HISTARCH Archives

HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY

HISTARCH@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
"David L. Browman" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 19 Feb 2003 11:11:35 -0600
Content-Type:
TEXT/PLAIN
Parts/Attachments:
TEXT/PLAIN (32 lines)
Carl

Regarding your question to the list about what do we know about longevity
of infectious microbes in archaeological sites:

I'll be interested in other replies.

We worked with cholera victims in a historic cemetery in St. Louis from
the 1890s.  We asked the infectious disease folks: did we have to worry?
They said: in the usual moist conditions of the temperate zone, all such
microbes would be long since dead.  So we went ahead with abandon, as they
say.  Turns out later, however, they really had no clue, and this was just
an educated surmise.  Not very reassuring.  But none of the crew got
cholera, so I guess it was a good guess?

dave bromwan

 On Wed, 19 Feb 2003, Carl Barna
wrote:

> Just out of curiosity --
>
> Is there some period of elapsed time when bacterial concerns at privies
> become of no consequence?
>
> For example, are 100 or 200 year-old privies of no concern healthwise?
>
> Carl Barna
> Regional Historian
> Colorado State Office
>

ATOM RSS1 RSS2