[Skip to Navigation]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
JAMA 100 Years Ago
June 28, 2006


Author Affiliations

JAMA 100 Years Ago Section Editor: Jennifer Reiling, Assistant Editor.

JAMA. 2006;295(24):2937. doi:10.1001/jama.295.24.2937-a

Every one is familiar with the statements regarding the astonishingly low mortality in Chicago, and we are not venturing to criticize their accuracy. We are ready to admit that it is becoming increasingly difficult for people at any age to die in that fortunate city, and that stockyard odors, dirty streets, inadequate sanitary inspection and even impure foods are powerless in the face of the life-giving forces of the climate of Chicago. It is only when an attempt is made to explain the causes of this victory over the common enemy of mankind that we are apt to raise a slight protest. For instance, we are informed by the Bulletin of the Health Department that the sobriquet, “Windy City” is one that Chicagoans should be proud to bear, for “it is to the great wind movement of their city that it largely owes its pre-eminent healthfulness.” The bulletin goes on to quote Prof. E. G. Dexter, of the University of Illinois, who, in a recent work, made the statement that such “phenomena” as “absence from school, absence from public duty, clerical errors, sickness and death” are more frequent in periods of aerial stagnation than in those of high winds.