Read this article about the state of public health in the Mid-Victorian era in England. Consider its arguments against what we know of people's lifestyles during those times. What accounts for any differences in the accounts?
How the Mid-Victorians Died
Public Health Patterns
The overall pattern of Victorian causes of death broadly resembles that found in developing countries today, with infection, trauma and infant/mother mortality in the pole positions, and non-communicable degenerative disease being relatively insignificant.
Common causes of death [65,66]
- Infection including TB and other lung infections such as pneumonia;
epidemics (scarlet fever, smallpox, influenza, typhoid, cholera etc),
with spread often linked to poor sanitation: and the sexually
transmitted diseases.
- Accidents/trauma linked to work place and
domestic conditions. Death from burns was an important cause of death
among women, due largely to a combination of open hearth cooking,
fashions in dress, and the use of highly flammable fabrics.
- Infant/mother mortality [66]. This was generally due to infection,
although maternal haemorrhage was another significant causative factor.
- Heart failure. This was generally due to damage to the heart valves
caused by rheumatic fever, and was not a degenerative disease. Angina
pectoris does not appear in the registrar general's records as a cause
of death until 1857 – and then as a disease of old age - although the
diagnosis and its causes were recognised [67–70].
Uncommon causes of death
- Coronary artery disease (see above)
- Paralytic fits (strokes, see Webster's Dictionary). Stroke was
mainly associated with the middle and upper classes who ate a diet in
which animal derived foods had a more significant role, and who consumed
as a result rather less fruits and vegetables. Strokes were generally
non-fatal, at least the first time; although mortality rates increased
with each subsequent stroke [65]
- Cancers were relatively rare [65]. While the Victorians did not possess sophisticated diagnostic or screening technology, they were as able to diagnose late stage cancer as we are today; but this was an uncommon finding. In that period, cancer carried none of the stigma that it has recently acquired, and was diagnosed without bias. For example, in 1869 the Physician to Charing Cross Hospital describes lung cancer as '… one of the rarer forms of a rare disease. You may probably pass the rest of your students life without seeing another example of it'. [71].
Not only were cancers very uncommon compared to today, they appear to have differed in other key respects. James Paget (of Paget's Disease) built a large practice on the strength of diagnosing breast cancer, which he did by sight and palpation – that is at Stages 3 and 4. In this group he describes a life expectancy of 4 years after diagnosis, extending to eight or more with surgery [72].
The corresponding figures today are Stage 3: 50% survival at 10 years if given surgery, chemo- and radio-therapy, and Stage 4: overall survival about 15 months. These figures suggest that breast cancer during the Victorian period was significantly less rapidly progressive than is the case today, probably due to the Victorians' significantly higher intakes of a range of micro- and phytonutrients which slow cancer growth.
In summary, although
the mid-Victorians lived as long as we do, they were relatively immune
to the chronic degenerative diseases that are the most important causes
of ill health and death today.