

PREVENTIVE MEDICINE 301 



said to have been attended with very good results. The method 

 was examined by a Committee appointed in 1904, but was found to 

 be useless. 



FELINE DISTEMPER. 



Feline distemper is if anything more highly contagious than 

 the canine form, from which it is considered to be a distinct disease. 

 The causative agent is not known. The period of incubation is 

 about the same as that of the canine disease, and it is also as widely 

 distributed. Spring and autumn are the chief seasons for its 

 appearance, and cats of any age are liable to attack. The rate of 

 mortality is frequently very high; in catteries and veterinary 

 infirmaries 50 per cent, of the cases may be expected to end fatally. 

 Infection spreads extremely rapidly in such places, and the con- 

 tagium is probably air-borne. What has been said under canine 

 distemper concerning transmission and prevention also applies here. 

 Cat shows often act as distributing centres, and the disease may 

 also be introduced by a cat returning from stud. Cages in which 

 cats are kept are dangerous sources of infection. The contagium, 

 however, seems to be more resistant than that of canine distemper 

 and fumigation with sulphur is desirable. The premises or parts 

 contaminated should afterwards be freely exposed to the air and 

 left vacant for a fortnight or longer. Gray considers that cats 

 are capable of carrying the virus for an indefinite period, even for 

 years, and infect each litter as it appears. Though some cats appar- 

 ently possess a natural immunity, to those susceptible one attack 

 offers no protection from a second, and Gray is of the opinion that 

 on the contrary one attack may predispose to others. 



STUTTGART DOG DISEASE. 



Stuttgart disease (contagious gastro-enteritis, canine typhus) 

 is a disease of dogs, the characteristic features of which are 

 gastritis and ulcerative gangrene of the oral mucous membrane. 

 The cause is unknown. Some clinicians look upon it as being a 

 form of distemper, but this view is most probably wrong. It seems 

 to have first attracted notice in various towns in England, and 

 especially on the south coast, in 1898, and no doubt is similar to 

 the disease which prevailed in some parts of Germany in the latter 

 part of 1898. The German disease was well described by Klett* 

 of Stuttgart in 1899. Klett looked upon the disease as being 

 * Journ. Conip. Path., Vol. XII., p. 36, Trans. 



