International Journal of Epidemiology 2001;30:688-696
© International Epidemiological Association 2001
Reiterations |
Commentary: ‘The child is father of the man.’ The relationship between child health and adult mortality in the 19th and 20th centuries
Department of Sociology and Social Policy, University of Southampton, Highfield, Southampton SO17 1BJ, UK.
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
In the early years of the twentieth century, enormous concern was focused on the relationship between the health of the child and the welfare of the nation. In 1902, Leslie Mackenzie and Matthew Hay informed the Royal Commission on Physical Training (Scotland) that large numbers of children in Aberdeen and Edinburgh were suffering from serious medical conditions which could pose a threat to them in later life, and in 1904 the Interdepartmental Committee on Physical Deterioration devoted more than one-third of its report to conditions affecting the ‘juvenile population’.1 In 1905 Leslie Mackenzie told the Royal Society of Edinburgh that the most important single lesson to emerge from the enquiries was the need to make the individual citizen fit for the environment around them. ‘One truth we have already realised—if we would fit the man for his environment, we must begin with the child. "The child is father of the
Infant and child health and adult mortality in Scotland and Sweden
The decline of mortality in England and Wales since 1700
Health, height and mortality
Conclusions
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  M. Gorsky, B. Harris, and A. Hinde Age, Sickness, and Longevity in the Late Nineteenth and the Early Twentieth Centuries: Evidence from the Hampshire Friendly Society Social Science History, December 1, 2006; 30(4): 571 - 600. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 R. Catalano and T. Bruckner Child mortality and cohort lifespan: a test of diminished entelechy Int. J. Epidemiol., October 1, 2006; 35(5): 1264 - 1269. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. M Crimmins and C. E Finch Commentary: Do older men and women gain equally from improving childhood conditions? Int. J. Epidemiol., October 1, 2006; 35(5): 1270 - 1271. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. Grundy Commentary: The McKeown debate: time for burial Int. J. Epidemiol., June 1, 2005; 34(3): 529 - 533. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. D. Smith and J. Lynch Commentary: Social capital, social epidemiology and disease aetiology Int. J. Epidemiol., August 1, 2004; 33(4): 691 - 700. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. Szreter Author response: Debating mortality trends in 19th century Britain Int. J. Epidemiol., August 1, 2004; 33(4): 705 - 709. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 C. Merzel and J. D'Afflitti Reconsidering Community-Based Health Promotion: Promise, Performance, and Potential Am J Public Health, April 1, 2003; 93(4): 557 - 574. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. D. Smith and D. Kuh Commentary: William Ogilvy Kermack and the childhood origins of adult health and disease Int. J. Epidemiol., August 1, 2001; 30(4): 696 - 703. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|