At Wolverhampton Dr. Badger reports that, out of 131 cases, malnutrition is due to the influence or reaction of disease, convalescence from recent disease, or defective heredity in 64; to pampering in 4; to excessive growth in 1; to overwork and insufficient sleep in 11; to ignorance and poverty in 25; while in 26 cases there was strong evidence of neglect, dirt or drink.[470] In his opinion, an opinion based upon a comparison of the clothing and footgear of the malnourished and normal children, "the malnutrition of the scholars examined was not primarily due to poverty."[471] This, as Sir George Newman points out, "may well have been the case, but the fact that the examinations were 'routine' in character, when the children are apt to be specially dressed and boots even borrowed for the occasion, makes this particular item, unless subjected to further analysis, of little or no value as a criterion in forming a judgment as to the relation of poverty to the malnutrition."[472] Footnote 470: Report of the School Medical Officer for Wolverhampton for 1911, p. 28. Footnote 471: _Ibid._, p. 32. Footnote 472: Report of the Chief Medical Officer of the Board of Education for 1911, p. 25. Other School Medical Officers are of the same opinion as Dr. Badger. At Congleton the School Medical Officer visited the homes of a considerable number of children whose nutrition was defective, with a view to ascertaining the cause of their condition. He found that "actual poverty of the parents and inability to provide food was comparatively rare, that neglect was common, and unsuitable food probably the most frequent cause."[473] At Hornsey in the majority of cases "some definite ailment was apparent to explain, at least partially, the condition. There were very few instances in which it could be certainly stated that insufficiency of food was the sole cause."[474] At Manchester "the vast majority" of children whose nutrition was medium "and many of those who were poorly nourished were not in this condition through want of food.... Each year's work adds to the evidence that poverty is not responsible for more than about 50 per cent. of the cases."[475] On the other hand, the School Medical Officer for Kidderminster reports, "I find that the better condition of trade and employment in the town was reflected in the improved nutrition of the children.... This also tends to show that the majority of cases of defective nutrition arise, not from carelessness and inattention on the part of the parents, but from inability on their part to provide the children with sufficient nourishment owing to want of means."[476] Footnote 473: Report of the School Medical Officer for Congleton for 1911, p. 4. Footnote 474: Report of the School Medical Officer for Hornsey for 1911, p. 14. Footnote 475: Report of the School Medical Officer for 1911, in Report of the Manchester Education Committee, 1910-11, p. 242. Footnote 476: