It is commonly supposed that good health is the invariable accompaniment of country life; that children who are brought up in the country are always rosy-cheeked, chubby, and, except for occasional colds, free from disease; that adults, both men and women, are strong to labor, like the oxen of the Psalmist, and that grandfathers and grandmothers are so common and so able-bodied that in practically every farmhouse the daily chores are assigned to these aged exponents of strong constitutions and healthy lives. If, however, we are honest in our observations, or have lived on a farm in our younger days, or have kept our eyes open when visiting in the country, we will remember, one by one, certain facts which will persistently suggest that, after all, life on the farm may not be such a spring of health as we have been led to believe. We will remember the frequency of funerals, especially in the winter, and the few families in which all the children have reached maturity. We will remember the worn-out bodies of men and women, bent and aged while yet in middle life.

It is worth while, then, at the beginning, to find out, if we can, just what are the conditions of health in rural communities, in order to justify any book dealing with rural hygiene; for it is plain that if health conditions are already perfect, or nearly so, no book dealing with improved methods of living is needed, and the wisdom of the grandparents may be depended on to continue such methods into the next generation.

Death-rate.

The usual method of measuring the health conditions of any community, such as a city, town, county, state, or country, is to compute the general death-rate, as it is called; that is, the number of deaths occurring per 1000 population. For example, in 1908, with its estimated population of 8,546,356, there occurred in New York State 138,441 deaths, or 16.2 deaths for every 1000 population. Sixteen and two-tenths is, then, the general death-rate for the state for that year. This method of determining the health of a community is crude and should not be too strictly relied upon for proving the healthfulness implied. The rate is at best only an average, and takes no account of anything but death, one death being a greater calamity, apparently, than a dozen persons incapacitated from disease. Then, too, this death-rate is greatly affected by peculiarities of the community in age, sex, nationality, and occupation, and by local conditions of climate, altitude, and soil. The effect of these local conditions can best be explained after a consideration of the general death-rate and its definite values in different places.

In the United States, as a whole, or, more exactly, in that part of the United States which keeps such records of deaths as to be reliable (about one half), the annual average death-rate for the five-year period 1901-1905 was 16.3, and this may be compared with the death-rate in other countries shown in the following table for the same period:—

Table I. Death-rates in Various Countries

Ideal death-rates.

There are special reasons why the Australian death-rate should be low, but, neglecting this one country entirely, it will be seen that Norway, Denmark, and Sweden have rates of 14.5, 14.8, and 15.5, respectively; rates which may be considered as good as any country can attain at the present time. But the United States, as a whole, has about one more death per 1000 than these countries, and New York State two more per 1000 population. This means that in New York State there are 16,000 more deaths each year than if the population were living in Sweden under Swedish conditions and laws. Or, expressed in another way, it means that in Sweden one out of every sixty-five persons dies each year, and in New York one out of every fifty-eight persons.

The rate in New York State is high because the state contains a large number of cities, and concentration of population generally implies all kinds of bad and unsanitary conditions. As a rule, a higher death-rate may be expected in a densely populated community than in a sparsely settled one, and we should therefore expect a rural community to show a lower death-rate than a city or urban community. It is not a fair estimate of the health of any rural locality, such as a county where no large cities exist, to compare its death-rate with the average of the state, or with the average rate of some other county which contains a large city. This fact is plainly brought out by the statistics in Table II, from the several sanitary districts into which the state of New York is divided, as shown on the map, Fig. 1:—

Table II. Showing Varying Death-rates in Different Parts of New York State

Death-rates in New York State.

The Maritime District includes the four counties of New York City and comprises about half the population of the state. Its population is almost entirely quartered under distinctly urban conditions, in some parts with a congestion not equaled in any other city of the country. It would naturally, therefore, have a high death-rate, and that it is no higher than it is makes it a matter for congratulation. And yet the rate in New York City is higher than in the other principal large cities of the world. For example, the rates for the five-year period 1900-1904 in Berlin averaged 18.3, in Paris 18.2, and in London 16.9, New York being 19.4 for the corresponding period. The excess in New York is due in part to local conditions and in part to a less active oversight in matters of public health. Similarly, the Hudson Valley District, which embraces the large cities along the Hudson, has a higher death-rate than the state average, whereas the other six districts have low rates, chiefly because of the large proportion of agricultural land and small towns. The last district should be noted particularly, since its rate is remarkably low and its number of cities very small, compared with the area included. The conclusion may be properly drawn, therefore, that statistics confirm the general impression that life in the country is healthier than life in the city.

Accuracy of death-rate records.

One factor must be considered, however, since it plays an important part in drawing conclusions from these kinds of statistics, and that is, the accuracy of the records. In a city in which every one must be buried in a public cemetery, and when the physician, the undertaker, and the sexton all have to keep records which must agree, it is not easy for any burial to occur without the fact being recorded and later registered in the Census Office at Washington. But in the country, a person may be killed by accident, for example, and buried in a private lot without the undertaker recording it at all. The result is that the total number of deaths seems fewer and the death-rate seems smaller than the facts warrant, so that a false idea of the healthfulness of the community obtains. That errors of this sort have existed in the past can be seen by examining the death-rates for New York City and those for regions outside that city for the past ten years:—

Table III. Death-rates in New York City and Elsewhere in New York State, 1898-1908

The decrease in the city rate is to be expected, since with greater knowledge of sanitary matters, more precautions against disease would naturally be taken. But it is not likely that the country is becoming more careless, although the tendency to concentrate population even in rural hamlets may have an effect. It is rather more likely that the reports are made more carefully and that the records are more complete now than formerly. The apparent increase in the number of deaths in rural communities is, therefore, due to greater attention in reporting deaths rather than to any real increase in the number.

If the difference between the rural community death-rate and the rate in all the cities of more than 8000 population in New York State be shown, the difference between the city rate and the country rate is even less than that shown in the table, being only 0.7 deaths in 1000 for 1908. This shows that the boasted superiority of the country over cities is not very great; that it is marked only in the case of a very large city like New York; that, as the size of the city decreases, the difference disappears, and that the country rate in the United States is high when compared with the general rate of other countries like Denmark or even England, where the general rate includes the large cities.

Effect of children on death-rate.

An interesting sidelight on the apparent tendency of the country to have an increasing death-rate, year by year, is shown by the meager figures which are available on the subject of the number of small children in the different towns. The Chief Clerk in the Census Office, Mr. William S. Rossiter, has investigated the proportion of children in two rural counties of New York State, Otsego and Putnam, and has discovered the startling fact that while the population in those counties has hardly changed since 1860, the proportion of young children has decreased almost one third in the forty years ending with 1900, as shown by the following table:—

Table IV. Table showing Percentage of Children in Otsego and Putnam Counties, 1860-1900

This shows that while in 1860, when the total population was about 64,000, the number of children was about 14,000 or 22.5 per cent, in 1900, when the total population was 62,462 or nearly the same, the number of children was only 9453, or a reduction in numbers of nearly 5000 children. In many of the small cities of New York State, the fact that there is a constantly decreasing number of children in the community is well recognized, the greater proportion of the population being past middle life. The death-rate, therefore, is lower, from this very fact.

Death-rates of children.

That the general death-rate is directly affected by the number of children living in a community is shown by the following table:—

Table V. Showing Deaths from all Causes in the United States for the Years 1901-1905, at Various Age Periods

This table shows two things: first, that children have a hard time reaching five years, as nearly one third of all the children born in any year die under five years, and second, that from five to twenty years is the healthiest—that is, safest—time of a person's life, since after twenty the constitutional diseases make themselves felt so that death becomes almost uniformly distributed from twenty to eighty. It is plain, then, that in any community a change in the relative proportion of children born in any year would change the death-rate, since with a smaller number of infants there could not be so many to die.

No statistics are available to determine the number of small children in the country as compared with that in the city, but it is probable that they are in excess in the latter, since the highest birth-rates are found in the congested districts of cities where foreigners congregate. If this is so, it will account for and justify a higher rate of death in the city because of the larger number of children, as has been explained above, and the lower rate in the country may be due, not to better sanitary surroundings, but solely to fewer children.

According to statistics, the death-rate of children is almost 50 per cent higher in cities than in rural districts, and it is a general impression that most deaths in the country are from old age. English statistics show, however, and those of the United States would probably show the same thing, that while a baby born in the city is more likely to die before its first birthday than a baby born in the country, they have equal chances to finish a month of life and that the city child has better chances to live out the first week. The advantages of the country, therefore, do not begin to operate until after the first month of the baby's life, and there is a decidedly greater chance of the child's living in the city the first week on account, probably, of better and quicker medical attendance.

Typhoid fever and the death-rate.

Turning now to special diseases and comparing the number of deaths caused by special diseases in the country and in the city, it is to be noted, first of all, that a greater difference exists in the case of certain special diseases in the country and in the city than was found in the general death-rate. In the case of typhoid fever, basing the comparison on the statistics of the Census Office of the United States, we find, first, that, at present, the difference in the death-rates from typhoid fever in cities and in rural districts is very small. It is also to be seen (from the following table) that in both city and in rural districts, the rate is steadily decreasing, although in neither has the rate yet fallen to what would, in other countries, be considered a reasonable and proper death-rate. The first line of the table is the actual death-rate from typhoid fever per 100,000 population, based on the total population resident in all the United States where vital statistics are kept; the second line gives the same data for cities not included in registration states;[1] the third line is based on figures for cities in registration states;[**] and the fourth line is based on the statistics for rural districts and villages of less than 8000 population:—

Table VI. Showing Death-rates per 100,000 Population from Typhoid Fever in Places Indicated

This table shows that, taking the United States as a whole, the typhoid-rate in rural districts is generally less than in cities and that in cities the rate is excessively high.

When it is remembered that by filtration of public water-supplies the typhoid-rate may be brought down to about 15 per 100,000, and that cities with pure water-supplies will not exceed that rate, it is plain how serious is the danger from typhoid in such cities as Cohoes or Oswego. The following table from statistics taken in New York State shows the same conditions as Table VI.—

Table VII. Showing Death-rates from Typhoid Fever per 100,000 Population in New York State as Indicated

The first line is the death-rate in cities, found by taking the ratio of all the deaths from typhoid in cities to the population in those cities, and the second line is a similar ratio for rural districts. If the actual rates of the several cities be averaged, a method which has the effect of giving the rate found for a city of 10,000 equal value in the average with one of 1,000,000, the third line of the table is obtained; and in the same way, by averaging the death-rates of the counties of the state, excluding cities, the fourth line is obtained. These last two lines show that the average of the city rates is noticeably higher than the average of the rural rates, and that, while since 1900 the average of the rural districts has remained uniform, the death-rate in cities has been continually decreasing.

It is, then, not fair to say, despite frequent but careless statements by writers on typhoid fever, that this disease is a country disease, and that it is transmitted to the city by the vacationist who finds the disease lurking in the waters of the farm well. Some years ago it was pointed out that the period of maximum development of typhoid fever is in the fall, and the conclusion was drawn that the disease was particularly prevalent then because that season is the end of the vacation period. That this is not true, or at any rate not entirely true, may be seen from the consideration of two facts, viz. first, that the death-rate in the country districts is low compared with the rates in cities, and second, that those stricken with the disease on their return to the city are quite as apt to have traveled through other cities and to have taken water from other places than farm wells.

Typhoid in small cities.

As a matter of fact, the greatest danger from typhoid fever is neither in the country nor the large city, but in the village or small city. Here the growth and congestion of population has made necessary the introduction of a water-supply, and in many cases this has not been supplemented by the construction of a sewerage system. The ground becomes saturated with filth, percolating, in many cases, into wells not yet abandoned, and the introduction of the typhoid germ brought in from outside is all that is needed to start a widespread epidemic.

Table VIII. Mortality from Typhoid Fever in the Cities of New York State, showing Total Deaths from Typhoid Fever and Deaths per 100,000 Population

Another reason for the prevalence of this disease in small cities is that the organization of their health boards is much less effective than that of larger cities. Individuals have not yet learned to sacrifice their own wishes for the sake of the community, and the local health officer, however much he may desire to do his duty, is not upheld by public opinion, and is therefore powerless.

In order to show the condition existing in the small cities of the state of New York, the preceding table has been prepared, showing the average death-rate for the cities of the state for the past ten years, excluding, however, the cities of New York, Buffalo, Rochester, and Syracuse, all of which have well-organized health boards, and where no epidemic of typhoid fever may be expected. Remembering that a rate of 15 per 100,000 is a normal rate, it will be easily seen how excessive is the amount of typhoid fever in most of the cities of New York State.

Table IX. Showing Deaths from Tuberculosis per 100,000 Population in the United States

Tuberculosis death-rate.

Turning now to tuberculosis, the death-rate in cities is very markedly higher than in rural districts, and the superiority of the country as a place to live is hereby plainly demonstrated. The preceding table shows the death rate from tuberculosis in cities for the years 1903-1907, the data being taken from the United States Census Reports.

The death-rate in the cities is evidently about 60 per 100,000 greater than in the rural districts, due, of course, to the crowding in city tenements. This is true for nearly all cities, although the difference is more marked in some parts of the country than in others. In Massachusetts, for example, the death-rate in rural districts is slightly higher than the death-rate in cities, but tuberculosis is much more prevalent in that state than in any other part of the country. In New York State the rate in cities is about 70 per 100,000 greater than in rural districts, due, presumably, to the larger number of manufacturing centers in this state. In New York City the rate is constantly more than 200, and in 1908 in the borough of the Bronx it was nearly 500.

Diphtheria as affecting the rate.

Diphtheria is another disease that exacts heavier toll from the cities than from the country, about three times as many deaths occurring in the former as in the latter.

Influenza, and its effect on death-rate.

Influenza is, on the other hand, markedly severe on people in rural districts, the death-rate there being more than twice as high as in the cities. It is easy to see why this is. Lack of sidewalks, lack of protection, lack of uniform temperature in the houses, and the lack of care in the first stages of illness, all tend to increase the death-rate from this disease.

Pneumonia.

The death-rate from pneumonia, on the other hand, is higher in the city, the vitality and power of resistance of victims probably being reduced under average city conditions.

Other diseases.

Diseases that are induced by water, all referred to under typhoid fever, but extending into such complaints as diarrhoea and enteritis, are much more severe in cities than in the country. Such an excess of general intestinal diseases shows again that a polluted water-supply is not peculiar to the country, but is responsible for an excessive death-rate in the city. Most of the constitutional diseases also have higher death-rates in the city than in the country. Bright's disease, for example, for the five years 1903-1907, had an average rate in cities of 107.3 per 100,000, while for the same five years in the rural districts the rate was only 68.6.

Old age and the death-rate.

Further showing the advantage of country life, it is to be noted that the number of deaths from old age in rural districts is nearly double that in cities. For example, in the same period already referred to the death-rate in cities of persons over sixty was 27.6, while in the rural districts, for the same period, it was 49.3,—nearly double.

The need for attention to rural hygiene.

One must conclude, therefore, that the chances of living are increased through residence in the country or in rural districts, and one is therefore led to ask why, if conditions there are superior to those in the city, is it necessary to deal with the question of rural hygiene, and why attempt to improve conditions which are already evidently superior to those in cities. The answer to this must lie in the statement that the death-rate does not tell the whole story of public health. So far as the real welfare of a community is concerned, the standard should be that of the efficiency of the lives in the different age periods rather than the length of those periods. By efficiency in such a connection is meant not merely a life that is free enough from disease to permit the full number of working days in the year, and the full number of years in the man's life usually devoted to toil, or all together a life that contributes something of value to the world, whether produce from the farm or books evolved from the brain; but efficiency here means that composite development of the whole man—body, mind, and spirit—which we believe must have been intended when man was created with this threefold nature. It is in this composite development that those living in the country are sadly lacking in efficiency.

Not to the same extent as twenty-five years ago, but still too often is the farmer so exhausted by bodily toil that he has left no strength for the cultivation of either mind or spirit. For the brief period of spring and summer, the good farmer in the Eastern States works himself harder than any slave of old. Up with the sun, or earlier, he follows through the long day the hardest kind of manual labor. When the end of the day comes, after fifteen hours' physical strain, his weary body demands sleep, and no vitality is left for mental improvement. In the winter, on the other hand, a lack of exercise is enforced, and the resulting interference with normal functions is so great that he lives the winter through in a sort of hibernation. He is nearly poisoned by lack of ventilation in the small living room, where the one stove makes living possible; he gets fat and indolent, and then with relaxed muscles plunges into furious labor again when spring comes round.

"No wonder," says Woods Hutchinson, "that by forty-five he has had a sunstroke and 'can't stand the heat' or has a 'weak back' or his 'heart gives out' or a chill 'makes him rheumatic.'" Such a life is not efficient any more than a steam engine is efficient when half the time it is run at such high speed that it tends to shake itself to pieces and the other half of the time it stands idle. Nor are the conditions under which farmers' wives live any better. Statistics show that the highest percentage of insanity in any class of persons in the United States (due chiefly to overwork, overworry, and lack of proper amusements and recreation) is to be found among farmers' wives.

An ideal life is not one which merely rounds out the allotted span, but one which, during that span, is measurably free from ailments and disabilities and in a condition to claim a share in the joy of living which belongs to every human being by reason of his existence. Such lives, to be sure, are seldom found, and no system of statistics yet devised has been able to take account of those ailments. Insurance companies, which make good losses for inability to work and which return the cost of medicines and doctors' bills, give the only information on the subject. From these, it has been shown that for each death in a community there are a little more than two years of illness. Or, expressed differently, for every death occurring in a village, there are two persons constantly ill during the year. Or, still differently, there are, on the average, thirteen days' sickness per year for every person in a community.

It is the aim of all hygienic efforts to prevent not merely premature death, but also the inefficiency of unhealthy living, and it is the latter condition rather than the former which generally prevails in rural communities. As we have seen, the death-rates in the country, except for pneumonia, are not noticeably higher than in the city. But by minor ailments, with the resulting loss of daily efficiency, the rural communities are sadly overburdened. As Irving Fisher says in his Report on National Vitality:—

"But prevention is merely the first step in increasing the breadth of life. Life is to be broadened not only negatively by diminishing those disabilities which narrow it, but also positively by increasing the cultivation of vitality. Here we leave the realm of medicine and enter the realm of physical training.... Beyond athletic sports in turn comes mental, moral, and spiritual culture, the highest product of health cultivation. It is an encouraging sign of the times that the ecclesiastical view of the Middle Ages, which associated saintliness with sickness, has given way to modern 'muscular Christianity.'... This is but one evidence of the tendency toward the 'religion of healthymindedness' described by Professor James. Epictetus taught that no one could be the highest type of philosopher unless in exuberant health. Expressions of Emerson's and Walt Whitman's show how much their spiritual exaltation was bound up with health ideals. 'Give me health and a day,' said Emerson, 'and I will make the pomp of emperors ridiculous.' It is only when these health ideals take a deep hold that a nation can achieve its highest development. Any country which adopts such ideals as an integral part of its practical life philosophy may be expected to reach or even excel the development of the health-loving Greeks."