Lessons learned from the 1896 Bombay Plague

Source: The post Lessons learned from the 1896 Bombay Plague has been created, based on the article “Public health — insights from the 1896 Bombay Plague” published in “The Hindu” on 7th December 2024

UPSC Syllabus Topic: GS Paper2- Governance-Issues relating to development and management of Social Sector/Services relating to Health,

Context: The article discusses the 1896 Bombay Plague and how colonial authorities used mapping, policing, and surveillance to control the epidemic. It highlights the shift from focusing on public health to maintaining order and examines lessons for modern public health policies, ethics, and surveillance practices.

What was the Bombay Plague and its impact on Colonial India?

1. The Bombay Plague of 1896-97 was a major epidemic in colonial India.
2. It originated in Bombay through trade with the Far East and spread across the subcontinent, killing over 370,000 people by September 1899. The outbreak exposed weaknesses in public health infrastructure.
3. The colonial government formed the Indian Plague Commission in 1898, chaired by T.R. Fraser, to study the epidemic.
4. Despite extensive investigations and five volumes of documentation, the Commission failed to determine the plague’s origins and transmission.
5. The Indian Plague Commission used maps to highlight control measures rather than disease spread. Unlike John Snow’s maps of cholera cases, these maps emphasized railway lines, inspection stations, and quarantine zones.

6. The focus was on maintaining order rather than addressing community health needs.

What role did policing play in managing the plague?

1. Policing was central to controlling the plague. The government used police to enforce quarantines, monitor movement, and collect data.
2. Observation camps near railway stations were operated by police.
3. Military ward orderlies were deployed in hospitals.
4. Chaukidars reported deaths to police stations, a practice that continues in some areas for death registration.
   5. The reliance on policing linked public health with colonial control, prioritizing order over care. The Epidemic Diseases Act, 1897, gave the state unrestrained powers, often misused.

What were the ethical implications of these measures?

1. Colonial strategies prioritized control over care, raising ethical concerns.
2. Maps and data reinforced power dynamics and overshadowed individual suffering.
3. Control measures were aimed at protecting colonial interests, not improving community health.
4. The Indian Plague Commission’s focus on control reflected a lack of transparency and respect for individual rights.

What lessons can be learned for modern public health?

The Bombay Plague provides key insights for today’s public health strategies:

1. Framing health problems: Prioritize individuals and communities over control measures.
2. Evolving surveillance: Transition from policing to health professionals for surveillance reflects ethical progress.
3. Ethical governance: Balance effective control with transparency and respect for freedoms.
4. Power dynamics: Ensure data collection methods do not reinforce inequities.
5. Continuity in practices: Practices like death reporting by police highlight lasting influences of colonial approaches.

By learning from history, policymakers can design surveillance systems that address health crises ethically and effectively.

Question for practice:

Examine how colonial strategies during the 1896 Bombay Plague influenced public health practices and their ethical implications.