Buy books by AWers

 

Welcome to the AbsoluteWrite Water Cooler! Please read The Newbie Guide To Absolute Write

Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Tuberculosis in the 1960s

  1. #1
    New Fish; Learning About Thick Skin SageChild's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    45

    Tuberculosis in the 1960s

    How did ordinary people then protect themselves from transmission? For example caring for family while they're sick. Did they wrap a cloth around their mouths?

  2. #2
    Never Surrender AW Moderator Maryn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    On a Pedestal
    Posts
    39,706
    I knew a few people who had TB in the late 1970s, not all that close to your era but not that far away, either.

    The caregivers did not mask or glove or anything. Perhaps they should have, or perhaps once it was under treatment the risk of transmission was greatly reduced. At that time, most of the TB cases were among people who lived on the fringes--the homeless, the lifestyle drug users, hippie types who opened the door to anybody with hair and weed--and the level of care others gave was low, as was the responsibility of the person with the illness. The ones I knew were drug users who spent every day high. They were supposed to take a lot of prescription drugs for two years, but often forgot for days at a time. By now, they might well have died of their illness.
    Get to work. Success isn't built on the power of your dreams.


    Brick by Brick, a ménage à trois novel
    Taming the Wilde, FemDom spotted--and striped--in the wild
    Men in Love, anthology about--hey, you're already there, aren't you?
    Maryn Says, an irregular blog almost never about writing
    The Occasional Tweet

  3. #3
    practical experience, FTW cornflake's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    13,034
    People get TB now -- you don't really need to do that once people are on drugs, and it's hard to get TB anyhow. It's not very easily transmissible.

  4. #4
    practical experience, FTW MaeZe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    Ralph's side of the island.
    Posts
    3,395
    Until the 1950s, TB was not recognized as an occupational risk to caregivers. The reason being the delay between when one contracts TB infection and when TB disease develops can be anywhere from months to decades. And a certain percentage of caregivers were already infected when they began working with TB patients. So despite the fact TB was recognized as a contagious disease, it was thought that many people were not susceptible.

    That is true to a certain extent. For one in good health, only about 10% of those infected will develop disease.

    Typically people are infected in crowded living conditions after prolonged exposure.

    You should look into the tuberculosis sanitariums like this paper: The Culture of Death and the Tuberculosis Sanatorium. These hospitals began closing in the 60s as treatment for TB improved, but it would have been a transition time and the sanitariums were still a big part of TB treatment in the timeframe you ask about.

    The fear of being forced to leave everyone and everything was a big deal at the time.

    As for respiratory protection, again, since it wasn't clear why some people got TB and when they acquired it, respiratory protection was not common. Instead people with active disease were isolated. Look up images of TB sanitariums and you will not see the nurses wearing masks at all.

  5. #5
    Dragging myself from the mire. Thorberta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    35
    Oh! My grandfather had TB in the 1960s! Actually it was for the second time in his life. He was sent to a sanatorium. My mom (who was in high school at the time) had to go visit him in a special visiting area. Apparently, they had the patients sewing wallets for something to do and my mom said the drugs they gave him for the TB made him surprisingly happy to be doing this.

  6. #6
    practical experience, FTW Tsu Dho Nimh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    West Enchilada, NM
    Posts
    1,531
    At the time, the TB drugs were effective - resistant strains had not shown up - so a person would be isolated until a culture showed they were not spreading bacteria. It could be at home, it could be in a sanatarium (although they were scarce), or in the contagious isolation room of a hospital. Occasionally a person who refused treatment and/or isolation would be jailed as a threat to public health.

    The drugs act quickly, so it's not months and months.

    And someone with TB is normally able to care for themselves.

    Household members were usually given preventive doses of the TB drugs unless their skin tests showed they were already exposed and immune.

  7. #7
    ever seeking GeorgeK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    6,453
    Quote Originally Posted by Tsu Dho Nimh View Post
    A
    The drugs act quickly, so it's not months and months.
    .
    No, actually TB is a slow growing but relentless organism and it takes a minimum of 6 weeks of culturing to say it is a negative culture. In recalcitrant cases they may even run the culture times out to 3 months. IT's slow growth is the reason that it is assumed some people do fight off the infection on their own, which is why they can test positive and have no evidence of disease

    Quote Originally Posted by Tsu Dho Nimh View Post
    Household members were usually given preventive doses of the TB drugs unless their skin tests showed they were already exposed and immune.
    A TB skin test whether positive or negative does not confer a status of, "immune." If you have a history of exposure and a positive skin test then it is often assumed that you've been exposed, cultures are taken and you are started on presumptive antibiotics, at least that's how it was done before the multi-drug resistant strains. I wouldn't be surprised if there are more non-invasive scans nowadays and holding off on antibiotics. That seemed to be the way the trend was going around the time that I retired. If you had a history of exposure and a negative skin test then they do an anergy panel (a skin test against a panel of things that everyone should react to, like bread mold, locally ubiquitous bacteria etc). If you don't react to an anergy panel then it is assumed that you have a weakened immune system and won't react to a TB skin test whether or not you have an active infection. There's a whole lot of dominoes involved and the skin test is only an early part of it and doesn't on it's own prove anything


    Also to the OP, it is not always a pulmonary infection. I've seen it as solid tumors mimicking both testicular and prostate cancer, even to the point of elevating tumor markers because the tumor markers are generally chemicals that are also made by the normal tissue and when it is irritated for whatever reason, the markers can be elevated. Putting the tumors like these in formalin which used to the be norm in the operating room will kill the bacteria so it went unnoticed for a long time and why any good surgeon should call the pathologist and hand off the specimen in person if it looks particularly odd.
    Last edited by GeorgeK; 04-23-2017 at 10:28 PM.

  8. #8
    practical experience, FTW MaeZe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    Ralph's side of the island.
    Posts
    3,395
    Quote Originally Posted by Tsu Dho Nimh View Post
    At the time, the TB drugs were effective - resistant strains had not shown up - so a person would be isolated until a culture showed they were not spreading bacteria. It could be at home, it could be in a sanatarium (although they were scarce), or in the contagious isolation room of a hospital. Occasionally a person who refused treatment and/or isolation would be jailed as a threat to public health.

    The drugs act quickly, so it's not months and months.

    And someone with TB is normally able to care for themselves.

    Household members were usually given preventive doses of the TB drugs unless their skin tests showed they were already exposed and immune.
    My apologies but most all of this is inaccurate.
    Last edited by MaeZe; 04-23-2017 at 10:25 PM.

  9. #9
    Herder of Hamsters AW Admin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    On the Server
    Posts
    12,503
    There's also "Bovine TB"; from a related bacteria Mycobacterium bovis, which dairy farmers are still very very vigilant about.

    It's pretty common in India even now.

  10. #10
    ever seeking GeorgeK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    6,453
    Quote Originally Posted by AW Admin View Post
    There's also "Bovine TB"; from a related bacteria Mycobacterium bovis, which dairy farmers are still very very vigilant about.

    It's pretty common in India even now.
    We actually use it to treat bladder cancer as a topically instilled agent in the US. So it's always very important to do a skin test first so we can document down the road if they have a skin test conversion which TB it's likely to be.

  11. #11
    Derailed WriteMinded's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Above Paradise in California
    Posts
    5,481
    What I remember most — probably because we (my husband and I) were just talking about it — is that there were vans with X-ray equipment that periodically parked on the main street of town. Anybody could step inside and get a free chest x-ray. Test results were mailed to you. Pretty cool. When they came out with the skin tests, the vans disappeared.

  12. #12
    Who's going for a beer? waylander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    6,634
    Quote Originally Posted by AW Admin View Post
    There's also "Bovine TB"; from a related bacteria Mycobacterium bovis, which dairy farmers are still very very vigilant about.

    It's pretty common in India even now.
    And still a problem for farmers in the UK

  13. #13
    practical experience, FTW Twick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    2,254
    I was born approximately 1960. When I was six months old, my mother was diagnosed with tuberculosis, and was immediately removed from the home. She spent several months in a local sanatorium until she was considered "clear." (One doctor admitted after the fact the diagnosis was probably a mistake, and marvelled that she didn't actually become sick when put in with a lot of people who did have the disease.)

    Do I have abandonment issues because of it? Don't know but ... please don't leave until we find out.

  14. #14
    New Fish; Learning About Thick Skin SageChild's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    45
    Thanks you for your answers! The help is much appreciated

  15. #15
    Cat whisperer Mark HJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Cornwall, UK
    Posts
    144
    I do remember when I was a kid, so mid-sixties, that my grandfather disappeared for quite a long period because he was ill. We were not allowed to visit, but I was reasonably clear that he was not in hospital but 'something like hospital'. Reading between the lines, I now suspect that it may have been TB. It's hard to tell because my family really doesn't talk about this stuff. (Earlier this year Dad mentioned some really wobbly plastering he did when I was in my early teens. I sort of remember a lot of swearing and sanding. Apparently it was the last time his malaria flared up and he couldn't keep his hands steady. Parents. They never tell you the fun stuff.)
    Demonyka on AmazonUK AmazonUS
    Writing On The Edge
    of Bodmin Moor - a blog of life and writing on a small farm.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Custom Search