Nazi Science: To Use or Not to Use?

[Oliver Clozoff]

As a dedicated lover of both medicine and history, I recently came across a site that really fascinates me. PBS' NOVA put together this site about medical experiments performed by Nazi doctors and researchers on Jews and other prisoners during the '30's and '40's.

Take a look: www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/holocaust/experiside.html

The atrocious acts these doctors did to people were unimaginable. Among the worst:

~Prisoners were placed in low-pressure chambers to measure the effects of high altitude (up 68,000 feet) on human physiology to benefit Nazi pilots. Subjects' vital signs were measured as they died. The brains of some patients were dissected while they were still alive.

~Children and others were directly innoculated with the bacteria that causes tuberculosis to test a poorly conceived vaccine for the disease.

~To learn how best to revive German pilots who had ejected into freezing water, prisoners were placed in vats of freezing water for up to 5 hours at a time and then were attempted to be revived.

~To develop antibiotic treatments for German soldiers with infected war wounds, Nazi doctors wounded prisoners, innoculated the wounds with bacteria commonly found in war wounds and rubbed dirt and other irritants into the wounds.

Obviously this was among science's darkest hours. None of these experiments can be morally justified by any means of the imagination. BUT, now that the experiments have been done, the question arises: is it ethical to use the information learned from these experiments?

I can see the arguments for both sides. To use the ill-gotten data would seem to give tacit approval to the atrocious means in which it was gathered. It may encourage other unethical experiments. And not least, its use may show disrespect for the victims of the experiments and other holocaust victims.

On the other hand, though, it can be argued that although these horrible experiments were wrong and never should have been done, there is actually a lot of good science in some of these experiments (but many of the "experiments" were simply cruelty masquerading as science). Since we can't undo the consequences of these experiments, wouldn't it be better to make use of the data, so at least the victims' lives weren't totally in vain? We will never get this kind of data on human beings again. How else might we know how best to rewarm someone whose body temperature has fallen to 79 degrees?

I thought this was a fascinating site and a fascinating question, so I thought I'd share with the board. What do y'all think?

 

[Problem Child]

I don't see anything wrong with using any knowledge they might have acquired if it helps to cure people and save lives. Any good to come out of that horrible period should be used to help people today. I'm sure that the people who were used in those experiments and tortured so horribly would want some tiny measure of good to come from their deaths.






[Edited by Problem Child on 03-31-2001 at 07:26 PM]

 

[MinkSoul]

from what i've heard...

their 'experiments' were flawed so i wouldn't trust the results anyway....

 

[Weird Harold]

Re: from what i've heard...

their 'experiments' were flawed so i wouldn't trust the results anyway....

Where there is no other source of data, the data from flawed "experiments" is better than no data at all.

Knowledge gained is not evil, no matter how evil the methods used to gain it are. Repeating the "experiments" to verufy their accuracy is NOT thinkable, but the information itself is, as is the case with hypothermia, often the basis for treatment today.

 

[MinkSoul]

i thought we got most of the information on hypothermia from the Navy, from their experience in treating downed airmen...

 

[SungHi]

Sure?

I'm sure that the people who were used in those experiments and tortured so horribly would want some tiny measure of good to come from their deaths.

How easily we are sure of things. How are you sure? Have you ever been horribly tortured? or spoken to someone who has? Perhaps this means that we would like some good to come to us from their deaths. I will forego any such 'good' if it's all the same. Comparitively, a big sacrefice for me huh?

 

[SungHi]

Re: Re: from what i've heard...

Originally posted by Weird Harold Where there is no other source of data, the data from flawed "experiments" is better than no data at all.[/B]

It is? Why would that be? Give me the no data at all I think.

But more than anything, why would we ever use words like 'doctor', or 'scientist' or 'experiments' or 'data' or 'knowledge' or 'good' in a discussion of what was done to these Jews, and Catholics, and homosexuals and unknown others? Let alone why it was done. I kind of think it is so men can believe they have made sense of it. So that it doesn't frighten them so much.

 

[bluntforcemama]

As the granddaughter of a Jewish camp survivor..

I would have to say that I still think that the facts they gathered from torturing those people was atrocious, but in the end, it comes down to the past and the future. What has been done cannot be rectified. What has become of it may or may not be useful in the future. I know the medical field is in an uproar over the subject, since many of the experiments have been documented in widely used medical journals. The experiments that the nazis conducted were horrific, and I wish that they had never happened, but they did, and it's now our choice whether or not to use what we can from something that we had no control over. My grandmother told me much about it, and I don't condone using those facts for present day references in any field, but they out there, they've been published... there's nothing more to be said or done.

 

[Madame Pandora]

Hey, SungHi, if you're going to be smug, how about having a fucking idea about what you're talking about?

Just because you want to strut around defending something doesn't mean anyone else is attacking it.

No one is defending the experiments. No one is saying the prisoners ASKED to be tortured. No one is saying - "I'll bet while they were being tormented they were thinking, 'at least maybe some good will come of this'."

Hell no. They were in agony and terror and misery. No one disputes this.

How easy it is to be sanctimonious. Try thinking or expressing a viewpoint.

Ollie's question was about the DATA.

Like it or not, there will always be people who attach emotion to an issue of logic. This will always be true in cases of unspeakable horror. And it should be.

I think it's good that we HESITATE to use the data. That it makes us cringe. But, in the end, I don't think knowledge is ever wrong. And I think it is more a crime against science to NOT use the information.

The fact remains that those poor souls who were experimented on are no longer. They are far from harm and insult. And if the knowledge is there, it should be considered for all it is worth.

Ignoring something only makes society move in one direction: backward.

Just MHO

MP

 

[Problem Child]

Re: Sure?

I'm sure that the people who were used in those experiments and tortured so horribly would want some tiny measure of good to come from their deaths.

How easily we are sure of things. How are you sure? Have you ever been horribly tortured? or spoken to someone who has? Perhaps this means that we would like some good to come to us from their deaths. I will forego any such 'good' if it's all the same. Comparitively, a big sacrefice for me huh?

Gee..no I've never been tortured.

Are you trying to sound silly?

 

[Weird Harold]

It is? Why would that be? Give me the no data at all I think.

Even flawed data can give you some starting point to improve treatments.

Originally posted by MinkSoul
i thought we got most of the information on hypothermia from the Navy, from their experience in treating downed airmen...

Information on Hypothermia has come from many sources: Skiers caught in avalanches, Eskimos and other people in cold climes, downed pilots and shipwreck survivors, AND the Nazi experiments. However, only the information from the Nazi experiments tracks the process of hypothermia moment by moment, because only the Nazis (that we know of) were heartless enough to carry exposure experiments to the death of a human subject.

Not using information that exists because of the callous disregard for human life that produced it is like saying that we should not use information from airplane crashes to make planes safer, or the infromation from the Murrow Federal Building to make buildings more blast resistant.

Myst makes a very good point that the past is past, and nothing can change it. Disregarding information from any source will NOT ressurect the people who died to produce it.

 

[lazarus UK]

Most of the concentration camp science is badly flawed - whether unethical experiments which produce useless data are doubly unethical is a good question ... but the ethics aren't too much of a problem here.

The problem with the hypothermia/immersion experiments is that, by and large, they are not. The science is deeply unethical but the data is solid. The number of people used is unnecessarily high from the point of the statistics - but Himmler insisted, (he was an obsessional ), despite the suggestions it was unecessary to go further and was a bit of a waste of time ...

Sadly, the available data on hypothermia in the 1940's wasn't worth much and didn't answer the questions posed by the airforce. If it had the initial pilots wouldn't have died in the first place ...

(see the Nuremberg transcripts - "Documents in Evidence" volume - about vol 24, I think)

On evidence-based lines, it directly influenced the design of Luftwaffe life jackets and presumably saved lives ... research was comissioned by the airforce.

All fairly messy from the ethical standpoint.

Just to add one bright note however, Dr Raasche who was in charge was shot by the SS near the end of the war - the two alternative explanations as to why are a) fiddling his expenses and b) falsifying data.

 

[doctor_insanus]

Just an opinion here.

I think this whole episode should be used more as a display of man's inhumanity than as genuine scientific data.

The words "Never Again" have been tossed around when the Holocaust is remembered. However, the fact is that this kind of cruelty still exists in the darker corners of our world. Perhaps not so calculated, but no less heinous.

These people should be remembered. They were the innocent victims of a sick regime. Human nature suggests that they won't be the last. It's just a matter of time.

 

[Madame Pandora]

These people should be remembered. They were the innocent victims of a sick regime. Human nature suggests that they won't be the last. It's just a matter of time.

Well, I can't predict the future, nor will I try to. Certainly, there are things conducted in parts of the world (as well as by our own government) that defy humanity.

But, where exactly are you living? The holocaust needs to be remembered? WHO has forgotten?

What belittles horror is when people turn it into a cliché.

"Oh, that was so awful" (heads nod in agreement)

OF COURSE IT WAS TERRIBLE. IT WAS BEYOND MOST OF OUR UNDERSTANDING.

So let me say again. No one - least of all Dr. Oliver was ever suggesting for a moment that we belittle the horror of this terrible time in history. All he was suggesting was that - if there was significant data - should it be incorporated into modern science?

It's easy to say "the holocaust was terrible." Well, Duh.

MP

 

[doctor_insanus]

These people should be remembered. They were the innocent victims of a sick regime. Human nature suggests that they won't be the last. It's just a matter of time.

Well, I can't predict the future, nor will I try to. Certainly, there are things conducted in parts of the world (as well as by our own government) that defy humanity.

But, where exactly are you living? The holocaust needs to be remembered? WHO has forgotten?

What belittles horror is when people turn it into a cliché.

"Oh, that was so awful" (heads nod in agreement)

OF COURSE IT WAS TERRIBLE. IT WAS BEYOND MOST OF OUR UNDERSTANDING.

So let me say again. No one - least of all Dr. Oliver was ever suggesting for a moment that we belittle the horror of this terrible time in history. All he was suggesting was that - if there was significant data - should it be incorporated into modern science?

It's easy to say "the holocaust was terrible." Well, Duh.

MP

No argument there. However, I think there is a surprising number of people out there who either simply ignore what happened in Europe during that period, or deny it altogether. Certainly not the general population, but a growing minority.

And to simply say that they're a bunch of lunatics is somewhat short-sighted. After all, the Nazis themselves began as an obscure faction. At the risk of sounding confrontational, where are YOU living?

I'm not suggesting Oliver was belittling it at all. As I said, it was an opinion. Take it or leave it. You, apparently, have decided to leave it. No problem.

[Edited by doctor_insanus on 04-01-2001 at 06:19 AM]

 

[Cheyenne]

But, where exactly are you living? The holocaust needs to be remembered? WHO has forgotten?

There are people in the world who don't believe the holocaust ever happened. Crazy people, yes. But they really and truly think no such thing ever happened and it is all a conspiracy to make the world think that it did. I didn't do a search to get sources for you, but I have read various articles over the years about these nuts.

To deny the deaths ever happened seems much worse to me than using the medical information from the experiments.

 

[BrainyBeauty]

Oliver, thanks for introducing this topic. It is certainly a departure from the norm.

As a lover of medicine and history, you no doubt recognize the danger in trying to bridge the gap between the two. Not to say that the two are mutually exclusive. I am fairly certain that the medical schools still teach you to "First, do no harm." I presume that they also still instruct and reiterate the importance of accepting valid data.

The basic tenet of science is validation. In order to validate, an experiment must stand up to the rigors of replication. Again and again, over time. Science demands proof.

Naturally, no one condones the means to the end in the case of the Nazi "experiments". Some may argue that these were not experiments at all. These doctors violated the oath they took and inflicted great harm. They were merely exercises in sadistic and cruel evil. The impetus being, not for the good of all mankind or future scientific conclusions, but, rather, hatred. Prejudice against all non-Aryans. The false conceit of superiority and the absolute power to back that up are what spurred these undertakings. That it was not limited to one or two madmen is disheartening.

Many have spoken to the fact that this type of behavior is part of the human condition. I agree. Our own government has indeed undertaken equally barbaric studies - subjecting 'patients' to radiation to observe the effects. Read any anecdotal evidence from ANY war or hot spot around the world and you will find evidence of unimaginable cruelties. Whether under the guise of "science"; national security or any other excuse, these things do happen. Much of it is too gruesome to describe here.

You (and the folks from NOVA) have posed a serious question. Should we ignore the way in which the data were collected and use the information for our benefit now? I am truly torn as to my response. As a scientist, I try to rely on hard facts. Of course, these are not experiments that anyone could possibly advocate as possible for replication. Any one with an ethical compass would resist. Perhaps a computer model could be set up to test the theories.

But, as other respondents have suggested, it may not be unthinkable to use the data since it is "already there". That seems, on the surface, a reasonable approach. However, the fact remains, scholars and scientists from around the world have disputed and called into question the results. This is nothing new, either. These ethical questions have been tossed around for 56 years.

My concerns are with the few remaining victims and their descendants. How to justify to them publishing material or even discussing it without glorifying it or giving it credence is indeed a sticky wicket. I think we need to take into consideration their feelings in addition to the benefits to science.

So, while the ends do not justify the means in this subject area, the fact remains that someone, somewhere will cross the line and use the information to their own advantage.

Science is not easily contained. Greed and pride may seem foreign concept to the public in terms of the lab geeks. But, it is a hotbed of egos! Keep in mind that the first to discover or publish something is rewarded greatly. If you followed the race to uncover the entire human genome code, you saw it came down to a horse race between 2 groups. It will only get more adversarial now as companies and individuals compete to come up with new technologies, drugs and treatments.

Look at cloning - the scientific community all agreed that they would never cross the line and apply this to human beings. Ha! There is a doctor in Kentucky right now who testified in front of congress last week in an attempt to secure permission to conduct cloning experiments for infertile couples. No, you cannot impede or arrest the 'progress' or forward march of science.

But you can learn from the past. And you can best learn from talking about it.

 

[Madame Pandora]

*sigh*

I'm sorry, Ollie. I've gone and ruined your perfectly good thread with my special brand of hostility.

Since it's too late to stop now, I'm going to continue.

doctor_insanus - Yes, it is your opinion. I never said you weren't welcome to it. My problem was you stated the obvious and didn't weigh in on the issue. It is like asking "Should the descendants of slave owners be compensated for the crimes against their ancestors?" and you answering "Slavery is wrong." Again - DUH. And I think you're grossly exaggerating the number of people who deny or ignore the holocaust. Yes, there are some people who say it never happened. There are also people who say that dinosaur skeletons are planted by scientists as a conspiracy to debunk Genesis. You can't base your philosophies on a few nutjobs. Well, you can, but why would you?

And *I* never said that all the Nazis were lunatics. Yes, that is very short-sighted. I maintain that one of the unfathomable horrors of that particular black patch in human history is that ordinary people fell in line behind an “evil” empire. The process of their assimilation, together with the atrocities committed - that is the equation that echoes the true horror. The heinous acts themselves are one thing, but that they happened in tandem with a nation of compliance...that is what most people cannot get their heads around.

In the future, please don't put words in my mouth. I have plenty, thank you.

Cheyenne - See above re: Dinosaurs. Yes there are nutcases who deny the mass murdering of the Jews. Stack that number up against the overall belief of the modern world. The number is so small it would barely register, despite Geraldo's fascination with their little clan.

The question is: should medical and scientific knowledge gained through immoral resources be examined and considered for prosperity? (Sorry to paraphrase, Ollie).

Yes, there are issues of validity here. Yes, there are moral issues here. But no one is debating the horror of the holocaust. It's not the issue.

MP

 

[Juspar Emvan]

OK, so I'm the grandson (no I'm not really this is just an illustration) of a simle Jewish Polack who was tortured and murdered by the Nazi's in their so called 'experiements'. I fall through the ice on the river one winter and am hauled out just short of death. A local doctor has read information about the hypothermia experiments, but believes that the information may be flawed. However he has no other starting point for my treatment.

I ask you:
1. What do I want at that point? No don't use your knowledge to save me as I loath it's source? I don't think so.
2. What would pop have wanted? Let my grandson die, that will teach those bastard Aryians? I don't think so.
3. What is the doctor thinking? The information I have may save this young mans life, but it could be wrong so I wont even try? I don't think so.








Flame away

 

[lazarus UK]

3. What is the doctor thinking? The information I have may save this young mans life, but it could be wrong so I wont even try? I don't think so.
[/B]

OK, let's try this one:

I meet the criteria and I've read the research ...

We pull you out of the water and put you in a sleeping bag:

Who do you really want in the sleeping bag with you?
a) two women
b) one woman
c) one man
d) one woman who has sex with you
e) no-one, you'll get warm by yourself

d) is most effective, followed by c), b), a)

e) you may well die

c) & b) are the current approved rescue techniques -
d)is up to her

Original research: Raasche, Dachau 1942

 

[Juspar Emvan]

I'm sorry to do this to such a serious issue, but I have to ask. What about a combination of a) and d)?

 

[lazarus UK]

I think it rips the sleeping bag ...

Not cuddly enough anyway

 

[Problem Child]

OK, so I'm the grandson (no I'm not really this is just an illustration) of a simle Jewish Polack who was tortured and murdered by the Nazi's in their so called 'experiements'. I fall through the ice on the river one winter and am hauled out just short of death. A local doctor has read information about the hypothermia experiments, but believes that the information may be flawed. However he has no other starting point for my treatment.

I ask you:
1. What do I want at that point? No don't use your knowledge to save me as I loath it's source? I don't think so.
2. What would pop have wanted? Let my grandson die, that will teach those bastard Aryians? I don't think so.
3. What is the doctor thinking? The information I have may save this young mans life, but it could be wrong so I wont even try? I don't think so.
Flame away

Argument over. Thanks Juspar.

 

[Gingersnap]

It is obvious to me that those experiements were excuses for sadistical ways to torture and kill. Nova is being naive if they think it is about anything else. The data is forever suspect because hate not the quest or knowlege drove it. Besides we must really ask ourselves some questions first.

What knowlege was gleaned from that descent into hatred and hell? I think there is more to be gained by examining the thought process that allowed this obscenity to occur. Did it start with the intellectualization of horror? The desensitatization of the youth to violence. The insidious loss of concsience? The indifference to suffering?

I say we look at the body of information and use it to stop the current attempts at genocide. The morally decayed and pyschotic have lessons to teach us.

 

[MinkSoul]

my question is...

with all the experience and knowledge we have gained in "Modern Medicen"(sp?) do we Really need to information that was gathered over 50 years ago? did they have 12 lead EKG's then?....the capability to defib? Pacers? Atropine? Bicarb? in the 20 years i was a medic the treatment for a number of life threatening situations changed dramaticly...
....including Hypothermia....

..... are you trying to tell me we haven't come up with the same (or better?) conclusions and treatments through non-tortous means in the over half century since then.....



......i find that Very hard to beleave......


.......Very Hard .........