The question of sewer-air poisoning has received no inconsiderable
attention at the hands of sanitarians within the past few years, some
claiming that it is a carrier of many of the contagious diseases,
including malarial affections, while others have denied its harmful
action in these respects.
The last class, in substantiation of their claim, point to the assumed
fact that plumbers and those who work in sewers are not, as a rule,
especially subject to the diseases generally attributed to sewer air.
That plumbers are not exempt from troubles of this kind is attested by
numerous examples. According to _Science_, an inquest was recently held
in Liverpool, Eng., on the body of a plumber’s apprentice who had been
engaged in repairing pipes which connected with the sewer. Quantities of
gas came through these pipes, and at the time the young man complained
of pain and sickness, and died forty hours afterward. The jury rendered
a verdict of poisoning by sewer air.
According to the _Sanitary News_, Dr. Vaughn, of the Michigan State
Laboratory of Hygiene, claims to have found the specific germ of typhoid
fever in the air of a soil pipe from the prison at Jackson, in that
State, during an outbreak of typhoid fever.
The _Sanitary Inspector_ for February and March, reproduces from the
_Medical News_ an article by Dr. Henry Hun upon this subject. Dr. Hun
cites twenty-nine cases in support of his statements. The histories are
those of non-contagious diseases, and therefore were probably cases of
illness produced by non-infected sewers. He says: “In all of these
twenty-nine cases there was an escape of a large amount of sewer gas
into the air which the patients breathed; and at the time that the case
was observed, it seemed extremely probable that the sewer gas was the
cause of the disease.
“From the consideration of these twenty-nine cases, we may conclude that
it is probable that the following conditions may result from sewer-air
poisoning:
“1. Vomiting and purging, either separately or combined.
“2. A form of nephritis.
“3. General debility, in some cases of which the heart is especially
involved.
“4. Fever, which is frequently accompanied by chills.
“5. Sore throat, which is frequently of a diphtheritic character.
“6. Neuralgia.
“These conditions may occur separately, but are frequently combined, and
it is especially common for the fever to be associated with other
symptoms of sewer-gas poisoning. Finally, in cases of sewer-gas
poisoning, there is one group of symptoms which is almost always
prominent, and these symptoms are: loss of appetite, drowsiness, extreme
prostration, and a dull, unpleasant feeling in the head; and whenever
this group of symptoms occurs, not as the result of an attack of acute
disease, but as a chronic condition, we are justified in suspecting that
the patient is exposed to sewer-gas infection.”
EFFECTS OF FOOD PRESERVATIVES ON THE ACTION OF DIASTASE, PANCREATIC
EXTRACT AND PEPSINE.
This subject has recently received experimental study at the hands of
Dr. Henry Leffman and William Beam, the results being published in the
_Analyst_ for June, 1888.
The antiseptics selected were those which have been known to be used to
preserve articles of food and drink. They were salicylic acid, boric
acid, sodium acid sulphite (sodium bisulphite), saccharine,
beta-naphthol and alcohol.
In the following experiments a solution of arrow root starch, 30 grains
to the litre, was used.
To 100 c.c. of this solution was added 0.5 c.c. of maltine diluted to 50
c.c. with water.
The figures give the proportion of antiseptic to the whole volume of
liquid.
_Experiments with Maltine._
_Antiseptic used._ _Amount._ _Fehling’s Solution reduced by the Maltose formed._
None. None. 245 cc.
Salicylic acid. 1 to 500. No sugar formed.
Salicylic acid. 1 to 1,000. No sugar formed.
Salicylic acid. 1 to 20,000. 245 cc.
Boric acid. 1 to 1,000. 245 cc.
Sodium bisulphite. 1 to 1,000. 245 cc.
Saccharine. 1 to 1,000. 18.5 cc.
Saccharine. 1 to 500. 5.6 cc.
Beta-Naphthol. 1 to 1,000. 204 cc.
Beta-Naphthol. 1 to 500. 174 cc.
Alcohol. 1 to 25. 245 cc.
Experiments with varying amounts of diastase showed that one part of
salicylic acid to 1,000 of liquid prevented the diastasic action
completely. Saccharine in the proportion of 1 to 1,000 prevented the
formation of sugar when the proportion of diastase was 1 to 1,000 of
liquid. When the proportion of diastase was reduced to 1 in 2,000,
salicylic in the proportion of 1 to 3,000 prevented the formation of
sugar. It seems, then, that the weaker the diastasic solution, the more
is its action hindered by salicylic acid, saccharine, etc. Sodium
bisulphite has little if any power of hindering diastasic power.
_Experiments with Fairchild’s Pancreatic Extract._
_Antiseptic._ _Amount._ _Fehling’s Solution required._
None. None. 78 cc.
Salicylic acid. 1 to 1,000. No sugar formed.
Saccharine. 1 to 1,000. No sugar formed.
Beta-Naphthol. 1 to 1,000. 78 cc.
Boric acid. 1 to 1,000. 78 cc.
Sodium bisulphite. 1 to 1,000. 80 cc.
The tests were made with 0.2 grams of the extract.
It seems from these experiments that salicylic acid and saccharine, in
the proportions used, entirely prevent the action of pancreatic ferment
upon starch.
In similar experiments with saccharated pepsine with hydrochloric acid,
except that the temperature was kept at 105° F., sodium bisulphite and
boric acid were without effect.
Saccharine and salicylic acid had a slightly retarding action.
Beta-naphthol almost entirely prevented the action.
With pancreatic digestion of albumen the results were practically the
same, but the retarding action of the salicylic acid and saccharine was
not quite so well marked.
From these experiments it will be seen that salicylic acid prevents the
conversion of starch into sugar under the influence of either diastase
or pancreatic extract, but does not seriously interfere with peptic or
pancreatic digestion of albumen. Saccharine holds about the same
relation as salicylic acid.
Sodium bisulphite and boric acid are practically without retarding
effect.
Beta-naphthol decidedly interferes with the formation of sugar by
diastase, but not with the action of pancreatic extract on starch.
It almost entirely prevents both peptic and pancreatic digestion of
albumen.
The bearing of these experiments upon the sanitary question of
permitting the use of these preservatives in foods, is self-evident.
Prof. Leffman says: “Their use is scarcely allowable under any
circumstances, and certainly only when the nature of the preservative
and the amount is distinctly stated.” The use of saccharine as a
sweetening agent must be looked upon as deleterious to health, and ought
to be forbidden by sanitary authorities.