Econ Hist Rev. 2011;64(4):1315-35. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0289.2011.00620.x.
This article is a response to Davenport, Schwarz, and Boulton's article, ‘The decline of adult smallpox in eighteenth-century London’. It introduces new data on the parish of St Mary Whitechapel which casts doubt on the pattern of the age incidence of smallpox found by Davenport et al. However, it is concluded that there was a decline in adult smallpox in London, accompanied by a concentration of the disease among children under the age of five. Davenport et al.'s argument that the shift in the age incidence was due to the endemicization of smallpox in England is challenged, with an alternative view that these age changes can be accounted for by the practice of inoculation, both in the hinterland southern parishes of England and in London itself. A detailed discussion is carried out on the history of inoculation in London for the period 1760–1812. It is suggested that inoculation became increasingly popular in this period, rivalling in popularity the practice of vaccination. This was associated with a class conflict between the medical supporters of Jenner and the general population, with many of the latter being practitioners of the old inoculation.
这篇文章是对 Davenport、Schwarz 和 Boulton 文章《18 世纪伦敦成人天花的减少》的回应。它介绍了关于圣玛丽怀特查佩尔教区的新数据,这些数据对 Davenport 等人发现的天花年龄发病模式提出了质疑。然而,结论是伦敦的成人天花确实有所减少,同时疾病集中在五岁以下的儿童中。Davenport 等人认为,年龄发病的转变是由于天花在英国的地方化,这一观点受到了挑战,另一种观点认为,这些年龄变化可以通过接种的实践来解释,无论是在英格兰南部内陆的教区,还是在伦敦本身。对 1760 年至 1812 年期间伦敦接种历史进行了详细讨论。有人认为,在这一时期,接种越来越受欢迎,与接种的做法一样流行。这与詹纳的医学支持者与普通民众之间的阶级冲突有关,后者中的许多人都是旧接种法的从业者。