The Editor: Why the Babies Die 



65 



sion ignores the actual facts. Statistics certing one. It can only be proved by 



show that infant mortality campaigns refined statistical methods, but several 



have consistently produced reductions independent determinations leave no 



in the death rate. The figures for New doubt as to the fact.* Nature is weeding 



York, which could be matched in dozens out the weaklings, and in proportion to 



of other cities, show that the number of the stringency with which she weeds 



deaths per 1,000 births, in the first year them out at the start, there are fewer 



of life, has steadily declined since a weaklings left to die in succeeding years, 



determined campaign to "Save the To put the facts in the form of a truism. 



Babies" was started: part of the children born in any district 



jgQ9 . . 181 ^^^ ^ given year are doomed by heredity 



1903 152 to an early death ; and if they die in one 



1904 162 year they will not be alive to die in the 



1^^^ 1^5^ succeeding year, and vice versa. Of 



j^gQ^ 244. course, there are in addition infant deaths 



1908 128 which are not selective and which if 



1909 129 prevented would leave the infant with 



1^1^ 1^2 ^s good a chance as any to live. 



jgp JQ5 In the light of these researches, one 



1913 ". '. *. 102 must conclude that baby-saving cam- 



■ 1914 95 paigns accomplish less than is thought ; 



To one who cannot see beyond the that the supposed gain is to some extent 



immediate consequences of an action, temporary and illusory, 

 such figures as the above indeed give 2. There is still another consequence, 



quite a different idea of the effects of If the gam is by great_ exertions made 



an infant mortality campaign, than that more than temporary; if the baby who 



which I have just tried to create. And would otherwise have died m the first 



it is a great misfortune that euthenics so months is brought to adult life and re- 



often fails to look beyond the immediate production, it means m many cases the 



effect, fails to see what may happen next dissemination of another strain of weak 



year, or ten years from now, or in the heredity, which the bloody hand of 



next generation. natural selection would have cut off 



It must be admitted that it is possible ruthlessly in the interests of race better- 

 to keep a lot of children alive who would ment. In so far, then, as the infant 

 otherwise have died in the first few mortality movement is not tutile, it is, 

 months of life. It is being done, as the from a strict biological viewpoint, often 

 New York figures, and pages of others detrimental to the future of the race, 

 that could be cited prove. The ulti- ^^^ ^^^^^^ ^^^^^ ^^ ^^^^^ 

 mate result is two-ioid: 



Do we then discourage all attempts to 



RESULTS OF CAMPAIGNS save the babics ? Do we leave them all 



1. Many of those who are doomed by to natural selection? Do we adopt the 



heredity to a selective death, but are " better dead " gospel ? 

 kept alive through the first year, die in Unqualifiedly, no ! The sacrifice of 



the second or third or fourth year. They the finer human feelings, which would 



must die sooner or later; they have not accompany any such course, would be a 



inherited sufficient resistance to survive greater loss to the race than is the 



more than a limited time. If they are eugenic loss from the perpetuation _ of 



by a great effort carried through the first weak strains of heredity. The abolition 



year, it is only to die in the next. This of altruistic and humanitarian sentiment 



is a statement rarely observed in the for the purpose of race betterment would 



propaganda of the infant mortality ultimately defeat its own end by making 



movement; and it is perhaps a discon- race betterment impossible. 



» The work was done by E. C. Snow, Karl Pearson and Ethel M. Elderton. A brief review 

 of it will be found in the Journal of Heredity, vi, pp. 497-498, Nov., 1915. 



