The National Socialistic state made propaganda to us, stating that the situation was that we were like the crew on a ship descending into a maelstrom, and the individual no longer had the right to follow his own wishes, because his fate was the fate of all, and it could only be a question either of the ship's floundering or that, through common efforts, it would be able to reach the shore. I believe that this was the most convincing argument, that persuaded many who were in opposition, or simply endured National Socialism, then actually took part in it actively, abandoned their passivity and regarded the Fuehrer not as the leader of the Party or as the exponent of a political system, but as tho chief of state of the German Reich and as the commander-in-Chief in the war whom they obeyed implicitly in that capacity. The whole situation during that period, which we all knew in the year 1942, was Germany's fight - life and death struggle - and I knew that this has not yet been expressed by witnesses at this trial - that was a characteristic that I, as a man of the people, experienced and did not so experience as a person in high position. This we saw as members of the German people. For us the State was characterized by the clear chain of command from the top to the bottom, to which was attached the responsibility and the duty to accept responsibility, and the duty from below upwards to be obedient. I should like to mention something else as characteristic for that situation. When I mentioned my front line experiences I spoke about how this law of war was obligatory ethically when one saw friends and also persons, one did not know, losing their lives during the war. In my effort to recognize the spirit and philosophic situation, I saw that it was not possible for the individual to recognize it, because it took place in an order that was above the individual and embraced a whole state, and so the situation in 1942 was characterized by the individual's recognition that he must obey the orders of the state, no matter where they might reach him, without always demanding that he should understand the individual measures, and without it being domanded that he should consider them just.
There are many parallels to these occurrences not only from the purely military sphere, but this law of war, which previously had been sharply discriminated between combat and rear area soldiers * now this law applied not only to front line soldiers but also to the hinterlands, and with this extension of the effectiveness of weapons, automatically the law of war, of which I have been speaking, also became extended; and so it happened that in other fields of life * for example, in labor allocation, all the individual peaceful laws were relinquished and were supplemented by new laws and regulations, which one could not understand from the purely peaceful point of view or orientation. The duty to work was obligatory for everyone, including women, and so in various spheres, life became loosened up, so to speak, so the individual was no longer able to discriminate at what point the law of peace applied and where it was ever-lapped by the law of war. We also know at this time that other persons, who wore engaged in the pursuit of science * for instance, in the preparation of chemical war or in increasing the effectiveness of explosives - that these men certainly were not acting as individuals with a positive aim, but, on the contrary, with a destructive intention; and vis-avis these tusks, the individual who received orders to do such work was not in a position to refuse or even to ask himself whether it was permissible.
Q What was the contents of the order which, in connection with the sulfonamide experiments, Professor Gebhardt issued in July, 1942?
A Professor Gebhardt came, in the middle of July, 1942, from the Fuehrer's Headquarters, called me to him, and told me briefly and definitely that he had received an order from the Fuehrer via Himmler to test the effectiveness of a few new sulfonamide preparations, of which he justifiably hoped that they would succeed in controlling wound infections, and which, for that reason, should be used as preventive means in the German Wehrmacht as widely as possible.
He told me that for this reason, in order to be able to answer this decisive question entirely clearly, this order had come from the Fuehrer via-* Himmler and that the testing was to be carried out on human beings. Gebhardt told me that he was the person who had received part of this order; namely, the medical part and that he was going to carry it out and wanted to make use of my services as his assistant and he told me that I was as much obligated by this order as he was, since it was a Fuehrer Order, and that it was not my responsibility - what I did in obeying it.
Q You testified that it was a Fuehrer Order; namely, an order which you felt particularly obliged to obey. Did you otherwise, in your military career, receive a Fuehrer Order?
A In my military career I three times received Fuehrer Orders. Through the explanation I tried to give, regarding Germany's inner structure at that time, I wanted to point out the particularly obliging nature of such a Fuehrer Order. In November, 1941, when the German Front, for the first time, was brought to a standstill, my division was before the Russian city of Rostow on the Don River. The German forces were exhausted, and in order to mobilize them again, the Fuehrer went to the front to Mariepol and gave our divisional commander the order that the city of Rostow was to be taken. My division consisted at that time of roughly 1000 men in four battalions. Two battalions, totaling 500 men, were put together and I was given the order to conduct the main dressing station for them. For a military tactician this would have been an enormous task to command such a group. The fact that it was a Fuehrer Order excluded any possibility of discussion and, on the morning of the 30th of November, the two divisions went into attack as ordered, broke through the Russian defense, and, on tho same day, took the city of Rostow on the Don.
Out of the 500 men, 300 were lost, and four days later they were thrown out of the city again. In the winter of 1943-1944, the German front in the Ukraine collapsed. The First German Army was inclused, surrounded, dispersed and fled into the rear regions. At this time, my division received a second Fuehrer Order. We were unleaded at Lemberg and entered a territory in which there were no more German soldiers; went 120 kilometers through the bitter Russian cold to the East. The tanks begged down so that at the end we, consisting of infantry alone, had to try to gain our goal. This order was only carried out, because it was an order from the highest commander-in-chief; and, in this case also, we succeeded in doing what we were ordered to do. We freed tho 230,000 people who had been surrounded, but this order also was carried out at the expense of great losses.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will new recess until 9:30 o'clock tomorrow morning.
(A recess was taken until 0930 hours 11 March 1947)
Official transcript of the American Military Tribunal in the matter of the United States of America, against Karl Brandt, et al., defendants, sitting at Nurnberg, Germany, on 11 March 1947, 093*, Justice Beals presiding.
THE MARSHAL: Persons in the court room will please find their seats.
The Honorable, the Judges of Military Tribunal 1.
Military Tribunal 1 is now in session. God save the United States of America and this honorable Tribunal.
There will be order in the court room.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Marshal, with you ascertain that the defendants are all present in court.
THE MARSHAL: May it please your Honor, all defendants are present in court with the exception of the Defendant Oberhauser, absent due to illness.
THE PRESIDENT: The Secretary-General will note for the record the presence of all the defendants in court save the Defendant Oberhauser, who has been excused on account of her illness.
Counsel may proceed.
FRITZ ***SCHER * Resumed.
DIRECT EXAMINATION (Continued).
BY DR. SEIDL (Counsel for the Defendant Fischer):
Q. Yesterday you spoke of the Fischer Order which Dr. Gebhardt informed you of; I ask you now to tell the court what the contents of this order were and what was to be ascertained through these experiments.
A. When in the middle of July 1942 I was called to Dr. Gebhardt, who was to tell me about these experiment, he told me that this Fuehrer Order was an order on the part of the State, in which a new series of new sulfonami preparations were to be tested. This testing was particularly important in that preparatory investigations on animals, and also a clinical testing, had demonstrated tee particular effectiveness of the sulfonamide preparations, so there was the justified hope that a decisive turn in the therapy of wound infections would be achieved through these reparations. He pointed out to me that the decisive improvement was so important because, as I said yesterday, the therapeutic situation regarding persons wounded was very difficult.
On the basis of documents he told me that there were in essence four prepa rations, one of which was cibazol, a sulfatiazol prepared by a Swiss firm; and a Swiss professor's, Dr. Brunner's work on this subject he showed to me, who had tested this preparation in a clinic. This clinical testing of the preparation really seemed to justify the hopes. He had carried out experiments on normal wounds, such as turned up in the accident clinic, and treated a total of 109 patients exclusive with sulfonamide and without the usual academic wound treatment according to Friedrich. His results were surprising in that of these 109 patients in the accident clinic, 106 recovered without complications, although in the case of 15 of these patients gas bacillus had been identified in the patient. This meant, in other words, a success of 97% i.e. for practical purposes 100% success.
Our clinic itself was sceptic 1 regarding sulfonamide therapy in general, but the wish had of gradually entered into our critic for a means of combatting wound infections, which were taking greater and greater sacrifices.
The second paper, shown to me as a basis for this experimentation, was a work by Professor Domak with marfanil experiments on animals. Marfenil is a sulfonamide preparation. It was introduced into the German Army, a mixture with Prontalbin. It was known as an M.P. Powder, but in this M.P. Powder one part was marfanil and nine parts prontalbin. In the work that I was shown by this professor the preparation consisted solely of marfanil. Experiments were carried out on animals, and they had taken place as follows: There were a number of animals who were infected with gas gangrene without being treated surgically. In all these cases without surgical treatment death resulted. The animals treated with marfanil recovered in 82.5% of the cases. Gebhardt said thus, if marfanil therapy was used in association with surgery on the front, 100% success could be expected.
The third preparation was an entirely now one, Katoxin. It was particularly characterized by the fact that it was a colloidal solution, a combination of oxygen and silver; and of this preparation it was expected that it would be a vacercide because of the silver, and because of the oxygen was to have particular effect on those bacilla which react to oxygen during their growth.
There were animal experiments to substantiate this also, which had been carried out by the staff of the firm that manufactured katoxin, and the results of these naimal experiments showed, for practical purposes, 100% success.
The last preparation was ultraseptil. That was also a sulfathiazol. There was only a short paper on this preparation, but Professor Gebhardt explained that this preparation was said to be particularly effective from what he had heard from Professor Morell in the Fuechrer's headquarters. From the explanation that I heard there, these preparations before they were introduced into the Wehrmacht -- Which was to be done on a very broad basis -- should once more be tested as to their certain and reliable effectiveness. In order to achieve this goal, as Professor Gebhardt told me, the order had come to Professor Gebhardt from Hitler via Himmler and Grawitz, to test these preparations on human beings, so that a perfectly a clear answer could be given to these questions. And he told me that since this order had been given, and once it had been given, he felt perfectly justified in carrying it out.
He described this order to me an a commission on the part of the State and said that he as the medical part of it would carry out only the medical part, and that the other members of the State would take care of the legal and other aspects of the problem.
Since this whole matter was extraordinary surprising to me, and I was totally unprepared for it, I asked him at that time not to choose me to participate in it, because I was reluctant to operate on men under such circumstances; but I was told in the usual form at that time, namely, in a strict and factual manner, that this was a military order and that Professor Gebhardt had received this order; what he was responsible for what I did; that I was in no way responsible and that I in a certain sense should be his righthand.
Q What was told you about the experimental persons?
A I was told that a number of male German professional criminals who had been condemned to death were to be used for these experiments who would thus have a chance for pardon; and in addition Gebhardt told me how he imagined the experiments would take place. He told me that the healing effect of the chemotherapeutics would be completely confirmed, so that we would not have to count on having fatalities. A few of the patients for purposes of comparison would have to be left untreated chemotherapeutically. However, he would try to keep the resulting inflammation localized and isolated to such and extent in these untreated persons, that the physician would always be in a position to interrupt this inflammation through surgical means.
I must add one thing: at that time I was told that these experiments were not to be kept secret. I received this order from Gebhardt within the scope of our hospital perfectly publicly, nor did I see any writing that was marked secret. Professor Gebhardt did not keep these experiments secret, and I myself carried out these experiments perfectly openly; and I was also told at that time that reports were to be published on these experiments. Then, in other words, there was no secret character to this any way. In addition, I was always assured that this was a legal State action, the State having during the War taken the right to carry out such experiments.
Q You have now described your participation that you were to have according to the Fuehrer Order. Did you not also wonder in what situation the experimental persons, on whom the experiments were to be carried out, would find themselves?
A Yes, I did. At the beginning I stated that the thought of doing something that was not really in accordance with basic middle medical principles, namely, to treat a man not with the first aim of helping but a secondary one. I said that this was counter to my basic feelings, and that for that reason I did not want to take part in these experiments; but, at the same time I could not deny the effectiveness of Professor Gebhardt's argument. He told me that I had been chosen for this as his assistant, because he wished that the experiments should be carried out by him and the assistant who was close to him and within his same circle.
Regarding the fate of the experimental subjects involved, I did not think of them in a legal way, but thought of myself as part of a State whole as a soldier who not always had the opportunity, the possibility, and the right to fully realize and see the individual act he has been ordered to do in its full extent and to justify it to himself. I believe that these experimental subjects who as condemned to death were faced with certain death and, therefore, had a chance for life by going through with these experiments seemed to me some justification. It seems to me that if I were in the same situation as these experimental subjects, I would seize such an opportunity as was being presented to them.
Q The expectations, with which these experiments were undertaken, were that they would provide an effective means for front-line treatment. You expected from the experiments a positive result, namely, that the sulfonamides that were there tested could be used successfully in fighting wound infection
A When the experiments began, I, at least, was firmly persuaded that, on the basis of the writings on the subject that we already had, there would only be minor inflammatory reactions, namely, in the experimental persons who were to be treated with sulfonamide. The writings on this subject seemed to justify this assumption on my part.
We were also convinced that the inflammation, that would result without the effect of the therapeutic means, could be combatted simply by keeping them resting in plaster casts, and that the inflammation would not spread.
I must go into this in some detail for the doctor and for the surgeon An inflammation is deprived of its serious consequences if it is split open; and also in the case og gas gangrene we thought we could control inflammation if the patient was kept resting in bed, and if we stood next to the bed with the surgical knife in order to be able to combat the inflammation immediately by surgical means if necessary.
Q In other words, you did not expect fatalities?
A No. This fear of fatalities was not the reason why I asked not to participate in these experiments. Rather, I did so only because of my inner resistance to doing something in contrary to basic medical principles; but we were of the opinion that in the individual cases the inflammation would be no worse than a boil, and we believed that in the patients not treated with sulfonamide a locally limited phlegmone might arise which, however, could be effectively combatted through surgical means.
We did not expect fatalities.
Q How far is Ravensbrueck from Hohenlychen?
A Twelve kilometers.
Q Then it was always possible in the case of a fatality for you or Professor Gebhardt or another doctor to be fetched to Ravensbrueck?
A Yes, and Professor Gebhardt also told me that he had reached this arrangement precisely so that here would be assurance that he would be there at any time available to assist.
Q At that time when the order was given to you, did you know anything about the prehistory of this order such as it was described in this courtroom by Dr. Gebhardt?
AAt that time I was Obersturmfuehrer in Hohenlychen, one of the youngest and lowest in rank of the assistants. Professor Gebhardt was the absolute chief of Hohenlychen, a very active and energetic man. He never discussed these matters with me. The prehistory of it such as it was here described I had no knowledge of.
Q Did you take part in any preparatory discussions of this with any officers?
A No.
Q Had you previously been in a concentration camp?
A No, never previously. My first visit to a concentration camp I made in the company of Professor Gebhardt, namely, at Ravensbrueck.
Q You heard Professor Gebhardt's description of the experiments in Group 1, namely, those carried out on fifteen male prisoners. Would you like to add anything to that description?
A It was as Professor Gebhardt described it. So far as I recall, twelve of these patients were given sulfonamide and three were treated only surgically as check patients. As in the later cases, a cut was made in the outer surface of the lower leg about three centimeters deep, and into this incision the bacilli were introduced, and, as I said, in the case of twelve patients sulfonamide was later added or given intravenously, and in the other three, they were simply observed surgically.
This first experimental series was only slightly effective. It was ascertained that the way in which we were innoculating the bacteria culture which we were doing very carefully was not satisfactory and resulted in something which we surgeons would call primary healing. In all fifteen cases the convalescence took place only with slight delay. There were no untreated persons in the experimental series.
Q Was there no subsequent damage as a result of these experiments or permanent damage in these patients?
A No, as I said it was something which we called delayed primary recovery. I checked their bandages until the conclusion of the experiment and was assured that no one suffered any further consequences of it above the scar which resulted.
Q How was Professor Gebhardt informed of the course of these experiments if he himself was not present at them?
A So far as Professor Gebhardt was not himself at Ravensbrueck, he was informed by me in the evening after the bandages had been checked in the clinic. Our clinic was very strictly organized. Every morning at 7:30 we turned in reports on all patients who had a temperature above 37.5 centigrade, and then in the evening at seven o'clock we reported personally on those patients whose case was somewhat more serious. In the course of these reports on the various patients in the surgical department, the ambulance departments and so on, I also mentioned to Gebhardt the patients from Ravensbrueck as to their general state and their temperature.
Q Please describe to the court the course of a normal visit which you paid to see the experiments in Ravensbrueck?
A Preceding such a visit was a telephonic announcement. I then rode over to Ravensbrueck and drew up before the large Commandatur building and reported there to the resident physician. This was really outside the camp itself. The resident physician then went with me into the camp. Once one had gone through the gates one entered a large court yard about 100 meters square, and to this the camp street lead. One of the barracks in the immediate vicinity of the gate was the barrack of the camp hospital, namely the operation al building. I crossed this court yard and together with the resident physician I entered this first barrack. This was a wooden building with a cement or stone foundation, which gave one a good impression so far as it was constructed. There were two large operational theatres in this building, one for septic and one for asceptic operations, and as I recall, one or two small offices there, and then a room in which medical mechanical treatment could be carried out, namely, treatment for broken arms, and a heat treatment, and then there was a special x-ray room, and then a drug room and a bath.
When I came there, the visits to the building were rather few in number. I brought various equipment with me from Hohenlychen, and then the experimental patients were taken to the experimental location on portable conveyances, either in chairs or being carried. Initially they went on foot, but since we had patients brought in Hohenlychen I had asked the resident physician to make the arrangement I have just described. Then the bandage changing, which I then did, I carried on in the same way I would have in our clinic at Hohenlychen. I must state that because of the great amount of work we had at Hohenlychen I could only take care of this dressing between two and four in the afternoon, and when I got there I came directly from the sick beds of the patients in Hohenlychen, and I acted in the case of these Ravensbrueck patients exactly as I would have acted at Hohenlychen. I was assisted by prisoner nurses, who gave me the materials I needed, the change of dressings was carried out under anesthesia, and if the process of changing the dressings promised to be painful, it was carried out when the person was under complete anesthesia. I always tried to be as considerate of the experimental subject as I would have been of a private patient And I came from a clinical private hospital environment and returned to it: before 2 p.m. and after four o'clock. When I returned, I was again attending to our patients at Hohenlychen.
Q That impression did this camp hospital in its external organization make on you? Was it clean?
A I can only make statements about the buildings and the equipment. I must also state that my arrival was announced before hand always. When I got there I saw a hospital situation which seemed very clean to me, such as one might find in a medium range hospital. The cleanliness was perfectly satisfact ory. I also happened to know that the question of sanitation is not too great a problem there because there are so many persons around who can carry out sanitation measures.
Q You then cane to the experiments on female Polish prisoners?
A In my description of the first experimental series I said that the effectiveness of these medicants could not be effectively tested because there was no difference between the case history of those treated with sulfona mides and those who were not treated with sulfonamide. For this reason, Professor Gebhardt ordered that the inflammation should be intensified, so that the local inflammation would be brought about which would permit these preparations to be tested. I went back to Ravensbrueck and found out from the president physician there that female prisoners had been prepared for these experiments. I had always previously seen the patients under narcosis only because I first had to sterilize my hands, and by the time I got there the patients had been already anesthesized. When I was told this by the resident physician I did not operate, but went back to Hohenlychen and reported to Professor Gebhardt, who was then in station I as a patient. I described the situation to him and asked him to free me from the necessity of carrying out these experiments. He also was greatly impressed, because as I knew he also was spiritually opposed to this experimentation, and he told me that he would take care to clear up this matter. A period of about two weeks then elapsed before I was called to him, and in the meantime he had recovered from his sickness and had gone to the headquarters and returned; and he told me he had spoken of this matter with the competent quarters, and that the experiments were to be continued, and that he was passing on this order to me. That it had been decided that female prisoner were to be used for the experiments, particularly in consideration of the fact that the experiments would probably not be dangerous to life. I was then told that Reichsarzt Grawitz was to visit this next experimental series, which was considered to be the final one, and that for this reason I should begin immediately. Therefore, on the same day I went over to Ravensbrueck and began with the next experimental series.
Q What was told you with regard to these Polish female prisoners? Were you told they had been condemned to death and were to be executed?
A Yes, I was told that they were female Polish prisoners who were about to be executed. Professor Gebhardt also told me that, because of the fact that experiments with male prisoners had been so harmless, this had females that had been condemned to death and wanted to give these prisoners the chance to save their lives by experimenting on them rather than on males.
Q You heard Professor Gebhardt's testimony regarding experiments on the second group of subjects, namely, this group of 36 women. Do you have anything to add to that description?
A No. My experiences with this second group of thirty-six was exactly what Professor Gebhardt described. This group was broken down in three series of twelve which were to be compared, one with the other. Among every twelve patient subjects, two were not treated with sulfonamide, and the other ten received sulfonamide after the inoculation, although in a varying scheme. There was one thing in common with all three groups, namely inflammation did not result in all cases when sulfonamide was injected into the wound at the same time as the bacteria. In the other cases on the other hand local inflammation arose, roughly the size of a boil as large as a walnut. In other words an inflammation that was altogether localized and which did not in any way endanger the whole organism; and, as I said, the only difference in these experiments was that there were some of there namely the six that received sulfonamide immediately with the bacteria culture, in which cases no inflammation resulted.
Q You heard Professor Gebhardt's testimony regarding Dr. Grawitz's visit to Ravensbruck in September 1942. Do you have anything to say in supplement to that?
A No. Professor Gebhardt described it clearly. Regarding the conversations that took place between Gebhardt and Grawitz, I am, of course, not informed. They were private conversations. I knew only that Dr. Grawitz was very intemperate, and expressed the opinion that these experiments were providing no answer to problem as he understood it, and were providing no answer to the question of the effectiveness of sulfonamide, especially the effect of katexyn and marphanil in the case of gas gangrene. I knew that he demanded that wounds should be treated that resembled war wounds, and that he gave directions these wounds were to be created by means of a shot.
Q What do you have to say about the third experiments series come about, with the two by twelve experimental patients
A On tho evening of Grawitz's visit I spoke with Professor Gebhardt in the evening conference. Even at that time he was determined not to do any wounding through shooting. He was considering how this question regarding the effectiveness of the medicine could be solved a general state of illness and in particular through anearobian infection. He told me a few days later that he had decided to test this effectiveness through changing the course or manner of tho experiments, namely, that t* anairobia should be tested in a part of tissue that was poorly irrigated by blood. I was then told to test tho effectiveness of anairobia in such poorly irrigated tissue, namely, on a tying of of certain muscles in order to keep this tissue isolated from the rest of the tissue of the body. These partly segregated muscles, were then examined under a microscope, and we found in the center of them a change that resulted from the reduction in irrigation and supply of oxygen. Now, subsequently to the first experiments we now planned experiments on two groups of twelve - which were to test these new ideas. The course then took place as Professor Gebhardt described.
Q You have heard various witnesses here, on whom experimen were carried out, and who show the damage that had been done on them. A Are these damages to be traced back to the experiments themselves, or are they the result of therapeutic means that word taken surgically to reduce inflammation and to save the life of the patient?
A I must say to that the following: In this third group, consisting of a total of twenty-four experimental subjects, there were serious inflammations; but then not all twenty-four were inflicted with these serious inflammations. No inflammation resulted in the four who received bacteria in association with t* medicine and, as I remember, tho inflammation in the case of the eight more was relatively unimportant. Again inflammation was the size of a boil the size of a walnut.
In the other twelve, however, the inflammation was more intense and in them there was a true picture of gas gangrene, or, at least, a very intense inflammation. From these who had been isolatedly inoculated, three died because the inflammation spread in such a way as to make it impossible for us to control it surgically. We had hoped through giving them rest and through preventive splitting of tissue, and by standing always on hand to control the infection, but the results were the same as in clinics frequently, namely tho inflammation spread so rapidly that, in the case of the three perso* experimented on, unavailing in saving their lives. In other case on the other hand, from this group of twelve we succeeded, to be sure, only through repeated opening of the tissue, and because we followed regular orthodox procedure with the point of view the most important thing was saving the patient's life; and the next most important point was the preservation of the person's ability to move his member, and only in third order did we consid the cosmetic considerations, namely what the patient would look like.
Q. How did this third experimental series terminate?
A Let me add that we also carried out blood transfusions a* serum therapy, and in all cases after the inflammation spread we used sulfonamide. The series was terminated in this way: Professor Gebhardt had seen all these serious cases, had taken them under his immediate care. We had, through observation in the clinical course of the experiments, answered the cardinal question and had discovered that sulfonamides were not able to combat as a preventive such bacterial wound infections. For in the cases in which bacteria and sulfonamide had been injected into the wound simultaneously, this condition was an artificial one and would n* have happened in actuality, because surgically inflicted wounds have smooth, edges and there is no destruction of tissue around t* wound.
For this reason it was possible in our experiments to have this therapeutic effect. However, actual was wounds are much different - the tissue is crushed, and so on. Thus the results could not be transferred to military medicine. Professor Gebhardt was greatly upset, that contrary to our expectations that persons had died, and we were of the opinion that this question,no matter how responsible we felt toward military medicine, regarding the preventive effectiveness of sulfonamide would have to be answered in the negative.
Q You said that the experiment did not produce the expected results. But was not this result positive in the sense that, at least, it was a clarification of the question?
A Professors Brandt and Rostock have already testified here that clinical observations in medicine unfortunately do not always result in positive and useful conclusions, but that it is often the fate of the experimenter that the results he wishes to achieve are not attained, but that his negative discoveries contribute to medicine. We had demonstrated that the newest methods, even in their latest forms, were not able to control wound infections. In other words, that they could not be used as a preventive, and this was of great importance to the front line physician, because henceforth no physician could hope to conquer such wounds easily through sulfonamide, still hoping that they might, in some way, be effective, and thus hoping that he would be freed from the obligation to operate surgically.
Q Were the orders for these experiments drawn up by you, or were they given to you?
A I neither took part in the initiative in these experiments nor did I take part in drawing up the orders for these experiments. They were given to me.
Q The witness Broil-Pluter testified that in the choice of the experimental persons you participated, and that she had seen you choosing them. What do you have to say to that?
A The witness is in error. I never took part in the choice of the experimental subjects. I believe she must have confused me with someone else because she also said that she had seen me in the company of the commander and other officers of the camp in front of the prisoners' block. However, I never visited the prisoners' block and I met the commander only once in the company of Professor Gebhardt when the experiments were just beginning.
Q You carried out the changes of dressing in Ravensbruck. Did you also speak with the experimental persons?
4308 -A.