749

report says little. We have heard of a distinguishedepigraphist who, for want of opportunity of adding to theCorpus Inscriptionum Romanarum, collected the anony-mous writings of the lavatories. It must have been dullwork. The most effective way of circumventing thosewho wish to scatter their subconscious on the walls is asurface which will not " take " pen or pencil-lipstickwill write on anything. The long-suffering landlord of acountry inn fixed a large sheet of hardboard on the

lavatory wall complete with pencil and a notice " Pleasewrite here." The results were too frightful for descriptionalthough the pencil was, of course, stolen on the first

evening. A correspondent in The Times pointed out thattelephone booths have been largely saved from scribblednumbers and hearts pierced with arrows by the provisionof a mirror in which the user can admire himself.2 Some-one might try this in the public lavatory, but a mirror is atempting object for destruction. These obscenities on thewall are one of the penalties of a literate society and wemust bear them; the traditional grin is matter of taste.

RUBELLA VIRUS IN PLACENTA AND FŒTUS

THE connection between rubella in pregnant womenand congenital abnormalities in their babies was notedfirst by Gregg 3 and later by Swan. Epidemiologicalstudies in Sweden 5 and England 6 confirmed Gregg’sobservations and also the finding that the greatest risk offoetal damage followed maternal infection in the firsttrimester of pregnancy. The pathogenesis of the fcetaldefects remained a mystery, however, until Selzer,’ usingmethods described the previous year by Weller and Neva 8and Parkman et al. 9 in the United States, isolated rubellavirus from a 20 mm. foetus and placental material abortedby a woman 10 days after the onset of rubella early in herpregnancy. Although Selzer demonstrated intracyto-plasmic eosinophilic inclusion bodies in foetal cells, shewas unable to show any chromosomal abnormalities. The

congenital abnormalities of the rubella syndrome (com-prising some or all of deafness, cataracts, microcephaly,mental retardation, and congenital heart-disease) are inany case more likely to result from tissue damage thanchromosomal insult, which-if severe enough-willprevent the cells from dividing. On p. 723 of this issue,Dr. Monif and his colleagues report the isolation ofrubella virus from various organs of infants who diedwith rubella syndrome after some weeks of life, a findingwhich strongly suggests tissue damage from persistentinfection as a cause of the stigmata.

Plotkin et al.10 and Dudgeon et al." found quite hightitres of neutralising antibody in children with the rubellasyndrome, and they concluded there was no evidence thateven early intrauterine infection with rubella virus causedimmunological tolerance to the virus antigens. Alfordet a1.l2 reported a virological and serological study onmaterial obtained by termination of pregnancy inwomen exposed to rubella in the first trimester. They2. Times, March 20, 1965.3. Gregg, N. M. Trans. ophthal. Soc. Aust. 1941, 3, 35.4. Swan, C. J. Path. Bact. 1944, 56, 289.5. Lundstrom, R. Acta pœdiat., Uppsala, 1952, 41, 583; ibid. 1962, 51,

suppl. no. 133.6. Manson, M. M., Logan, U. P. D., Loy, R. M. Rep. publ. Hlth med.

Subj., Lond. 1960, no. 101.7. Selzer, G. Lancet, 1963, ii, 336.8. Weller, T. H., Neva, F. A. Proc. Soc. exp. Biol., N.Y. 1962, 111, 2159. Parkman, P. D., Buescher, E. L., Artenstein, M. S. ibid. p. 225.10. Plotkin, S. A., Dudgeon, J. A., Ramsay, A. M. Brit. med. J. 1963, ii, 1296.11. Dudgeon, J. A., Butler, N. R., Plotkin, S. A. ibid. 1964, ii, 155.12. Alford, C. A., Neva, F. A., Weller, T. H. New Engl. J. Med. 1964, 271,

1275.

isolated rubella virus regularly from placental tissue, lessregularly from foetal tissues. Isolation was successful as

long as 7 weeks after the onset of disease in the mother.Kay et ail. 13 isolated rubella virus from a 231/2-week foetus18 weeks after the onset of disease in the mother. Furtherevidence of the persistence of rubella infection was

obtained by Alford et al. when they isolated the virus fromthroat washings of three out of four infants borne bymothers infected in early pregnancy. The three infants

excreting virus all had signs of the rubella syndrome; thefourth, whose mother had had rubella when 12 weekspregnant, did not. Attempted isolation of rubella virusfrom congenitally abnormal babies may, therefore, in theabsence of a history of maternal rubella, give usefulinformation about the aetiology of the deformities. Thereis also the possibility that such babies could be the sourceof virus responsible for the prevalence of rubella amongnursing staffs and medical students.The serological findings of Alford et al., like those of

Dudgeon et al., indicate that the human embryo is

immunologically competent at a very early stage in

development, at least as far as rubella-virus antigens areconcerned. Since the induction of tolerance in laboratoryanimals depends, among other factors, on the antigensused, a lack of tolerance to the rubella virus doesnot imply that human embryos and newborns are alwaysimmunologically competent, no matter what antigen is

presented to them. It may be that the response to infec-tious antigens such as rubella virus is basically differentfrom the response to blood-group or other non-reproducingantigen s.

THE RENT BILL

THOUGH the total number of dwellings in this countryincreases every year, the number which are privatelyrented declines. Before the 1957 Rent Act there wereover 5 million of these, but by mid-1964 only 33/4 millionremained-partly as a result of slum-clearance and partlybecause landlords had been selling for owner-occupation.This process continues, yet the demand for cheaperrented accommodation (particularly in conurbations likeLondon, as the Milner Holland Committee showed 14) isintensified. The Government’s new Rent Bill aims to

deal with this situation of increasing scarcity.Basically it seeks to give tenants " reasonable security

of tenure ", and it recognises that such security must havesafeguards. In the first place, it cannot be achieved unlessrents are subject to some form of regulation: otherwise alandlord can increase rents to levels which tenants find

impossible to pay and hence find themselves "forced out".The Bill introduces rent-regulation for all rented dwellingsof rateable values up to S400 in London, and E200 else-where. Properties still controlled by the 1957 Rent Actwill not be covered by the new scheme until there is a

change of tenancy.Essentially, the new system will rely on

"

appeal "

rather than a rigid formula tied to the gross value of theproperty. " Fair rents " will reflect the " age, character,location, and state of repair " of the dwelling, but discountany scarcity value. If the tenant and landlord can nego-tiate a rent on this basis voluntarily, well and good; andthis is the more likely to happen since the tenant’s

position is strengthened by other sections of the Bill.

13. Kay, H. E. M., Peppercorn, M. E., Porterfield, J. S., McCarthy, K.,Taylor-Robinson, C. H. Brit. med. J. 1964, ii, 166.

14. See Lancet, March 20, 1965, p. 650.

750

However, if they cannot agree on a fair rent, the problemis to be referred to a rent officer appointed locally bycounty and county-borough councils. The rent officerwill try to help the two parties to come to an agreement.If either remains unwilling to accept the officer’s recom-mendation, the matter is to be passed on to a local rentassessment committee, which will include a valuer and alawyer. There will be no appeal from the decision of thiscommittee on the level of a " fair rent ". Rents acceptedafter reference either to the rent officer or to the committeewill be " registered ". It is hoped that those voluntarilyagreed by tenant and landlord will also be registered.Usually it will not be possible to alter registered rents forthree years.A second safeguard is to be offered to all tenants,

whether their accommodation is subject to rent regulationor not. The Bill prohibits eviction without a court orderfrom any privately rented dwelling, and thus extends tothe tenant in England and Wales protection already enjoyedin Scotland. Furnished accommodation, though remain-ing under the jurisdiction of the old rent tribunals, willalso be covered by this safeguard.The tenant’s third line of defence under this Bill

concerns what has come to be termed " harassment " bythe landlord. Such behaviour is to be made a criminal

offence, liable to fines of up to El 00, six months’ imprison-ment, or both.

Clearly security of tenure is vital in times of increasingscarcity, and the Bill seems a sensible approach to theproblem. A possible difficulty may be confusion over theassessment of " fair rents ", for different areas may takedifferent views, particularly about how much " scarcityvalue " to discount. The Government intends this to

be a fair and flexible system of rent regulation, andthe provision for withdrawing regulation in areas whereit seems unnecessary supports this claim. The Bill, as itsaccompanying white-paper 15 recognises, is not a solution,or even a partial solution, to the housing shortage, but itdoes offer much-needed security to tenants who live wherethe " shortage of moderately priced rented accommodationhas become an endemic social crisis ".

PROBLEMS IN AIR POLLUTION

JUST how air pollution damages health has proved sur-prisingly hard to determine. The details of the relationbetween given contaminant and given effect have, in

many instances, still to be elucidated; and Dr. P. J.Lawther, addressing the Royal Society of Arts on March24, described some of the problems which have yet tobe solved and the obstacles in the way of their solution.

Episodes of severe air pollution induced by localweather changes were, he said, ill tolerated by the veryold, the very young, and those with established diseaseof heart or lungs. They led to wheezing and shortness ofbreath-symptoms typical of increased airway resistance.Experimental inhalation of such irritants as sulphurdioxide and sulphuric acid could be made to produce thesame symptoms; but their inhalation in the concentra-tions found during these episodes of pollution had con-sistently failed to induce any measurable change in

airway resistance. The effects of mixtures of common

pollutants were therefore being investigated. In guinea-15 Rents and Security of Tenure: The Rent Bill Cmnd. 2622. H.M

Stationery Office 1965 9d.

pigs, for instance (though not, so far, in man) the effectof sulphur dioxide on the airway resistance could be

potentiated by salt aerosols. But, Dr. Lawther continued,this type of inquiry had been further complicated by thefinding that the physiological effects of inhaled sulphuricacid were apparently determined by the physical pro-perties of particulate matter also present in contaminatedair. Porous particles were penetrated by the acid and soseemed to prevent its early dilution by water vapour inthe airway; concentrated acid was therefore able to

impinge on the lining membrane. Innumerable pollutantmixtures could be concocted which would make peoplecough and wheeze, but which of them were significantoutside the laboratory remained to be seen.

Experimental results were peculiarly hard to assess,because of the variation of subject response. Besidesnormal variation among healthy subjects, there was

a spectrum of response in bronchitics in different stagesof their disease. Initially the bronchitic might be able,because of excessive mucus production, to tolerate higherconcentrations of irritant in the inspired air than his

healthy counterpart. Once, however, cardiopulmonary’function had been impaired, an inhaled irritant might bethe last straw that led to breakdown. Epidemiologicalstudies, although they eliminated the difficulty of indi-vidual variation, had pitfalls of their own. In London,for instance, the smog of 1952 led to some 4000 excessdeaths whereas, ten years later, a second such episodeled to less than 1000. Atmospheric concentrations of

sulphur dioxide were much the same in the two smogs,but smoke pollution was much less severe in the second.To relate the lower mortality with this lower pollutionwas tempting but not justified until the comparability ofthe population at risk had been established-no easymatter in practice.

Neither had the reasons for the urban prevalence ofbronchitics proved simple. Population surveys had sug-gested that there was, over and above differences of

occupation, social class, population density, and smokinghabits in town and country, an urban factor predisposingto the disease. That this was, in fact, air pollution wasprobable but not proven. Certainly, the responsiblepollutants remained unidentified. As the irritant induc-

ing the early mucous hypertrophy, sulphur dioxidewould not do. Its concentration in urban air had neverbeen found to approach that regarded as perfectly safefor industrial exposure. Possibly, however, throughparalysis of ciliary activity, it predisposed to the infec-tion that ensued in the later irreversible stages of thedisease.

The internal combustion engine was, Dr. Lawther

remarked, more popular than the cigarette as a scape-goat for the urban preponderance of lung cancer. Its

significant contribution to lung-level air was not, how-

ever, in carcinogens but in carbon monoxide. A con-centration of this gas three-and-a-half times the peakpermissible in industry had been recorded on the pave-ment at Oxford Circus: and there was increasing reasonto suppose that, inhaled even in small amounts, the gasimpaired judgment. Much remains to be unravelled, butfor immediate practical purposes we know enough: theair in our cities should be as clean as we could make it.

Mrs. DOROTHY HODGKIN, Wolfson research professor of theRoyal Society, has been appointed to the Order of Merit.