esult from habits of unhealthy
living.

FOOTNOTES:

[12] Serviceable guides to personal habits of health are _Aristocracy of
Health_ by Mary Foote Henderson, and _Efficient Life_ by Dr. Luther H.
Gulick.

CHAPTER XXIII

INDUSTRIAL HYGIENE

To call the movement for better factory conditions the "humanizing of
industry" implies that modern industry not influenced by that movement
is brutalized. The brutalizing of industry was due chiefly to a general
ignorance of health laws,--an ignorance that registers itself clearly
and promptly in factory and mine. It is not that a man is expected to
do too much, but that too little is expected of the human body. The
present recognition of the body's right to vitality is not because the
employer's heart is growing warmer, or because competition is less
vicious, but because the precepts of hygiene are found to be practical.
Where better ventilation used to mean more windows and repair bills, it
now means greater output. Where formerly a comfortable place in which
to eat lunch meant giving up a workroom and its profits, it now means
25 per cent more work done in all workrooms during the afternoon. The
general enlightenment as to industrial hygiene has been accelerated by
the awakening that always follows industrial catastrophes, by the
splendid crusade against tuberculosis, and by compulsory notification
and treatment of communicable diseases.

Catastrophes, however, have dominated the vocabulary that describes
factory "welfare work." Because accidents such as gas in mines, fire in
factories, fever in towns, and epidemics of diseases incident to
certain trades were beyond the power of the workers themselves to
control or prevent, wage earners have come to be looked upon as
helpless victims of the cupidity and inhumanity of their employers.
This attitude has weakened the usefulness of many bodies organized to
promote industrial hygiene. Although the term "industrial hygiene" is
broad enough to include all sanitary and hygienic conditions that
surround the worker while at work, it is restricted by some to the
efforts made by altruistic or farsighted employers in the interest of
employees; others think of prohibitions and mandates, in the name of
the state, that either prevent certain evils or compel certain
benefits; for too few it refers to what the wage earner does for
himself.

Pity for the employee has caused the motive power of the employee to be
wastefully allowed