The Membrane Filter: A Teaching Aid to Supplement the Filmstrip

Issued jointly by the Division of Water Supply and Pollution Control and the Communicable Disease Center

Pictorial keys, arthropods, reptiles, birds, and mammals of public health significance

Introduction -- General -- Crustacea -- Centipedes -- Millipedes -- Arachnida -- Spiders -- Scorpions -- Acarina -- Ticks -- Mites -- Silverfish -- Collembola -- Cockroaches -- Termites -- Earwigs -- Psocids -- Lice (Anoplura) -- Lice (Mallophaga) -- Bugs -- Lepidoptera -- Beetles -- Hymenoptera -- Flies -- Mosquitoes -- Fleas -- Snakes -- Birds -- Rodents -- Lagomorphs -- Bats -- Selected referencesU.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public Health Service, Communicable Disease Center.Cover title: Pictorial keys, arthropods, reptiles, birds and mammals of public health significance.Also available via the World Wide Web as an Acrobat .pdf file.Includes bibliographical references (p. 187-192)

Key to Anoplura of North America

Key to families of Anoplura \ue2\u20ac\u201c Key to families of Echinophthiriidae \ue2\u20ac\u201c Key to families of Antarctophthirus \ue2\u20ac\u201c Key to genera of Haemotopinidae \ue2\u20ac\u201c Guide to species of Haematopinus -- Key to genera of Hoplopleuridae \ue2\u20ac\u201c Key to species of Enderleinellus -- Key to species of Fahrenholzia -- Key to species of Hoplopleura -- Key to species of Haemodipsus -- Key to species of Neohaematopinus -- Key to species of Polyplax -- Key to genera of Linognathidae -- Key to species of Linognathus -- Key to species of Solenopotes -- Key to genera of PediculidaeChester J. Stojanovich and Harry D. Pratt."4 October 1965."Selected references (p. 24)

Pictorial keys, arthropods, reptiles, birds, and mammals of public health significance

Introduction -- General -- Crustacea -- Centipedes -- Millipedes -- Arachnida -- Spiders -- Scorpions -- Acarina -- Ticks -- Mites -- Silverfish -- Collembola -- Cockroaches -- Termites -- Earwigs -- Psocids -- Lice (Anoplura) -- Lice (Mallophaga) -- Bugs -- Lepidoptera -- Beetles -- Hymenoptera -- Flies -- Mosquitoes -- Fleas -- Snakes -- Birds -- Rodents -- Lagomorphs -- Bats -- Selected referencesU.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public Health Service, Communicable Disease Center.Cover title: Pictorial keys, arthropods, reptiles, birds and mammals of public health significance.Includes bibliographical references (p. 187-192)

Isolation techniques for use in hospitals

Five colored signs (inserted) indicating categories of isolation for posting in hospital areas.Bibliography: p. viii

Lice of public health importance and their control

Introduction -- Lice and history -- Epidemic typhus -- Trench fever -- Relapsing fevers -- General biology of sucking lice -- Biology and habits of the head and body louse -- Biology and habits of the crab louse -- Control of head, body, and crab lice -- How may lice be avoided -- Sucking lice infesting domestic rats -- Films dealing with lice and their control -- Selected referencesHarry D. Pratt and Kent S. Littitg.This publication is Part VIII of the Insect Control Series to be published by the U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public Health Service as PHS Publication No. 77

Concepts of excess mortality

"During the past influenza season, pertinent summaries and epidemiological data were published regularly in the C. D. C. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Reports. It was felt that the currentness and expanded distribution of information achieved in this manner outweighed the possibly more detailed coverage but retrospective character of standard Influenza Surveillance Summaries. The present report includes: 1) a review of the 1964-65 influenza experience in the United States; 2) an international summary; 3) laboratory discussion; and 4) a collection of pertinent special reports. Interpretations and analysis in the present report are based on data received from official health and research agencies in States and Cities of the U.S. and material, largely that published by the World Health Organization and its sister organizations, dealing with international influenza surveillance. Where direct quotations or Daraphrased reports have been printed, full credits are given; otherwise, data have been assimilated into discussion of broader topics without specific references." - p. [1]I. United States summary -- Summer-Fall 1964 -- Winter 1965 -- -- II. United States divisional notes -- -- III. International summary -- -- IV. Laboratory report ---- V. Special reports -- Epidemic investigations -- Equine influenza -- Concepts of excess mortality / Robert E. SerflingJune 7, 1965.Produced by the Communicable Disease Center, Epidemiology Branch, Statistics Section, Surveillance Section, Influenza Surveillance Unit; and Respirovirus Unit, Laboratory Branch."New Name - The reader's attention is directed to an intended expansion of content in future Influenza Surveillance Summaries suggested by the more inclusive title first being published in this issue. As the epidemiology of multitudinous respiratory viruses becomes better documented, there is growing importance in fitting them into meaningful patterns for investigation and control. While these summaries cannot presume a major role in this regard, there will undoubtedly be times and reasons for comparative discussions and specific reports of general interest to our readers."Last page consists of a listing by state of state epidemiologists."Summarized in this report is information received from State Health Departments, university investigators, virology laboratories and other pertinent sources, domestic and foreign. Much of the information is preliminary. It is intended primarily for the use of those with responsibility for disease control activities. Anyone desiring to quote this report should contact the original investigator for confirmation and interpretation." - prefac

Recommendations for influenza immunization and control in the civilian population

"Epidemics of influenza-like disease became widespread in several areas of the Eastern United States during January. The first confirmed outbreak of the season began early in the month in Robeson County in southern North Carolina. Adjacent counties in North Carolina and contiguous areas of South Carolina became progressively involved. By February 15, outbreaks of inf1uenza-like il1ness had been reported from the District of Columbia and 15 States, including North Carolina, Maryland, Virginia, Delaware, Kansas, Illinois, Georgia, Maine, Vermont, South Carolina, New York, Massachusetts, Ohio, Kentucky, and West Virginia. Influenza A2 virus had been confirmed by isolation or by serologic titer rise as the causative agent in outbreaks in the District of Columbia, North Carolina, Maryland, Kansas, New York, and at the Great Lakes Naval Training Station in Illinois. During the month of January, the pattern of spread of disease confined itself to a northerly and southerly direction along the Atlantic Seaboard. The early confirmed outbreaks in Kansas City and Chicago areas occurred in rather specialized population groups, and it was not until February that: community-wide outbreaks were seen in these areas. Figure 1 shows the distribution of outbreaks through February 15. In early February, outbreaks in West Virginia, Kentucky, and Ohio suggested the beginning of a westerly spread, which was confirmed when, by late February J large segments of Middle 'Western and South Central States became involved. By the first week of March, outbreaks of influenza-like disease had been reported from the District of Columbia and 35 States, all east of the Rocky Mountains with the exception of focal outbreaks in Montana and Arizona. Influenza A2 virus was implicated as the etiologic agent in one or more outbreaks in twelve more States including Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Iowa, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, Ohio, South Carolina, Virginia, and Wisconsin. By early March, outbreaks were subsiding in most affected areas of the East and Middle West. The pattern of epidemic spread, however, continued a westerly course, although the extensive, often state-wide, involvement which characterized earlier outbreaks on the Eastern Seaboard was not frequently observed as the epidemic moved westward. Among the Mountain States, Colorado, Idaho, and Utah reported outbreaks for the first time, and the West Coast States of Alaska and California began to experience outbreaks. In mid-March, the State of Washington reported two focal outbreaks. A small focal outbreak also occurred in Wyoming about this time. By late April, one or more outbreaks of influenza-like disease had been reported from the District of Columbia and45 States. Only the States of Florida, Hawaii, Nebraska, Nevada, and New Mexico failed to report increased incidences of this syndrome. InfluenzaA2 virus was implicated as the causative agent of one or more outbreaks in the District of Columbia and a total of 34 States, with the States of Arizona, Arkansas I California, Colorado, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Missouri, Montana, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Tennessee, I Utah, Vermont, Washington, and West Virginia, now added to the list. With the exception of the State of Alaska, where widespread community epidemics occurred during the months of March and April, the West Coast States were notable for the lack of demonstrated community involvement. The State of California represents an interesting example of this phenomenon in which the presence of influenza A2 virus was demonstrated over large areas of the State through serologic confirmation in sporadic cases, but in which outbreaks could be demonstrated largely only in institutional environments. In general, the force of the epidemic, in its capacity for large scale community involvement tended to dissipate as the epidemic moved west. Figure 2 shows the distribution of outbreaks for the epidemic as a whole. Conspicuous by its absence during this epidemic was the widespread excess secondary school absenteeism so markedly associated with the 1957 influenza A2 epidemic. This observation was, in part, confirmed by surveys of age specific attack rate in selected areas of epidemic prevalence, where a marked flattening of the attack rate curves was demonstrated in the age groups 10-19. (See Influenza Surveillance Report No. 76, page 14). For the epidemic as a whole, the only influenza agents implicated by isolation have been strains of influenza A. No isolations of influenza B strains were reported to the Influenza Surveillance Unit during the entire season. The contemporary A strains showed relation, through hemagglutination inhibition to the A2/Jap 305/57 prototype, and are clearly members of the A2 subtype. That a certain amount of .antigenic drift away from the 1957 prototype has occurred is also clearly demonstrated in reciprocal cross hemagglutination inhibition tests using both ferret and rooster immune antisera. Studies at the Respirovirus Unit, Communicable Disease Center would also indicate that this is a continuance of a drift noticed with the appearance of the A2lJap 170/62 prototype strain, in that certain contemporary U. S. isolates would appear to vary antigenical1y as much from A2lJap 170/62 as A2/ Jap 170/62 varies from A2lJap305/57. On May 27 the Surgeon General's Advisory Committee on Influenza met to consider recommendations for the coming year (See Part VII of this Influenza Surveillance Report). Of particular note was the agreement on the prediction that widespread outbreaks of influenza are not likely to occur during the coming winter season. Of further note was the decision to change the current civilian polyvalent vaccine from a four-strain to a six-strain material-with the addition of one more contemporary strain each of A2 and B. The total CCA unitage of the new vaccine will be 600 instead of the current 500, the total CCA unitage of the combined A2components remaining, as before, at 200, and the total unitage of the B components being increased by 100. Also of interest was the increased disparity between the composition of the military vaccine (continuing the old four-strain 1000 CCA unit/ml composition for the coming season) and the new civilian vaccine. The decision to incorporate a new A2 strain into the civilian vaccine, though the new AZ/Jap 170/62 prototype reflects only variation within the subtype and not a major antigenic shift, would seem to reflect an underlying assumption that variations within a subtype may affect vaccine efficacy. During the season there were few adequate studies of vaccine efficacy. However, studies, to be described later in this report, would tend to question the efficacy of the current vaccine in the specific populations considered. One of the studies, in particular, poses the question of whether influenza vaccine induced H. I. antibody is related to vaccine protection. Pneumonia-influenza deaths in the 108 cities first exceeded the epidemic threshold in early January and reached a peak during the week ending March 16. Deaths fell to below threshold levels during the week ending April 13 and have remained so to the present." - p. [1]-5I. Summary -- II. Epidemic reports -- III. International summary -- IV. Special reports -- V. Laboratory report -- VI. Pneumonia influenza mortality -- VII. Surgeon General's Advisory Committee on Influenza: Recommendations for influenza immunization and control in the civilian populationJune 14, 1963.Produced by the Communicable Disease Center Epidemiology Branch Influenza Surveillance Unit.Section II called also: Influenza, United States-winter 1961-1962"Summarized in this report is information received from State Health Departments, university investigators, virology laboratories and other pertinent sources, domestic and foreign. Much of the information is preliminary. It is intended primarily for the use of those with responsibility for disease control activities. Anyone desiring to quote this report should contact the original investigator for confirmation and interpretation." - prefac

Bats

March 1969

The Aedes aegypti Eradication Program

Introduction -- History -- -- How the program works -- Organization -- Field operations -- Working with the community -- -- The program thus far -- Special problems -- Research.Two years ago the Public Health Service began a program to eradicate Aedes aegypti (the yellow fever mosquito) from all the still-infested areas under United States responsibility. This mosquito is notorious as a vector of human diseases: of yellow fever, historically one of the most dreaded pestilential diseases; of dengue fever, often called "breakbone fever" because of the pain its victims suffer; and of other hemorrhagic fevers, for example, a severe new type now epidemic in the Orient and moving slowly westward. Here is the story, briefly, of why this mosquito must be eradicated, of how the eradication program works, and of what has been done thus far