, its venereal disease treatment program, cancer treatments, and
the costs of hospitalization for polio patients.
In a number of
provinces during the mid-1930s, government interest in cancer treatment,
in particular, as with polio, was a new extension of provincial health
services against prominent and growing public health threats. By 1938
the Ontario government had spent over $750,000 to set up seven
provincial cancer clinics, and bought seven grams of radium (worth
$400,000 alone). The clinics provided diagnostic and treatment services
with radium and x-rays, but were designed "for the indigent and
near-indigent groups in our population." The fees were kept as low as
possible, "having in mind the fundamental objective of establishing the
clinics, namely the provision of modern facilities for cancer treatment
accessible to all."(150)
Prior to 1937 the
Ontario government spent an average of $4,000 per year on polio, mainly
to pay blood donors and to make convalescent serum. However, as Kirby
outlined, in 1937 "the interest of the Department in the matter of
[polio] treatment was expanded far beyond that ever previously
conceived." In total, the government spent $197,000 during the epidemic,
"$152,363 of which was for treatment."(151) Yet the widely-acknowledged
success of the government’s management of the epidemic left Kirby with a
more significant question to consider: "Frankly, how far should any
government be compelled to go in ensuring for its people the advantages
of modern treatment?"(152) The 1937 epidemic established an important
precedent and reinforced a growing trend towards "state medicine." It
was clear that polio, despite its relatively minor incidence and
mortality compared with cancer, was a disease that, even more than
cancer, required that the public be given as much access to the
advantages of modern treatment as the state could possibly afford,
"regardless of station." In subsequent years, the Ontario government
worried about further polio epidemics that might prove even worse. The
polio policy developed during 1937 was maintained and modified over the
next decade, and expanded into the most comprehensive in the country.
CONCLUSIONS
By the end of the
second wave of major polio epidemics in Canada a high degree of
provincial government interest had developed in the treatment,
hospitalization and unconditional financial support of those stricken by
this tragic disease. The unprecedented polio crisis of 1937 in Ontario,
its middle class impact, and the very limited prospects for prevention,
had generated an expanded program in state medicine. The previous
experience of other provinces with epidemic polio, particularly Alberta
in 1927-28 and Manitoba in 1936, had established important precedents in
the unconditional deployment of free diagnostic and treatment programs
by provincial governments. In most provinces, as polio epidemics
worsened into the 1940s, and especially into the 1950s, such government
treatment programs evolved into specific and often sophisticated
provincial polio policies. Their expansion was also driven by the
prominent example of the unconditional patient treatment program of the
National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis in the United States. The
interest of Ottawa in the polio problem also grew, especially after
World War II, catalyzed by the general post-war expansion of the federal
government, and by the particular personal experience and political
agenda Paul Martin, who was stricken by polio in 1907 as a child, and
whose son, Paul Martin Jr., became a polio victim in 1946, just prior to
the elder Martin’s appointment as Minister of National Health and
Welfare.(153)
This article has
also stressed the importance of the close professional and personal
cooperation that existed between provincial health authorities in
Canada, especially in Ontario, and the public health and scientific
leadership of the School of Hygiene and Connaught Laboratories in the
University of Toronto. This relationship was distinctive in North
America and proved highly significant to the 1937 Toronto nasal spray
trial, which had important implications for the subsequent scientific
understanding of polio and its human etiology. Also crucial to this
relationship, particularly with respect to the treatment of polio, was
the Toronto Hospital for Sick Children, and its pioneering use of
standardized splints and frames, and for its "Herculean efforts" to
manufacture "homemade" iron lungs in its basement. These Canadian public
health, scientific and political relationships grew in importance during
the next two decades and became of fundamental importance to the
development, production and distribution of the Salk vaccine and the
ultimate control of epidemic polio in Canada.(154) These unique factors
surrounding the growing problem of polio and its control during the
first half of the twentieth century thus played an influential role in
justifiying and shaping the subsequent development of Canada’s public
healthcare insurance system.
ENDNOTES
-
This article is
based on aspects of my "A Grim Terror More Menacing, More Sinister
Tahn Death Itself", Physicians, Poliomyelitis and the Popular Press in
Early 20th-Centurey Ontario" MA Thesis, University of Western Ontario, 1990, but more
directly on my dissertation," Do Something!...Do Anything!'
Poliomyelitis in Canada, 1927-1962," Ph.D. Thesis, University of Toronto, 1995. I would like to thank the
Hannah Institute for the History of Medicine for their substantial
financial support for each thesis, my close advisors, J.T.H. Connor,
Paul Rutherford, and especially Michael Bliss, for their wise and
constructive counsel. Special thanks to also Dr. Connor for his long
support of my polio research since the beginning, and for his patience
in awaiting the final version of this paper.
-
Jane S. Smith,
Patenting the Sun: Polio and the Salk Vaccine (New York: William
Morrow & Co., 1990); B. Davies, "Death Walks in Summer," Canadian
Magazine, 82 (July 1934): 7.
-
Richard Carter,
The Gentle Legions (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1961), p. 94.
-
Lauro S. Halstead
and Gunnar Grimby (eds.), Post-Polio Syndrome (Philadelphia:
Hanley & Belfus, 1995).
-
C.R. Donovan,
"News Items," Manitoba Medical Association Review (MMAR),
16 (Sept. 1936): 187.
-
The most
significant general works include: John R. Paul, A History of
Poliomyelitis (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1971); Smith,
Patenting the Sun; Tony Gould, A Summer Plague: Polio and its
Survivors (London: Yale University Press, 1995). On the Salk
vaccine story see: Dorothy M. Horstmann, "The Poliomyelitis Story: A
Scientific Hegira," Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine, 58
(1985): 79-90; Allan M. Brandt, "Polio, Politics, Publicity, and
Duplicity: Ethical Aspects in the Development of the Salk Vaccine,"
International Journal of Health Services, 8 (1978): 265; Richard
Carter, Breakthrough: The Saga of Jonas Salk (New York City:
Trident Press, 1966). On the political and legal aspects of the Salk
vs. Sabin vaccine debate, see Christopher J. Rutty, "Salk vs. Sabin:
The Great Polio Vaccine Debate: Legal Liability, Informed Consent and
American Public Health Policy, 1955-1995," paper presented at American
Association for the History of Medicine Meeting, Buffalo, May 1996.
-
Naomi Rogers,
Dirt and Disease: Polio Before FDR (New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers
University Press, 1990); Guenter B. Risse, "Revolt Against Quarantine:
Community Responses to the 1916 Polio Epidemic, Oyster Bay, New York,"
Transactions and Studies of the College of Physicians of
Philadelphia, 14 (1992): 23-50; Saul Benison, "The Enigma of
Polio, 1910," in L.W. Levy and H. Hyman (eds.), Freedom and Reform:
Essays in Honor of Henry Steele Commager, (New York City: Harper &
Row, 1967), p. 235-41; Saul Benison, "Speculation and Experimentation
in Early Poliomyelitis Research," Clio Medica, 10 (1975): 1-22.
-
Richard T.
Goldberg, The Making of Franklin D. Roosevelt: Triumph Over
Disability (Cambridge: 1981); Hugh G. Gallagher, FDR’s Splendid
Deception (New York City: Dodd, Mead & Co., 1985); Daniel J.
Wilson, "Covenants of Work and Grace: Themes of Recovery and
Redemption in Polio Narratives," Literature and Medicine, 13
(1994): 22-41; Daniel J. Wilson, "‘More Good Than a Gallon of
Medicine:’ Polio, Stigma, and the Inspiration of FDR," paper presented
at American Association for the History of Medicine Meeting,
University of Pittsburgh, May 1995; Fred Davis, Passage Through
Crisis: Polio Victims and Their Families (New Brunswick, N.J.:
Transaction Publishers, 1963, 1991).
-
The foundations of
a Canadian polio historiography are: Christopher J. Rutty, "‘A Grim
Terror More Menacing, More Sinister Than Death Itself:’ Physicians,
Poliomyelitis and the Popular Press in Early 20th-Century Ontario," MA
Thesis, University of Western Ontario, 1990; Gillian Liebenberg,
"Disease and Disability: Poliomyelitis Rehabilitation and Social
Reform for Disabled Persons in New Brunswick, 1941-1955," MA Thesis,
University of New Brunswick, 1994; Christopher J. Rutty, "‘Do
Something!... Do Anything!’ Poliomyelitis in Canada, 1927-1962," Ph.D.
Thesis, University of Toronto, 1995.
-
See for example:
Douglas O. Baldwin, "Volunteers in Action: The Establishment of
Government Health Care on Prince Edward Island, 1900-1931,"
Acadiensis, 19 (1990): 121-47; Jay Cassel, "Making Canada Safe for
Sex: Government and the Problem of Sexually Transmitted Diseases in
the Twentieth Century," in C.D. Naylor (ed.), Canadian Health Care
and the State: A Century of Evolution (Montreal and Kingston:
McGill-Queen’s University Press, 1992), p. 141-92; Heather MacDougall,
Activists and Advocates: Toronto’s Health Department, 1883-1983
(Toronto: Dundurn Press, 1990); John Duffy, The Sanitarians: A
History of American Public Health (Chicago: University of Chicago
Press, 1990); Carter, The Gentle Legions.
-
See: Carter,
The Gentle Legions; David L. Sills, The Volunteers: Means and
Ends in a National Organization (Glencoe, Ill.: The Free Press,
1957).
-
Rutty, "‘Do
Something!... Do Anything!’" p. 262-359; Robert D. Defries, The
First Forty Years, 1914-1955: Connaught Medical Research Laboratories,
University of Toronto (Toronto: University of Toronto Press,
1968); Paul A. Bator with Andrew J. Rhodes, Within Reach of
Everyone: A History of the University of Toronto School of Hygiene and
the Connaught Laboratories, Volume I, 1927-1955 (Ottawa: Canadian
Public Health Association, 1990); Paul A. Bator, Within Reach of
Everyone, Volume II: A History of the University of Toronto School of
Hygiene and Connaught Laboratories Limited, 1955-1975, With an Update
to the 1990s, (Ottawa: Canadian Public Health Association, 1995);
Christopher J. Rutty, "Dr. Robert D. Defries: Canada’s ‘Mr. Public
Health,’" in L.N. Magner (ed.), Doctors, Nurses, and Practitioners
(Westport: Greenwood Press, 1997).
-
Jane Lewis, "The
Prevention of Diphtheria in Canada and Britain, 1914-1945," Journal
of Social History, 20 (1986): 163-76; Claude E. Dolman, "Landmarks
and Pioneers in the Control of Diphtheria," Canadian Journal of
Public Health (CJPH), 64 (July-Aug. 1973): 317-36; Arthur
Gryfe, "The Taming of Diphtheria: Ontario’s Role," Annals of the
Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada 20 (March
1987): 115-19; J.G. FitzGerald, R.D. Defries, D.T. Fraser, P.J.
Moloney and N.E. McKinnon, "Experiences with Diphtheria Toxoid in
Canada," American Journal of Public Health (AJPH), 22
(Jan. 1932): 25-28.
-
M.-J. Freyche and
J. Nielsen, "Incidence of Poliomyelitis Since 1920," in World Health
Organization, Poliomyelitis (Geneva: WHO, 1955), p. 59-106.
-
O.J. Day,
"Poliomyelitis in Manitoba in 1928," Canadian Medical Association
Journal (CMAJ), 21 (Nov. 1929): 555.
-
Manitoba
Department Health and Public Welfare, Annual Report, 1936
(Winnipeg, 1937), p. 60; F.W. Jackson, "Infantile Paralysis in
Manitoba - 1936," Dominion Council of Health (DCH), 2-3 November 1936,
Appendix I, p. 1, Archives of Ontario (AO), RG1-05-06; C.R. Donovan,
"Poliomyelitis in Manitoba 1936," MMAR, 17 (Aug. 1937): 143.
-
M.R. Elliott and
R.D. Defries, "The Manitoba Department of Health and Public Welfare,"
in R.D. Defries (ed.), Federal and Provincial Health Services in
Canada (Toronto: Canadian Public Health Association, 1959), p. 95;
Bator with Rhodes, Within Reach of Everyone, p. 137-8.
-
Manitoba
Department of Health and Public Welfare, Report on the
Poliomyelitis Epidemic in Manitoba, 1928 (Winnipeg: February
1929).
-
Paul, History
of Poliomyelitis, p. 190-99.
-
Jackson,
"Infantile Paralysis...," DCH, p. 2; F.W. Jackson, "The 1936 Epidemic
of Poliomyelitis in Manitoba," Canadian Public Health Journal (CPHJ),
28 (Aug. 1937): 364-6.
-
Jackson,
"Infantile Paralysis...," DCH, p. 4.
-
Jackson, "The 1936
Epidemic...," p. 364-6; A.J. McIntyre, "Infantile Paralysis in
Manitoba - 1936," Bulletin of the Academy of Medicine, Toronto,
11 (Dec. 1937): 61.
-
Donovan, "Polio in
Manitoba...," p. 144.
-
Jackson, "The 1936
Epidemic...," p. 363-4; McIntyre, "Infantile Paralysis in Manitoba,"
p. 62.
-
Jackson,
"Infantile Paralysis...," DCH, p. 2-3.
-
James H. Gray,
The Winter Years: The Depression on the Prairies (Toronto:
Macmillan, 1966), p. 111-3.
-
Ontario Department
of Health (ODH), Report on Poliomyelitis in Ontario, 1937
(Toronto, March 1938); Toronto Department of Public Health, "Annual
Statement, 1937," Volume of Statements, 1935-1940 (Toronto,
1941), p. 1, 16-27.
-
A.B. LeMesurier,
"The Methods Used in Handling the Epidemic of Poliomyelitis in Ontario
in 1937," Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, 21 (Oct. 1939):
867-78.
-
Reg Hopper,
"History, Ontario Society for Crippled Children," unpublished
manuscript, undated (c. 1967), Ontario Society for Crippled
Children (OSCC) Archives.
-
F.A. Logan,
"Address of the President: Report on Poliomyelitis", OSCC Meeting, 18
March 1938, p. 1, OSCC Archives.
-
A.I. McKay, "The
Use of Convalescent Serum in Ontario and Elsewhere," The Horizon,
(June 1937), National Archives of Canada (NAC), RG29, Vol. 194, file
311-P11-3, pt. 1.
-
"75 Give Blood for
Serum," London Free Press, 27 August 1937; "Doctors Doubtful of
Serum"s Effect," Toronto Star, 27 August 1937.
-
"Near Panic...
Parent’s Imagination is Blamed for Influx of Tots to Hospital,"
Globe & Mail (Toronto), 18 August 1937; "Disease Data is Overdrawn
Doctors Feel," Toronto Telegram, 2 September 1937; "Will Not
Hide Epidemic Data Board Assures," Toronto Telegram, 2
September 1937.
-
J.A. Faulkner to
all Ontario physicians, 4 August 1937, NAC, RG29, Vol. 192, file
311-P11-1, pt. 1.
-
B.T. McGhie, "The
1937 Outbreak of Poliomyelitis," DCH, 15-16 October 1937, p. 13, NAC,
Microfilm, Reel C9815.
-
Faulkner to all
Ontario physicians, 4 August 1937.
-
"Poliomyelitis
Epidemic," Meeting of Board of Directors, OSCC, 28, September 1937, p.
2, OSCC Archives; ODH, Report on Poliomyelitis, 1937, p. 59-60.
-
Carleton McNaught,
Canada Gets the News (Toronto: Ryerson Press, 1940), p. 1-35;
Paul Rutherford, The Making of the Canadian Media (Toronto:
McGraw-Hill Ryerson Ltd., 1979).
-
"Clamps Censorship
on News of Paralysis Cases," London Free Press, 11 August 1937;
"Censorship on Illness Lifted," London Free Press, 12 August
1937.
-
"No Lid on
Paralysis Says Health Deputy," Toronto Star, 26 August 1937.
-
McGhie, "The 1937
Outbreak...," DCH, p. 13.
-
ODH, Report on
Poliomyelitis, 1937, p. 59.
-
"Hoping Cooler
Weather and Drastic Measures Clears up Paralysis," Toronto
Telegram, 25 August 1937; "Toronto Schools Not To Open Until
September 13," Globe & Mail, 27 August 1937.
-
R.B. Jenkins,
"Some Findings in the Epidemic of Poliomyelitis in Alberta, 1927,"
CPHJ, 20 (May 1929): 219-24; "Epidemic in Toronto Held Not
Paralysis," Globe & Mail, 25 August 1937; "Doctor Raps Stand
Taken on Paralysis," Toronto Telegram, 30 Au
|