- Email: [email protected]
Swine Erysipelas
EDITORIAL ARTICLES.
prevention, especially in the case of foals. If the poly-arthritis was always secondary to suppuration at the umbilicus, then, clearly, the indication was to secure an aseptic cicatrisation of the umbilicus. I t is possible that there are still to be found veterinary surgeons who believe that joint-ill is due to such causes as cold, improper dieting of the mother, etc., and it is certain that a systematic treatment of the navel as a means of prevention is seldom or never carried out in this country. The neglect of such precautions may be due not to any misapprehension regarding the true nature of the affection but to a conviction that the results obtained would not be commensurate with the trouble involved in carrying out a strictly antiseptic treatment of the umbilical region. It is, of course, true that the proportion of deaths from pya:mic joint disease among the total number of foals born every year is very small, but to the owner of a valuable foal dead from this cause that would probably in the mouth of a veterinary surgeon appear a very insufficient reason for not having advised the adoption of preventive measures. The method of dressing the umbilical stump recommended by Herr Gmelin, as he himself says, is not very simple, but if it is efficaciousand the results obtained in the Marbach stud appear to warrant that conclusion-probably many stock-owners would not grudge the necessary expense. At any rate, when a veterinary surgeon is called to a case of joint-ill it might not be a bad course to let the owner know that veterinary skill, although powerless to cure the disease, is quite competent to prevent it.
SWINE ERYSIPELAS. THE paper by Dr Murray and Mr Stephenson on "Swine Erysipelas" (p. 50), and the one on the same subject published in last issue of the Journal, raise some rather important questions. The observations recorded in these articles make it absolutely certain that we have in this country, besides swine fever, another very formidable scourge of the pig species. That this swine erysipelas is a disease as fatal and infectious as swine fever perhaps does not appear from the few cases referred to in the two articles in question, but that such is the case the statistics obtainable from France, Germany, and other Continental States fully prove. To reconcile this with the fact that the occurrence of the disease has not long ago been detected, one must conclude either that the disease is of recent importation here, that our swine are less susceptible to it than Continental breeds, or that it has been overlooked owing to its being mistaken for swine fever. Time will show which of these hypotheses is the correct one, but the one last mentioned seems much the most probable. By way of showing what a formidable plague the disease is in other
6..J.
EDITORIAL ARTICLES.
countries, we shall quote here some information from the interesting monograph on the subject by Lydtin and Schottelius, published in 1885. From a table there given it appears that the total number of pigs in the Grand Duchy of Baden in the year 1884 was 393,244, and of that number no fewer than 12,564 were attacked with swine erysipelas; 2923 of these succumbed to the disease, 8219 were slaughtered, and 1422 recovered. The authors quote many examples illustrating its highly contagious and infectious character; indeed, in this respect it seems to be in no way inferior to swine fever. It is spread not only by direct contact between diseased and healthy pigs, but also with great readiness by intermediate infection; and butchers, pig-dealers. and castrators very frequently act as agents for the dissemination of the disease. The flesh of diseased pigs is highly infectious, and the virus preserves its vitality in contaminated premises for half a year or more. H is understood that the Board of Agriculture contemplate the introduction of stamping-out measures against swine fever, but before any regulations with that object are framed it would be very desirable to have some information regarding the extent to which this second epizootic prevails in Great Britain. It might be said that if the stamping-out process were applied to swine fever it would matter little although, through errors in diagnosis, outbreaks of swine erysipelas were returned as swine fever, and in one sense that would no doubt be true; but legal enactments or Orders of the Board of Agriculture relating to the latter disease could not be held to refer to swine erysipelas, for the two diseases are just as distinct clinically and etiologically as glanders and strangles, or pleuro-pneumonia and tuberculosis. At the present time the Contagious Diseases (Animals) Act takes no cognisance whatever of swine erysipelas, and to apply to outbreaks of that disease the regulations referring to swine fever is certainly illegal. That such mistakes are frequently being made at the present time appears highly probable.
THE CURABILITY: OF CANKER OF THE HORSE'S FOOT.
THAT canker of the horse's foot is sometimes curable, probably no practitioner doubts; but it is equally certain that for one case that is cured two go on from bad to worse until they necessitate the animal's destruction. Such, at any rate, has hitherto been the general experience, but one may indulge the hope that in the future the method of treatment recommended by Mr Malcolm of Birmingham wiII receive a fair trial, and that it will yield results as gratifying as those obtained in his hands. We had the opportunity some considerable time ago to observe the
prevention, especially in the case of foals. If the poly-arthritis was always secondary to suppuration at the umbilicus, then, clearly, the indication was to secure an aseptic cicatrisation of the umbilicus. I t is possible that there are still to be found veterinary surgeons who believe that joint-ill is due to such causes as cold, improper dieting of the mother, etc., and it is certain that a systematic treatment of the navel as a means of prevention is seldom or never carried out in this country. The neglect of such precautions may be due not to any misapprehension regarding the true nature of the affection but to a conviction that the results obtained would not be commensurate with the trouble involved in carrying out a strictly antiseptic treatment of the umbilical region. It is, of course, true that the proportion of deaths from pya:mic joint disease among the total number of foals born every year is very small, but to the owner of a valuable foal dead from this cause that would probably in the mouth of a veterinary surgeon appear a very insufficient reason for not having advised the adoption of preventive measures. The method of dressing the umbilical stump recommended by Herr Gmelin, as he himself says, is not very simple, but if it is efficaciousand the results obtained in the Marbach stud appear to warrant that conclusion-probably many stock-owners would not grudge the necessary expense. At any rate, when a veterinary surgeon is called to a case of joint-ill it might not be a bad course to let the owner know that veterinary skill, although powerless to cure the disease, is quite competent to prevent it.
SWINE ERYSIPELAS. THE paper by Dr Murray and Mr Stephenson on "Swine Erysipelas" (p. 50), and the one on the same subject published in last issue of the Journal, raise some rather important questions. The observations recorded in these articles make it absolutely certain that we have in this country, besides swine fever, another very formidable scourge of the pig species. That this swine erysipelas is a disease as fatal and infectious as swine fever perhaps does not appear from the few cases referred to in the two articles in question, but that such is the case the statistics obtainable from France, Germany, and other Continental States fully prove. To reconcile this with the fact that the occurrence of the disease has not long ago been detected, one must conclude either that the disease is of recent importation here, that our swine are less susceptible to it than Continental breeds, or that it has been overlooked owing to its being mistaken for swine fever. Time will show which of these hypotheses is the correct one, but the one last mentioned seems much the most probable. By way of showing what a formidable plague the disease is in other
6..J.
EDITORIAL ARTICLES.
countries, we shall quote here some information from the interesting monograph on the subject by Lydtin and Schottelius, published in 1885. From a table there given it appears that the total number of pigs in the Grand Duchy of Baden in the year 1884 was 393,244, and of that number no fewer than 12,564 were attacked with swine erysipelas; 2923 of these succumbed to the disease, 8219 were slaughtered, and 1422 recovered. The authors quote many examples illustrating its highly contagious and infectious character; indeed, in this respect it seems to be in no way inferior to swine fever. It is spread not only by direct contact between diseased and healthy pigs, but also with great readiness by intermediate infection; and butchers, pig-dealers. and castrators very frequently act as agents for the dissemination of the disease. The flesh of diseased pigs is highly infectious, and the virus preserves its vitality in contaminated premises for half a year or more. H is understood that the Board of Agriculture contemplate the introduction of stamping-out measures against swine fever, but before any regulations with that object are framed it would be very desirable to have some information regarding the extent to which this second epizootic prevails in Great Britain. It might be said that if the stamping-out process were applied to swine fever it would matter little although, through errors in diagnosis, outbreaks of swine erysipelas were returned as swine fever, and in one sense that would no doubt be true; but legal enactments or Orders of the Board of Agriculture relating to the latter disease could not be held to refer to swine erysipelas, for the two diseases are just as distinct clinically and etiologically as glanders and strangles, or pleuro-pneumonia and tuberculosis. At the present time the Contagious Diseases (Animals) Act takes no cognisance whatever of swine erysipelas, and to apply to outbreaks of that disease the regulations referring to swine fever is certainly illegal. That such mistakes are frequently being made at the present time appears highly probable.
THE CURABILITY: OF CANKER OF THE HORSE'S FOOT.
THAT canker of the horse's foot is sometimes curable, probably no practitioner doubts; but it is equally certain that for one case that is cured two go on from bad to worse until they necessitate the animal's destruction. Such, at any rate, has hitherto been the general experience, but one may indulge the hope that in the future the method of treatment recommended by Mr Malcolm of Birmingham wiII receive a fair trial, and that it will yield results as gratifying as those obtained in his hands. We had the opportunity some considerable time ago to observe the