Medical Experimentation on Human Subjects by Nazi Germany and Japan

by A-C. D.

A student essay from Dr. Elliot Neaman's History 210 class (historical methods - spring 1998)

Medical Experimentation under the Nazi Regime

With the invasion of American troops into Nazi concentration camps, shock reverberated throughout the world with the news of the atrocities that had taken place. The mass murdering of millions of Jews would change the view of racism for decades to come. However, a new movement was to emerge--that of the Holocaust revisionists. These so-called historical revisionists took on the challenge to revise history by disproving the Holocaust ever took place. Under the guise of scholarly studies, they put their plan into action.

At a glance, these revisionists can seem legitimate. They site sources, conflicting eyewitness testimony, and continuously manipulate numbers in their favor. However, their attempt to appear legitimate is the most dangerous of their games. They can best be compared to David Duke: the politician who relinquished his KKK robes and instead, donned the three-piece suit. Under the heading of legitimate scholar, lies the most voracious bigot whose sole existence is based on the attempt to further alienate the "inferior race"--namely the Jew.

Those who understand their game may simply brush them off as harmless or insane. Insane they may very well be, but harmless they are not. These groups such as the Institute for Historical Review systematically attempt to push their theories forward. Instead of falling into the category of bigoted zealot, they are actually gaining a following. American society has become particularly susceptible to these outrageous views. As Aryan militia groups continue to grow, so does the popularity of such revisionism.

Again, one might say these people are harmless, but in actuality this is not the case. Should the popularity of these groups continue to grow, so could their power in government. Japan poses an excellent example for this theory. Throughout W.W.II, Japan performed the same experiments on human subjects as the Nazi doctors. Hypothermia experiments, infection of contagious diseases, and biological warfare were all performed on human subjects. However, if one were to read a Japanese history schoolbook on this subject, no evidence would be found.

Instead, the Japanese government has chosen to eliminate these facts from all books in Japan. Their policy--complete censorship of all war crimes perpetuated by Japan during W.W.II. As a result, many Japanese see themselves as the ultimate victims in the war. Only recently has the government acknowledged the haneous crimes committed against women throughout Asia. However, this acknowledgment is far from the entire reality of their crimes. As a result, many Japanese know only a fraction of the truth about their involvement in W.W.II. This ignorance prevents younger generations from learning the mistakes of their forefathers. As a result, those mistakes could repeat themselves in the future.

Such is the danger of Holocaust revisionists. Should people continue to brush off their advances, they could further solidify their views in American mainstream. Currently, the revisionists main target are college campuses. By recruiting young college students, the revisionists hope to mold the young educated minds of America. Even further, as time passes, the Holocaust becomes less and less prevalent in many young people’s minds. Unless society acknowledges the threat of the revisionists, their following will continue to grow. Eventually, if these people gain power in our government, the result could be devastating. Not only could the minds of our young people be molded to meet their agenda, but also another Holocaust could occur.

As a result, this paper focuses on the nature of the denier’s arguments against the claim that medical experiments took place on prisoners of Nazi concentration camps. Beyond disproving the denier’s claims, this paper will also introduce evidence of similar experiments conducted by Japanese doctors on their prisoners of war. By showing the similarities between the two nations’ practice of human experimentation, this paper hopes to illuminate the potential threat revisionists hold in our society today.

A Brief Explanation of the Experiments

In order to better understand the nature of the denier’s debates, one must first understand both the characteristics and the practice of human experimentation by the Nazi’s. In early Nazi Germany, Jews became the "polluter" of the human race. As a result, several legal policies were enacted with the ultimate goal as extermination. During this time, doctors became an integral part of this plot (Lipton, 31).

With the introduction of policies of forced euthanasia and sterilization of undesirables, the stage was set for human experimentation. From the fall of 1939 to the spring of 1945, some seventy experiments took place on humans in Nazi concentration camps. These experiments included the freezing of patients, genetic manipulation, high altitude tests, infecting the patients with contagious and life threatening diseases, and pharmacological sterilization, just to name a few. Test were also conducted on twins, dwarfs, and other "anomalies" of nature. These tests were forced onto each individual. Although some agreed to the experiments in hopes of prolonging their life, most did not survive (Mcvay, 19).

Even further, these tests can be divided into three groupings: those racial in nature, those medical in nature, and those conducted by the German Air Force. Those experiments conducted by the German Air Force included high altitude testing, hypothermia, and ingestion of seawater. Those medical included sterilization, infection of deadly diseases, and gassing. Those racial included studies on dwarfs and twins, specifically focusing on their skeletal make-up (19).

In sum, the experiments conducted by the Nazi regime on human subjects proved both painful and fatal for the victims. Under the guise of medical science, the Nazi’s attempted to racially purify their nation. In the process, millions of innocent people endured endless pain and suffering which often ended with death.

The Deniers Arguments

Interestingly, deniers offer few explanations in disagreement to the medical experiments conducted during the Nazi regime. Instead, they tend to focus their arguments solely on the issue of the gas chambers. By focusing their attention on this single aspect of the Nazi regime, they strive to contradict the fact that the Nazi’s killed six million Jews during this period in history.

However, Arthur Butz, the author of The Twentieth Century Hoax, does briefly attempt to deny the claim of Nazi human experimentation. First, Butz attempts to prove that the experiments took place on the subjects only after their death. However, his evidence proving this statement is sketchy at best. Butz points to an eyewitness account of an inmate, Christopher Burney. In his testimony, Burney notes that dead prisoners’ bodies at the concentration camp Buchenwald were often picked over by camp doctors. If these bodies contained medically interesting characteristics, they would be saved, preserved, and sent to nearby Strasbourg for further examination (42). Butz argues that this testimony proves that prisoners were not executed for medical experimentation, but instead were studied only after death.

This argument is weak at best. Although some prisoners’ bodies were saved for experimentation, the majority were executed explicitly for the purpose of experiments. The section in this paper on evidence against the deniers will further examine the legitimacy of this theory.

Butz also attempts to prove that no executions occurred for the purpose of experimentation by using the eyewitness account of SS Captain Josef Kramer. During the course of the Nuremberg trials, Kramer offered two different testimonies concerning the experiments at the Natzweiler concentration camp. Kramer, who served as a commandant at the Natzweiler concentration camp near Strasbourg, initially claimed no prisoners had been executed for experiments. Later, however, he recanted his testimony and admitted executions had occurred for the purpose of experimentation. Butz makes the argument that his second testimony was a lie. He says instead, Kramer changed his testimony in order to secure a lesser punishment (176).

Interestingly, further examination of Kramer’s first testimony directly contradicts what Butz is trying to disprove. In his first statement, Kramer concedes the possibility that experiments did occur on prisoners of concentration camps. However, he simply denies that he was involved. So, by denying Kramer’s second statement and agreeing with his first, Butz concedes the very point he is trying to deny. In actuality, the only point he has argued is whether one man was actually involved in the executions. However, he has failed to disprove all together that executions occurred for the purpose of experimentation (267).

Beyond the above arguments, the deniers offer little evidence in opposition to the claim of Nazi human experimentation. In sum, they generally avoid this subject altogether. However, for the sake of debate, this paper will also examine a few arguments the deniers might use in defense of their beliefs.

One of the denier’s favorite claims against the Holocaust is based on relativism. For example: "Yes many atrocities occurred at the hands of the Nazi’s but wars always have atrocities. The Nazi’s were no worse than any other people’s at war." This relativistic view does little to minimize what occurred at the hands of Nazi Germany. Six million Jews were systematically murdered under the philosophy of racial purity. Relativistic views do little to alleviate or lessen the importance of this fact.

Another favorite view of the deniers is based on the earlier debate. Deniers often ignore any witness testimony that does not strengthen their argument. Instead, the say that a witness can not possibly correctly remember an event if he or she was under extreme stress. As a result, they ignore most of the eyewitness accounts of prisoners of the concentration camps.

In sum, the deniers do their best to squelch any opposing arguments. However, instead of legitimately debating the evidence, they simply ignore that which contradicts their view. As a result, instead of entering historical debates, they attempt to revise history to fit their needs.

The Background of Butz

Beyond understanding the views of Butz, and examination of his personal history also remains important when assessing the validity of his argument. In her book Denying the Holocaust, Lipstat does an excellent job exposing the true nature of this supposed historian.

A true pioneer for his racist cause, Butz was the first to attempt to place a scholarly approach to anti-Semitism. However, through this approach, he has been forced to cite several white supremacist and neo-Nazi groups as the sources for his arguments. Even further, he has been directly linked to groups such as the KKK. Lipstat states:

His books are promoted and distributed by the Ku Klux Klan and other neo-Nazi organizations. When his book first appeared it was serialized in the neo-Nazi German weekly Deutsche National Zeitung. In 1985 he presented his hoax ideas at the Savior’s Day meeting of Louis Farrakhan’s Nation of Islam (126).

This man is not simply a historian attempting to find the truth. Instead, he is a racist, anti-Semite with an agenda. His agenda includes attempting to convert his worst enemy--the Jew--from a martyr into a demon.

Human Experimentation: The Nazi’s

Many different types of evidence exist as proof of human experimentation. However, written documents and eyewitness testimony prove the most useful. Although many of the experimentation documents were destroyed with the allied invasion, substantial written evidence still exists.

Butz’s first argument in regards to the statement that only the dead prisoners were experimented on, is easily refuted by eyewitness testimony. In this testimony, a prison doctor admitted to viewing thirty-nine women gassed simultaneously solely for the purpose of experimentation. The witness methodically describes the calculated formula that the Nazi’s followed. First, these women were given a physical examination. Apparently, this examination was performed to calm the women into believing they would live. After they were gassed, the doctor describes the precise nature of preserving the recently executed victims. He states: "preservation began immediately [with the arrival of the bodies that were] still warm, the eyes...wide-open and shining (285)." The purpose of these gassings was to provide specimens for a museum. Not only were these people killed to further racial studies, but also their bodies were to be used for display in the Nazi’s racially classified museum.

Even further, documents were discovered between a professor of anatomy and Himmler. These documents contain discussion on the necessity of accumulating the skulls of "Jewish-Bolshevik commissars." Through the use of cyanide gas, these particular prisoners were executed so that their skulls could be examined. Upon examination, this professor, Hirt, hoped to: "acquire tangible scientific research material [that would] represent...a repulsive but typical species of sub-humanity (285)." Beyond the eyewitness testimony that Butz would undoubtedly ignore, this written evidence proves the murder of prisoners occurred solely for the function of research and experimentation. By using this procedure, the Nazi’s "killed three birds with one stone." First, they tested the effectiveness of cyanide gas. Second, they furthered their racial research. Finally, they eliminated the much-hated Jew.

At this point, the above examples have already disproved Butz’s arguments. However, to further solidify this argument, several more examples of Nazi experimentation on human subjects will be discussed.

Dr. Miklos Nyiszli offers another example of eyewitness testimony, which refutes Butz’s claims. Dr. Nyiszli lived in Auschwitz from 1944 to 1945. Although a Jew, he enjoyed the rank of prison doctor in Auschwitz during the attendance of the much feared Mengle. As a doctor he was allowed to live. However, the atrocities he witnessed would haunt him forever (52).

Mengle, otherwise known as doctor death, is remembered as the doctor who coveted the study of twins. Nyiszli discusses many different experiments where twins were involved. As a prison doctor, he was often responsible for the autopsies of the subjects. Through his autopsy research, Nyiszli discovered the Nazi’s not only killed their subjects with gas, but also with an injection of chloroform to the heart (62). In spite of this discovery, he was unable to attribute this as the cause of death. Instead, he was told to find some disease to blame.

Nyiszli also describes the tests performed on Gypsies. He states:

[The Gypsies were] exposed to every medical examination that can be performed on human beings: blood tests, lumbar punctures, exchanges of blood between twin brothers, as well as numerous other examinations, all fatiguing and depressing (58).

Even further, Nyiszli describes the studies of twins. In his testimony, the doctor says Mengle was particularly interested in comparing one twin to the other. As a result, many tests compared a pair of twins’ organs. In order to perform these tests, corpses were needed, not living subjects. Similarly, the twins needed to die simultaneously. As a result, hundreds of twins were gassed at the hands of Mengle for the purpose of autopsies (58).

In one last eyewitness account given by Nyiszli, he discusses the gassing of several hundred prisoners. In this instance, he pulls a young girl still alive from the chamber and attempts to save her life. Although she would have lived after this event, the Nazi’s discovered her and ended her life with a bullet to the back of the head (120). Although this girl was not used for experimentation, her story remains an important one. In spite of the fact that many people were gassed for experimentation, many were also gassed simply for extermination. As a result, not even one life of the handpicked Jews would be spared from the gas chambers.

Another eyewitness account comes from Langbein, who worked as a secretary to the head doctor of Auschwitz, Wirths. In his testimony, Lanbein discusses the use of phenol to "cure" typhus. In actuality, phenol is a toxic substance, that when injected, caused immediate death. Lanbein describes the callous nature by which the doctors chose their subjects: "[an SS physician] decided whether the patient was to be admitted to the infirmary, given a phenol injection, or sent back to camp. [He] observed a group of emaciated prisoners and made a ‘lightening decision’ by placing each patient’s card in two piles (256)." By using this method of decision making, the doctor was able to both quickly and efficiently decide who would live and who would die.

Sora Seiler Vigorito also offers powerful testimony on the nature of the Mengle studies. A patient of Mengle’s at Auschwitz, Vigorito lost her twin sister to his atrocious experiments. Sora remembers the day her sister died by her side: "I didn’t want to lose my sister. That’s all I had to hold on to. It’s like being in a world where nothing is safe. She was safe and I didn’t want to lose that (Katz, 1)." This woman was only three years old when she experienced this tragedy. Crammed into a tiny cage with her sister, Sora recalls resisting Mengle when he came to take her away. Although initially he did nothing in response to her rebellion, he later returned with a hammer and smashed her hand. Not until many years and many surgeries later, did she recover from these injuries. However, Sora was lucky. She was one of two hundred twins out of several thousands involved in experiments to survive (1-2).

Again through our knowledge of the Denier’s methods, we know hey would simply state that eyewitness accounts offer two many openings for mistake. However, these are testimonies from several different people. Some were Jews who helped in the experiments, some were subjects of the experiments, and some were perpetrators of these experiments. Although each of these witnesses has a different role in the experimentation, they all have similar stories of the atrocities that took place. Could all of these witnesses remember the Holocaust incorrectly? Do you think that you would incorrectly remember the death of a sibling when you were crammed into a small cage with each other at three years of age? Do you think you would forget the doctor who tore the last member of your family from your arms and left you completely alone in the world at three years old? I know I wouldn’t. These atrocities continue to haunt the victims throughout their lifetimes. In sum, the denier’s argument against the legitimacy of eyewitness attempt is nothing more than their plot to completely disprove the existence of the Holocaust. While most readers cringe at the above stories of human suffering, the Denier’s would simply laugh.

Japanese Experimentation on Human Subjects

As mentioned earlier, the Japanese also used prisoners of war for experiments. Although the Japanese government categorically denies any involvement in these practices, eyewitness testimony says otherwise. As a result, this next section will examine eyewitness testimony of several Chinese who both witnessed, and were victims of, these experiments.

In September of 1946, at the Tokyo trials, evidence emerged which exposed the Japanese military was conducting experiments on human subjects to further their cause of biological warfare. After capturing several Japanese in the Manchuria area, the Soviet’s published a transcript that included testimony of twelve former members who participated in these human experiments. Found guilty of experimenting on humans to further their knowledge of bacteriological warfare, these men admitted to experimenting on Allied POW’s and Chinese civilians (Brackman, 197). Experiments on living people included: people who were infected with the plague, cholera, typhus, anthrax, and gangrene microbes (198). Brackman states:

These experiments included infecting prisoners with diseases, freezing portions of their bodies, and exposing prisoners to fragmentation bombs. Chinese women were infected with syphilis to develop vaccines. Prisoners were infected with typhoid, typhus, plague, hemorrhagic fever, cholera, anthrax, tularemia, smallpox, and dysentery (198).

Beyond these atrocities, the victims had their livers destroyed through prolonged x-rays and were often injected with horse blood. Dissections often occurred while victims were still alive. In order to assess the value of biological warfare, prisoners were strapped to poles while containers of bubonic plague detonated around them. As they stood dying, the Japanese timed how long they lived after exposure. Even further, these experiments often involved bombing of entire Chinese cities with the plague.

Another eyewitness testimony further solidifies these events. Surgeon General Chen Li-kai’s written testimony of such events highlights the atrocities that took place. In February of 1940, he noticed a plane dropping packages into the Hunan province. Initially, the people thought this was a much needed relief plane that provided food and medical supplies. Unfortunately, this was not the case. Instead, the Japanese had dropped a cargo of bubonic plague on the province of Hunan. Thousands of people died before quarantine and inoculation would take place (199).

The haneous nature of these experiments highlights the fact that the German’s were not the only one’s using human’s for experimentation during this time. Unfortunately, the CIA desperately wanted the research findings from these experiments, so many of the perpetrators were free from prosecution (200). Even further, this lack of prosecution kept many people around the world from being aware of the atrocities that took place at the hands of the Japanese. As a result, the government has made little effort to reconcile their involvement in these affairs (Piccigallo, 171). In sum, few people around the world, including many Japanese, are aware of the extent of the misery inflicted by Japanese perpetrators during W.W.II.

Conclusion

Eyewitness accounts and written documents offer powerful evidence toward the nature of human experimentation which took place during WW II. Examining this proof remains an important tool in refuting the statements made by Holocaust revisionists. As history continues to move further away from the atrocities that occurred during WW II, a danger exists that the Holocaust will be forgotten. As a result, extremist views such as that of the revisionist could continue to gain ground. Consequently, the continued examination of the historical importance of the Holocaust is necessary. Without these examinations, history could become permanently altered. Such is the danger of Holocaust revisionists.

Should people continue to brush off their advances, the deniers could further solidify their views in America’s mainstream. As the revisionists continue to target college campuses, America risks losing many of their great, young minds to this racist ideology. Even further, as time passes, and the Holocaust becomes less and less prevalent in many young minds, they could forget the importance of this tragic event. Unless society acknowledges the threat of the revisionists, their following will continue to grow. Eventually, if these people gain power in our government, the result could be devastating. Not only could the minds of our young people be molded to meet their agenda, but another Holocaust could occur.

Works Cited

Butz, Arthur R. The Hoax of the Twentieth Century. Newport Beach: Institute for Historical Review, 1976.

Brackman, Arnold C. The Other Nuremberg: The Untold Story of Tokyo War Crimes Trials. New York: William Morrow and Company, 1987.

Katz, Leslie. "Surviving Mengele Twin Shares Inspiring Words of Faith, Courage." The Jewish Bulletin of Northern California. Pages 1-2. On-line. Internet. 16 May 1998

Available: www.shamash.org/jb/bk951103/sfatwin.htm.

Lifton, Robert Jay. The Nazi Doctors: Medical Killing and the Psychology of Genocide. New York: Basic Books, Inc., Publishers, 1986.

Lipstat, Deborah. Denying the Holocaust: The Growing Assault on Truth and Memory. New York: Penguin Publishers, 1994.

McVay, Kenneth N. "Holocaust FAQ: Auschwitz-Birkenau: Layman’s Guide."

Available: via anonymous www. rtfm.mit.edu.in

pub/usenet/news.answers/holocaust/auschwitz/part01 (and ~/part02).

Nyiszli, Dr. Miklos. Auschwitz: A Doctor’s Eyewitness Account. New York: Arcade Publishing, 1993.

Piccigallo, Philip R. The Japanese on Trial: Allied war Crimes Operations in the East, 1945-5+1. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1979.