Cases of Rabies in

WINTER.SPRING.SUMMER.AUTUMN.
Dec., Jan., Feb. March, April, May. June, July, Aug. Sept., Oct., Nov.
Dogs755857788696(Bouley).
Men17254213(Boudin).

The increase of cases of rabies canina in the spring and summer months, as shown by the above statistics (7-15 per cent.), cannot reasonably be attributed to the influence of the weather, since even the strongest advocates for spontaneity would at once decline to claim any such ratio of spontaneous developments. The increase must therefore be mainly, if not altogether, due to the increased number of inoculations; and these latter are provided for in the jealousies and quarrels in the troops of males that follow each rutting bitch in spring, the principal period of oestrum in the canine female. The infection spread in this way in early spring tends to remain more prevalent throughout the hot summer months.

With regard to the greatly enhanced mortality in man during the summer months, as shown in Boudin's statistics for France, in the absence of any genuine hydrophobia in man apart from inoculation from a rabid animal, it may be attributed to three principal causes: 1st. The bites sustained from rabid dogs in spring and early summer, when the disease is most widely spread among these animals, will give rise to hydrophobia weeks or months later. 2d. In the warm season the body is more thinly clad and the hands and other portions are more frequently left bare, so that the teeth are less likely to be cleansed of the virulent saliva by passing through the clothes before entering the skin. 3d. The languor, fever, and nervousness attendant on extreme heat tend not only to hasten the activity of any disease-germs actually present in the system, but also strongly favor the increase of that nervous fear which so often generates a fatal pseudo-hydrophobia (lyssophobia) in persons that have been bitten by dogs.

Hunger, thirst, and spoiled food are invoked as causes of rabies, yet in the East, where the dogs are the scavengers of the cities and often suffer severely from hunger and thirst, eat the most offensive carrion, and drink the foulest water, the disease has a very restricted prevalence, while in South Africa and Australia the outcast and sheep-dogs, often the victims of starvation and thirst, entirely escape. Bourgelat, Dupuytren, Majendie, Breschet, and others have cruelly destroyed dogs by privation of food and water and by exposure under a broiling sun, but no rabies, nor anything resembling it, was produced. Dogs perspire little and suffer severely from heat, but there is no evidence that this can develop canine madness. It is claimed that Rossi of Turin developed rabies in cats by withholding food and drink, but, as he furnishes no inoculation-tests confirmatory of its virulence, the claim cannot be endorsed. Experiments with an exclusive diet of salt meat, putrid meat, and water only have failed to produce rabies.

The large preponderance of male dogs attacked with rabies has been constantly remarked by writers. Of 1990 rabid dogs reported by different authors, 1746 were males and 244 females—a ratio of more than 7 to 1. This excess of males attacked is much higher than the ratio of males in the dogs of the districts drawn upon. Thus, Bourrel found a ratio of 6 rabid males to 1 rabid female, while in his patients generally the proportion was 4 to 1. Leblanc found that 14 per cent. of the male dogs went mad, while but 1 per cent. of the females suffered. That sex is no protection against inoculated virus is shown by the frequent inoculation of castrated dogs of both sexes. The excess of male subjects may be attributed mainly to the frequency with which these bite each other when following a female in heat, and the respect of all alike for the latter sex. Even in the rabid dog the sexual instinct rises above the propensity to bite in the early stages of the malady.

Toffoli claims that he has caused spontaneous rabies by shutting up several dogs in a loose box with a bitch in heat and allowing them to fight for the prize. Weber and Leblanc have noticed similar occurrences. But Greve and Menecier have repeated the experiments with a contrary result; so that it remains probable that when successful the victims had already been inoculated before they were shut up. Moreover, the seclusion of male canine animals for a lifetime in menagerie cages, often adjoining those of their corresponding females, has never been known to induce rabies.

The bite of the violently enraged dog, and the bites mutually given when following a rutting bitch, are popularly supposed to cause rabies; but if this were the case, the disease must have been universally prevalent. The idea that the bite of a dog will cause hydrophobia should that dog at any subsequent period go mad is a similar delusion. Men doubtless occasionally develop lyssophobia under such an influence, but animals do not contract genuine rabies.

Dogs are alleged to have gone mad from violent suffering after an operation, and cats from being scalded or robbed of their kittens, but all such causes are continually operating without such effect, and when in a solitary case rabies develops, it can only be looked on as a coincidence.

Much popular prejudice exists against certain breeds, and the Pomeranian has been virtually ostracised on account of its supposed liability to rabies; but statistics show that the liability to contract the affection bears a relation to the exposure rather than the special breed. Eckel, Pillwax, and Hertwig found that dogs kept as house- or watch-dogs, and most pampered and confined, are the most liable, while St. Cyr and Peuch found the greatest number of cases among those running at large and allowed the freest exercise.