IRVING FISHER, PIT. D. 39 



the total 300,000 deaths of infants, but to that fraction of the 

 300,000 which is unnecessary. Out of all infant deaths at least 

 125,000 need not have occurred if modern hygiene as it is known 

 today were practiced universally. And this statement is not 

 the opinion of one man ; it is based on statistics in the report to 

 the government on national vitality, to which your chairman has 

 alluded. I cannot assume the credit for all the data on which 

 this report was constructed; much was obtained from medical 

 experts, who were asked, for instance, what part of the deaths 

 from spinal meningitis might be avoided if modern knowledge 

 in regard to prevention were applied; what part of the deaths 

 from diarrhoea and enteritis in infants under 1 year of age 

 might be prevented, and by means of these data it was estimated 

 that at least 47 per cent, of the deaths in infants might be pre- 

 vented. That would mean that out of 300,000 deaths some- 

 thing like 125,000 might be prevented. No one who once can 

 conjure in his imagination the immense amount of needless 

 deaths, and particularly of needless infant deaths, would need 

 any further argument as to the importance of this movement. 

 And yet the public are, it must be confessed, on the whole as 

 yet somewhat apathetic, and it is apathy rather than opposition 

 to the movement with which we have to deal. 



'There is another sort of opposition which should be men- 

 tioned, although it seldom expresses itself. I find certain phil- 

 anthropists, who think they are more far sighted than others, 

 who maintain that this prevention of infant mortality is really 

 "against the law of natural selection." A prominent philan- 

 thropist confessed to me that, while he wouldn't like to be quoted, 

 he believed we were merely attempting to prolong the lives of 

 the weak and to increase the miseries of the poor and thus reduce 

 the average of the vitality of the next generation. If I believed 

 this to be true, personally I should oppose the movement to pre- 

 vent infant mortality, for I do not think any considerations of 

 sentiment for the present generation should betray us into the 

 mistake of bringing about worse evils for future generations ; 

 but I am sure a careful study of the situation will show that this 

 argument is fallacious, that really we are not interfering with 

 natural selection, but that this movement aims to remove the 

 interferences with natural selection which modern civilization 

 has created. It is not a feature of natural selection that babies' 

 milk should be adulterated or contaminated with germs. Nature 

 gave infants as their birthright their mothers' milk, taken directly 

 from the breast and without a chance for contamination, without 

 100 miles intervening for the milk man to bring it. It is 

 their natural food, uncontaminated with germs or with polluted 

 water. Now we have to deal with artificial conditions. Artificial 



