No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
The blood from Auschwitz and the silence of the scholars
Abstract
The Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Anthropology, Human Genetics and Eugenics in Berlin-Dahlem was the centre of scientific racism in Nazi Germany. Its bad history culminated in a research project to analyse the molecular basis of racial differences in the susceptibility to various infectious diseases such as tuberculosis. Josef Mengele, a former postdoc of the director of the institute, Otmar von Verschuer, collected blood samples and other material in Auschwitz from families and twins of Jews and Gypsies. The blood samples were analysed by Günther Hillmann in the Berlin laboratory of Nobel Prize winner Adolf Butenandt. Butenandt had just moved to Tübingen. The project was paid for by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft. Butenandt, Hillmann and von Verschuer made scientific careers in the Federal Republic. To the present day this past has not been acknowledged by the Max-Planck-Gesellschaft as part of its history.
... Stanowiło to bezpośrednie naruszenie ustalonego prawa międzynarodowego. Podczas II wojny światowej niektóre badania wojskowe i medyczne prowadzone przez KWG były związane ze śmiertelnymi eksperymentami na testowanych osobach w obozach koncentracyjnych [5]. Wymienione fakty były przyczyną negatywnego nastawienia wojsk alianckich w kwestii dalszego istnienia i rozwoju tej instytucji po II wojnie światowej. ...
... Scientists whose research was somehow connected to the research of the Angel of Death include Verschuer, one of the world's leading human geneticists after the war, Butenandt, a pioneer of the contraceptive pill and Adolf Butenandt, whose work on sexual hormones and protein belonged to the greatest scientific breakthroughs in the 20th century (Diver, 2005;Karacs, 2001). Many of the scientists who collaborated with Mengele in his research made scientific careers in the Federal Republic of Germany after the war (Müller-Hill, 1999). ...
For centuries, the major story of enlightenment was that education is and should be the cornerstone of our society. We try to educate people to make them respectable members of society, something which we inherently relate to being "better persons", firmly believing that education makes humans less prone to evil. Today, modern research seems to validate that premise: statistics verify that more education results to less crime. But is this picture accurate and does this mean anything regarding morality per se? This paper tries to examine the facts with a more critical eye and determine whether education is indeed a source of ethics or not. The results of the analysis show that what we understand as education is not only unrelated to ethics but can also be a factor resulting in the degradation of morality in humans. Rousseau's arguments against science and arts are re-enforced with arguments stemming from other great philosophers and from modern experience itself. Using modern statistical analysis regarding the correlation of crime and education and through the examination of the modern regression in ethical issues, it becomes evident that education cannot and should not be a source of ethics. Knowing what is ethical is not as important as living an ethical life. Pharisees were the first to be denied the entrance to the kingdom of God. As Oscar Wilde once said, "Education is an admirable thing, but it is well to remember from time to time that nothing that is worth knowing can be taught".
... The "Galilee Declaration," discussed and published by the participants of the Second International Scholars Workshop on Medicine after the Holocaust in 2017, acknowledges that "[p]rofessionals from science, medicine and other healthcare and social science fields played decisive roles in justifying, developing and carrying out some of the most appalling atrocities of the Third Reich" [2]. Most medical professionals are culturally aware of Mengele's experiments in Auschwitz [3] and some other frequently discussed atrocities like the sulfonamide experiments in Ravensbrueck [4] or the freezing experiments in Dachau [5,6]. However, the specifics of the history of radiology and radiation oncology have only recently come into focus. ...
Whereas the scientific community is aware of atrocities committed by medical doctors like Mengele, the specifics of radiology and radiation oncology during National Socialism remain largely unknown. Starting in 2010, the German Radiology Association and the German Association of Radiation Oncology coordinated a national project looking into original archival material. A national committee convened in 2013 to discuss the project's findings, which were also the subject of a symposium at the University of Tuebingen in 2016 on radiology under National Socialism. The project identified approximately 160 radiologists who were victimized because of their Jewish descent, among them Gustav Bucky (known for the Bucky factor in x-ray diagnostics). Radiologists throughout Germany took part in forced sterilizations. The "Schutzstaffel," commonly known as SS, had a special radiology unit that was established for tuberculosis screening. Radiation was also used for sterilization experiments in the Auschwitz concentration camp with subsequent surgical procedures to enable histological analysis of the irradiated tissue. Reflection on medicine during the Holocaust will be strengthened by specific facts related to the respective medical field. Radiologists were involved in atrocious medical experiments as well as in supporting Nazi policies in Germany. These facts provoke ethical considerations about marginalized patient groups and doctor-patient communication. They also raise questions about "evidence-based" medicine as sole justification for medical procedures. In summary, historical studies will be able to help in the professional identity formation of radiologists gaining awareness to ethical issues of today.
... The "Galilee Declaration," discussed and published by the participants of the Second International Scholars Workshop on Medicine after the Holocaust in 2017, ac- knowledges that "[p]rofessionals from science, medicine and other healthcare and social science fields played deci- sive roles in justifying, developing and carrying out some of the most appalling atrocities of the Third Reich" [2]. Most medical professionals are culturally aware of Mengele's experiments in Auschwitz [3] and some other frequently discussed atrocities like the sulfonamide experiments in Ravensbrueck [4] or the freezing experiments in Dachau [5,6]. However, the specifics of the history of radiology and radiation oncology have only recently come into focus. ...
This final episode of a series on ‗Figurational social and cultural sciences' revisits in a special way the shortcomings of figurational scholars in explaining and applying one of their core concepts of Norbert Elias's theories, namely the concept of homo clausus self-experience. Elias' advice was to investigate whether the skin in humans is the ‗frontier' between ‗inside' and ‗outside.' Physiologist and anthropologist Hans Friedenthal had already initiated such research in the past. Discussion of his work leads to a historiography of the research work of Hermann Klaatsch, Otto Hauser, Eugen Fischer, Hans Weinert and Johan Goudsblom on ideas about human ‗naked' skin and the use and control of fire (and smoke) in anthropogenesis. The concluding paragraph about Irenäus Eibl-Eibesfeldt's research of the !Ko people actually holds up a mirror to us: we must investigate the physiogenesis of homo clausus self-experiences of contemporary people in Western European societies.
After a discussion of strong criticism made of a statement and of the work of Norbert Elias during a sociological conference in 1981 in Amsterdam, the Netherlands, it is indicated that this series of articles does not include so-called 'biologisms.' Afterwards, attention is paid to the book Anthropogenese by Anton Pannekoek with (further) hypotheses concerning 'detours' in thinking' and 'detours in action' in hominin and human behavior involved in the tool use by hominins and humans. Related to this, work by Dieter Claessens on the history of using tools is also discussed, as an introduction to Frans Veldman's hypotheses about haptic qualities of hominins and humans. For example, people can 'feel' through tools and objects that they hold in their hands, thus shifting the boundary between 'inside and outside the body' outwards, incorporating living beings and inanimate objects into their self-experiences, as it were.
At the ceremony dedicated to the 75th anniversary of Auschwitz liberation held in Yad Vashem Holocaust Commemoration Centre, Jerusalem, no complete truth about the Holocaust and Israeli state necessity, based on investigation of anti-Semitic crimes, was disclosed by any of Eurasian leaders. A careful examination of the Holocaust and foundation of the Israeli state shows that not only Germany and Nazi committed high and atrocious military and civil crimes against the Jewish people. The total Eurasian attitude towards the Jews was highly negative just before, during and after World War II. Soviet Union and Great Britain contributed most to the deferral of the Israeli state foundation. If the war had lasted longer and had ended in 1947 instead of 1945, there would not have been a single Jew in Eurasia because of mutual Eurasian aggression towards the Jewish people. Now, 75 years after, it is high time we revealed the importance of the Israeli state for Eurasian Jews and demythologize Eurasian “help” to the victims of Holocaust.
Mendelian Inheritance in Man ( MIM ), a computerized catalogue of human genetic disorders authored and maintained by cardiologist and medical genetics pioneer Victor A. McKusick, played a major part in demarcating between a novel biomedical science and the eugenic projects of racial betterment which existed prior to its emergence. Nonetheless, it built upon prior efforts to systematize genetic knowledge tied to individuals and institutions invested in eugenics. By unpacking the process of digitizing a homespun cataloguing project and charting its development into an online database, this article aims to illuminate how the institution-building efforts of one individual created an ‘information order’ for accessing genetic information that tacitly shaped the norms and priorities of the field toward the pursuit of specific genes associated with discernible genetic disorders. This was not by design, but rather arose through negotiation with the catalogue's users; it accommodated further changes as biomedical research displaced the Mendelian paradigm. While great effort was expended toward making sequence data available to investigators during the Human Genome Project, MIM was largely taken for granted as a ‘legacy system’, McKusick's own labour of love. Drawing on recent histories of biomedical data, the article suggests that the bibliographical work of curation and translation is a central feature of value production in the life sciences meriting attention in its own right.
Noma research protocol was conducted in the Auschwitz Birkernau camp by the infamous (Schutzstaffel) SS doctor Josef Mengele who was known as "the Angel of Death" in close collaboration with researchers at the Kaiser-Wilhelm Institute in Berlin Crimes. Mengele who held the post of camp doctor in the “Gypsy camp” saw an opportunity to set up a research program on gypsy children called “Nomaprojekt “. The purpose of this program was to study the causes of noma and to find treatment methods. The experimental treatment protocol consisted of administering a combination of sulfanilamido-ethyl thiodiazole and nicotinic acid. Heads and selected body parts of children suffering from noma were prepared in formaldehyde jars and sent to researchers at the prestigious Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Anthropology, Human Heredity and Eugenics in Berlin-Dahlem, but also to the SS Medical Academy in Graz to carry out further examinations. The experimental protocol for the treatment of noma among Gypsy children is one of the most horrific crimes that Dr.Josef Mengele committed in the Auschwitz camp.
The infamous SS doctor Josef Mengele was known as the Angel of Death for choosing and condemning Jews, gypsies, and other prisoners to the gas chambers at the Auschwitz-Birkenau concentration camp. Less known was his active participation in ophthalmic research with equal disregard for life and ethical principles. Mengele was not an ophthalmologist, but he worked in close collaboration and complicity with two genetic researchers at the Kaiser-Wilhelm Institute in Berlin, Karin Magnussen and Otmar Von Verschuer. The objective of the Eye Colour Protocol was to demonstrate hereditary differences in iris structure determined by race, and ostensibly to “cure” heterochromia. Mengele sent heterochromous Gypsy eyes to Magnussen, extracted from the bodies of inmates who died (or he killed). Mengele injected adrenaline into children’s eyes in an attempt to change eye color, and to study environmental influences. Mengele was undoubtedly influenced to conduct these human experiments by his great ambition to publish to obtain academic promotion. These ophthalmologic experiments not only solidify Mengele’s reputation as an angel of death, but also show the symbiosis that existed between the concentration camp physicians and others in the Nazi medical establishment. Ophthalmology, like all of medicine, has had its share of unethical experimentation, but none with more disregard for life and ethical principles than that of Mengele at Auschwitz
Adolf Friedrich Johann Butenandt (1903–1995) was a German biochemist who pioneered the chemistry of sex hormones and made significant contributions to insect endocrinology. For his work on sex hormones, he was awarded the 1939 Nobel Prize in Chemistry. As the director of the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute (1937–1945) respectively the Max Planck Institute (1949–1960) for Biochemistry, he was one of the formative personalities in twentieth century German life science. As long-standing president of the Max Planck Society (1960–1972), he was a pivotal figure in the reconstruction of West German science.
This article assesses critically the participation of Portuguese eugenicists in “Latin eugenics” and traces the continuities and discontinuities with respect to this model. In particular, it focuses on a number of examples of more “Germanic” eugenics in contrast and in comparison to Latin versions of eugenics. In the former category, Eusébio Tamagnini, José Ayres de Azevedo and Leopoldina Ferreira de Paulo are considered; in the latter category, especially the work of Almerindo Lessa on “racial mixing” is considered. The conclusions suggest that we should seek diversity in both Latin and northern European eugenic models while at the same time placing Portugal within the array of possible versions of eugenics during the first half of the twentieth century.
Whether the Medical Trial dealt adequately with race, eugenics and genocide has been a matter of debate. Alexander saw the experiments as driven by an annihilatory creed of race and extermination. Their aim was to induce death, and experiments on poison gas were a test bed for the Final Solution. The genocide operation required experts in physiology, statistics, public health and genetics to weed out racial undesirables.
As the 1939 Nobel Laureate and subsequent president of the Max Planck Society, Adolf Butenandt represented Germany's first-class research of his time like nobody else and received many honors during his lifetime. Yet, in recent years he has met increasingly with public criticism: he has been blamed for several things – in particular, his conduct during the National Socialist era. The most severe of these reproaches will be the issue of this essay: according to this charge, Butenandt had been at least aware of, if not actually involved in, the human experiments conducted by SS physician Josef Mengele in the Auschwitz death camp. The first suggestion for a connection between Butenandt's institute and Auschwitz was detected by molecular biologist Benno Müller-Hill. This connection consisted in a project conducted by a colleague of Butenandt, the hereditary pathologist and physical anthropologist Otmar von Verschuer, for which he received blood samples that Mengele had acquired from Auschwitz. Müller-Hill then tried to reconstruct this venture. Though universally accepted, his reconstruction leaves some questions unanswered. Therefore, this chapter will first describe the key sources for the project so as to place this project and its personnel in historical context. Subsequently, Müller-Hill's reconstruction will be described and analyzed before an alternative reconstruction is introduced. Finally, some thoughts on the evaluation of this project will be offered.
Preliminary Note What Basic Rule Defines Traits as Being Taxonomically Relevant? What is the Relevance of Differences in Genes Between Two Species? In Sticklebacks (Gasterosteus aculeatus), a Single Gene Controls Many Phenotypes What is the Relevance of Differences in Traits between Two Species? Traits that are Used by the Species to Distinguish Themselves A Species cannot be Defined by Traits What are Homologous Traits? The Vertebrate Eye and the Squid Eye: They Cannot be Homologous Nor can they be Non-Homologous The DNA Barcoding Approach – is Taxonomy Nothing more than Phylogenetic Distance?
Constructed Continuity – Manufactured Suppression: Contemporary discussion of the “zero hour” (Stunde Null) – sometime between the end of war and monetary reform – was replaced long ago by historiographic discussion of a dominating continuity, especially with regard to West German economic and science elites. On the other hand, in a 1995 article, Mitchell Ash concluded that personal continuity in the scientific community did not happen of its own accord. In fact, it was constructed with persistence and finesse in the course of the denazification of “incriminated” individuals and networks. This chapter will use this thesis to demonstrate that the associated mental procedure – in popular psychology referred to as the “repression” (“Verdrängung”) of participation in National Socialist rule, violence, and crime – was more than just an unconscious psychological process. At the same time, it was a communicative process used by the scientific elites while reconstituting their disciplines and institutions in postwar Germany. As such, it was bound to a manner of discourse that first had to be established, tested, and agreed upon; its message, however, had to be adjusted repeatedly to accommodate the changing political constellations and social contexts of the postwar era. But “repression” was not only a mental but also an active process, when scientific communities unburdened themselves of overly “incriminated” colleagues and tried to drive them out of their circles. That is, “repression” was multifaceted, a carefully and elaborately manufactured product of individuals, institutions, and networks. It was a constitutive element of the construct “continuity.”
Scientists who acceded to the demands and offers of the government of Nazi Germany.
We understand metahistory as an approach that studies how histories within a particular discipline have been written and focus on insider scientists' reconstructions of twin research. Using the concept of ethical-political affordances we suggest that such histories are based on a management of resources that prove to be beneficial for representing one's own research traditions in a positive light. Instead of discussing information on the context and intellectual life of pioneers of the twin method, which include high-caliber eugenicists and Nazi ideologues, and on how the twin method has been used and abused, insider scientists' accounts present twin research as neutral, objective and void of any kind of political connotations. We show how important leaders of German twin research have been historically managed, and how their contributions have been distorted and omitted. Reasons for historical revisionism by omission and for selectively revised accounts of the past are discussed. Suggestions for writing accounts of the twin method are included and focus on the necessity of self-reflection, considerations regarding one's own ethical-political inclinations, and review of the existing historical literature. In analyzing these connections, we attempt to understand how science, politics and history interact.
Great experiments will always be remembered. I highlight an experiment that was conducted during the Nazi regime in Germany. Not only did the experiment fail, it was also linked to fraud and crimes against humanity. This failed experiment will never be forgotten.
The goal of this review is to introduce the reader to the ideas behind the eugenic movement, its implementation, and its consequences. First, we address the work of prominent 19th century forerunners of eugenics. Second, we discuss the eugenic movement during the first half of the 20th century, and its common and differential characteristics in countries where its expression was more marked, including the US and Nazi Germany. We also discuss the eugenic movement in Sweden, whose history has remained unknown until recently. We analyze the reasoning behind forced sterilization and involuntary euthanasia. Finally, we consider the impact that past eugenics has had on the profession of psychiatry and psychiatric research, particularly genetics. We argue that the history of the 20th century eugenics movement and its leaders still require attention.
In 1959, the Arden House Conference on Tuberculosis inaugurated modern tuberculosis control strategy by declaring that curative treatment of tuberculosis is a public health obligation. In the decades after the conference, tuberculosis rates decreased more slowly than forecast, perhaps because chemotherapy had less impact than anticipated, or because the conference's recommendations were not implemented fully until 30 years later, when an epidemic resurgence jolted the country out of complacency. Since 1959, several broad issues have gained prominence after being overlooked or unexpected at the time of the Arden House Conference. These include tuberculosis outbreaks, contact investigations, treatment of latent Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection, briefer treatment regimens, human immunodeficiency virus infection, bacteriology laboratory capabilities, and transnational migration. Trends and experience have shown that tuberculosis elimination in the United States will be unfeasible until both technological advances and social justice allow control systems to be applied throughout the world.
Genetic factors may affect the susceptibility to tuberculosis, but no specific genes governing susceptibility have been identified. In mice, natural resistance to infection with some mycobacteria is influenced by the gene for natural-resistance-associated macrophage protein 1 (Nramp1), but the role of the human homologue of this gene, NRAMP1, in tuberculosis is unknown. We typed polymorphisms in NRAMP1 in a case-control study of tuberculosis in the Gambia, West Africa.
Sequence-specific oligonucleotide hybridization and microsatellite analysis were used to type NRAMP1 polymorphisms in 410 adults (mean age, 34.7 years) with smear-positive pulmonary tuberculosis and 417 ethnically matched, healthy controls. Patients with human immunodeficiency virus infection were excluded.
Four NRAMP1 polymorphisms were each significantly associated with tuberculosis. Subjects who were heterozygous for two NRAMP1 polymorphisms in intron 4 and the 3' untranslated region of the gene were particularly overrepresented among those with tuberculosis, as compared with those with the most common NRAMP1 genotype (odds ratio, 4.07; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.86 to 9.12; chi-square= 14.58; P<0.001).
Genetic variation in NRAMP1 affects susceptibility to tuberculosis in West Africans.
Earlier this century, the German biochemist Emil Abderhalden deceived
the scientific world with his spurious `defence enzymes'. Unless there
is a change in clinical thinking, such a fraud could happen again.
The fast growth and flourishing of science and technology in a vacuum of values was instrumental in organizing the various
genocide programmes in Nazi Germany. This use of science and scientists for both ideological and practical goals has been
overlooked by most observers including the scientists themselves. Some reasons for this are discussed herein