Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (3)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Lockwood, D. N.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Lockwood, D. N.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

International Journal of Epidemiology, Volume 33, Number 2, pp. 269-270
IJE vol.33 no.2 © International Epidemiological Association 2004; all rights reserved.

Commentary

Commentary: Leprosy and poverty

Diana NJ Lockwood

London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel St, London, WC1E 7HT, UK. E-mail: diana.lockwood{at}lshtm.ac.uk

The first 10% of the full text of this article appears below.

A hundred years ago the hot debate in leprosy circles revolved around disease causation; was leprosy hereditary or could the bacterial hypothesis of Armauer Hansen be believed? These arguments had important and very different public health consequences. If hereditary then patients should be stopped from reproducing but did not need isolation and confinement. However, if a bacterial aetiology was believed then leprosy patients should be isolated from society to prevent spread of infectious . . . [Full Text of this Article]


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?