MR. HARDY: Counsel for Prosecution is willing to stipulate that, your Honor. However, we are not stipulating as to the fact that as a fact this chamber arrived in Berlin on that date. We would stipulate that the entries are correct. Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: We understand that. But, Counsel for Prosecution is willing to stipulate that those entries are in the book as read by counsel. Is that correct?
MR. HARDY: Your Honor, due to my inability to read the German language I would request that the interpreter here read the same two entries as pointed out by Dr. Sauter, and that will verify the entries and the translation thereof; and then I will be willing to stipulate.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, suppose the entries be examined after the recess this afternoon and the matter can be taken up in the morning. The interpreter can examine the records then with counsel for both parties, and then some stipulation can be reached when the Tribunal opens tomorrow morning.
BY DR. SAUTER:
Q. Dr. Ruff, yesterday I showed you this work book. Did you recognize it with certainty as the same work book which was prepared by your foreman, Fohlmeister, at that time under your supervision?
A. Perhaps I may first make a correction -- not yesterday but the day before yesterday. Yesterday was Sunday. Yes, I know the book. That is the work book of my foreman, Fohlmeister.
Q. In that connection then, Mr. President I should like to ask the Tribunal to take notice of an affidavit Matthes in Document Book Ruff No. 6, Page 20 to 23, Exhibit 10. This Dr. Matthes also worked at the Institute which was headed by the defendant Dr. Ruff. In April 1933 he already met Dr. Ruff, as a definite opponent of the SS and then -- I did not intend to read this document -- but he described in February 1942 he was assigned to the Institute and he says that Rascher says some very derogatory things about Ruff -- that Ruff was no National Socialist, that he refused to give Rascher assistance, that Ruff was sabotaging the war effort, etc.
Then I shall read on page two at the bottom -- it says:
"From these records (says the witness Dr. Matthes) I noticed that in the experiments performed by Dr. Romberg no fatalities or physical damages had occurred, that according to the records all experimental subjects got well over these experiments and recovered soon. Further the records as well as the explanations given by Dr. Romberg showed that he had conducted his experiments by employing all conceivable precautionary measures. The experimental subjects, so Romberg explained to me, had been criminals condemned to death who were later pardoned."
Then the witness speaks about the time of the return of the chamber to Berlin and says -- I read on page 3 then, the last two paragraphs:
"Only at the time of my conversations with Dr. Romberg did I also learn that a low pressure chamber had come back from Dachau, According to my recollection, the low pressure chamber must have come back to the Institute in May 1942. I can remember the date because after the return of the low pressure chamber I was ordered by Dr. Ruff to take a trip to Cologno in order to procure spare parts. I made this trip and on that occasion I was in my home town of Bonn. That was in the time from 1 June to 10 June 1942 so that the low pressure chamber must have been returned to the Institute in May 1942."
I shall not read the last paragraph -- it merely shows that Dr. Ruff took an interest in the relatives of this witness in spite of their Jewish ancestry and that he helped them. And this has been sworn to by the witness Dr. Matthes and certified.
Mr. Ruff, the chamber came back to Berlin. What happened then to this chamber?
A. It stayed in the DVL longer than we liked. First that wasn't too bad, since it had to be checked over and prepared for new use.
A longer stay, as actually occurred was unpleasant because this indicated that the chamber was not urgently needed as we had indicated, that actually in the months of June and July there was no use for the chamber. Only in August the Luftwaffe group turned up and took over the chamber -- and they took it away in August.
Q. I should like the Court in this connection to take notice of an affidavit of Dr. Kellersmann which is in Ruff Document Book, Document 14. That will be Exhibit 11.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel, did I understand you to say Document 14?
DR. SAUTER: Yes, Document No. 14, Dr. Kellersmann, page 55, Exhibit 11. I do not intend to read the document -- it merely supports the statement just made by the defendant Ruff that the chamber was in Berlin and not used for several months, although the SS, as we know, repeatedly asked for use of the chamber.
Dr. Ruff, when he visited Berlin at the end of April or the beginning of May Romberg told you of only one death -- did you later learn of other deaths and from whom?
A. In the time between Romberg's return to Dachau and the removal of the chamber Romberg called my up once or twice in Berlin -might even have been three times. The first time I informed him that Hippke approved our plan. I informed Romberg that Hippke had already received a telegram from Rancher for use of the chamber for a longer period, and that Hippke intended to disapprove the extension and inform Milch. When Romberg called up again he told me that Rascher had performed further experiments, and from the telephone conversation could draw the conclusion that something had happened again during these experiments. Romberg was not able to say anything more definite on the telephone since all telephone conversations were checked on and he could not tell me over the telephone how the experiment had gone off and what had happened. But, from the conversation I could conclude something had happened. And, I believe that was the same telephone conversation when Romberg told me our experiments were finished and said that Rascher had approved having the chamber returned.
And, then on the basis of this telephone conversation I sent people to Dachau to load the chamber on the railroad there. When Romberg came back to Berlin, he reported to me that in the meantime Rascher had two further deaths. He, Romberg, had been present at the experimental station when these deaths occurred. As far as other deaths from Dachau experiments were concerned I never heard anything about them; and, in particular, I realized on the basis of Romberg's reports that the deaths had occurred during experiments performed by Rascher on instructions from Himmler.
Q. Without your volition?
A. Without my volition, and without my knowledge.
Q. Now, the witness Neff who was examined here in December spoke of five deaths which supposedly occurred during Rascher's experiments when Romberg was present. Did you hear anything about that?
A. No. I did not hear anything about that. I heard about three deaths, and Romberg reported them to me. When Rascher was in Berlin to draw up the report he didn't say a word to me about deaths, nor about his experiments which he had performed for Himmler at all.
Q. Dr. Ruff, you are speaking of experiments which Rascher carried out without your knowledge and without your approval on his own initiative. Apparently he had special orders from Himmler. Do you have any idea today whether these experiments of Rascher's he did on his own accord had anything to do with the problem which was to be solved through your experiments in Dachau, that is, the problem of rescue by parachute from high altitudes; or from your conviction as a specialist, were these independent experiments of Rascher's something quite different?
A. From the intermediate reports which Rascher sent to Himmler, which I saw here for the first time in the document book, one thing is clear; that these experiments have nothing to do with experiments for rescue from high altitudes. What Rascher wanted to clarify is not quite clear to me from these brief intermediate reports. He doubtless had attacked quite a number of questions, did a few experiments each time, and then stopped the experiments and taken up something different. In any case, insofar as one can conclude from these intermediate reports, there was in no case any complete series of experiments. There are at least three, four, Perhaps five problems which he tried to work on - none of which he completed and it seems to me that these experiments were merely orienting experiments and that he intended to clear up these various problems without longer series of experiments, and no doubt he always wanted to have the low pressure chamber in Dachau again for that purpose.
Q. Witness, you are convinced then that in the experiments which were carried out with your approval and with your knowledge -that is the regular orderly experiments - there were no deaths?
A. In these experiments for rescue from high altitude I know that there were no deaths.
Q. The witness Neff, when he was examined here in December, said that Rascher once, by night, allegedly performed experiments with sixteen Russians when Dr. Romberg was not present. The result was that, on the next morning, all of the sixteen Russians were dead. When did you learn of this matter for the first time?
A. I learned of it for the first time when the witness Neff made this statement on the witness stand here.
Q. Do you really believe that in this case one could speak of medical experiments or what is your opinion today, as an expert, about what Rascher's intention could have been in this action?
A. In the low pressure chamber, when it was in Dachau, twelve people could be accommodated at the utmost.
There was room for twelve people to sit on the benches if the people crowded together. If one assumes that the number of sixteen Russians is correct, then there was not room for these sixteen people in the chamber. Moreover, it is impossible to perform an experiment simultaneously on sixteen or twelve or eight at the same time. The chamber has three windows. Even if there is a doctor at each window, observing the experiment, it would hardly be possible for him to observe sixteen people at the same time who all become unconscious in a very short time, have cramps, etc. It is hardly possible. My opinion agrees with that of the prosecution's medical expert that this was not an experiment at all, that this was an execution.
Q. Dr. Ruff, in Document Book 2, there are a number of photographs concerning a man who was subjected to some experiments in the chamber, Do you remember those photographs in Document Book 2?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you believe that there is any evidence as to what the type of experiments was during which these pictures were taken? whether these were the rightful experiments for your institute or whether these were the independent experiments of Dr. Rascher for Himmler?
A. In the form in which the photographs were submitted in the document book these photographs show nothing whatever except that a dead body was dissected. These pictures could be from any pathological institute and could be autopsy. Dr. Alexander, the prosecution's medical expert, was kind enough, however, to give me a few better copies of these pictures, and in these good copies one can see very plainly that in this brain autopsy - in the big vessels of the brain there are more of less large air bubbles. The vessels, in part, looked like strings of pearls. This proves that these dead people died either when surfacing after diving, or died after leaving the so-called caisson, that is the air pressure chambers which are used for work in water, for instance, when bridge pillars are set up, or else that these were deaths from high altitude.
The latter is to be assumed in this case, if one grants that these pictures were actually taken in Dachau. Assuming then that these were people who died from high altitude, then on the basis of this finding of the air bubbles in the blood vessels, they must be people who died after a long stay at altitudes of more than at least 10,000 meters - probably more than 12,000 meters. These gas bubbles in the blood vessels develop at these altitudes normally above 12,000 meters - in the course of a longer stay at these altitudes, since these gas bubbles need a certain period of time to develop, at 12,000 meters, the time is five, six, seven, eight or ten minutes, this could not have happened in the experiments for rescue from high altitude. In these altitude experiments, the experimental subjects, for example, when bailing out at 15,000 meters and falling on the open parachutes - those people were at heights above 12,000 meters for three minutes. This is the longest time which the experimental subjects remained at altitudes higher than 12,000 meters, because, when jumping from 20,000 and 21,000 meters there were no parachute descents with the open parachute but only three falling experiments without the parachutes being opened, and in these experiments the experimental subjects remained one hundred seconds at the maximum above 10,000 meters. The gas bubbles in these pictures therefore show, with the probability that borders on certainty, that these deaths could not have occurred in experiments for rescue from high altitude.
Q. And you conclude, Dr. Ruff, that these films which were found among Dr. Rascher's papers and which were taken into document book #2, have nothing to do with your experiments?
A. That is correct.
Q. Well, then the chamber was returned to Berlin. Who gave the order for this - you or Dr. Hippke?
A. I had told Romberg to see it that we got the chamber out of the camp and then I had men sent down to load it. For the return transport, as well as for the transport down there, Hippke gave his approval.
Q. Now, Dr. Ruff, as we now know, on the 5th of April, 1942, Dr. Rascher wrote to Reichsfuehrer SS Himmler. He sent him an intermediate report - a secret report which you and Dr. Romberg did not sign. This is Document 1971A. - PS, Exhibit 49 of the prosecution, how do you explain the fact that, in this report which was made behind your back, the affair with the sixteen dead Russians is not even mentioned by Rascher to a man like Himmler, because you know, Dr. Ruff, this intermediate reports mention other deaths, but these sixteen Russians are not mentioned in this report of Rascher?
A. In this intermediate report Rascher speaks of experiments, and I believe the fact that these sixteen Russians are not mentioned supports the assumption of the medical expert of the prosecution, with which I agree, that these Russians were not the subject of an experiment but were executed, and that it was not mentioned for this reason.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel, the Tribunal will now be in recess until 9:30 o'clock tomorrow morning.
(A RECESS WAS TAKEN UNTIL 0930 HOURS, "( APRIL 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 29 April 1947, 0930, Justice Beals presiding.
THE MARSHAL: Persons in the court room will please find their seats.
The Honorable, the Judges of Military Tribunal I.
Military Tribunal I is now in session. God save the United States of America and this honorable Tribunal.
There will be order in the courtroom.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Marshal, you ascertain if the defendants are all present in court.
THE MARSHAL: May it please Your Honor, all defendants are present in the court.
THE PRESIDENT: The Secretary-General will note for the record the presence of all defendants in court.
Counsel may proceed.
DR. SIEGFRIED RUFF - Resumed.
DIRECT EXAMINATION (Continued) BY DR. FRITZ SAUTER (Counsel for the Defendant Ruff):
Q Dr. Ruff, you are still under oath today. Yesterday, Dr. Ruff, you were speaking of the Dachau highaltitude experiments with which you are charged. Today we come to one final subject, that is the reports on these various Dachau experiments. As we have heard, Dr. Rascher on the 5th of April 1942 sent a secret report to the Reichsfuehrer-SS Himmler -- which is in document book 2, document 1971 APS, Exhibit No. 49, page 62 in the German and 60 in the English. It was read here in the courtroom. In this report - you remember this, Dr. Ruff?
A Yes.
Q Dr. Rascher in the first part describes the experiments which he carried out together with Dr. Romberg, and he concludes this with the sentence, and I quote:
"All the experimental subjects recovered after a certain time at 8 Kilometers and regained their consciousness and the normal functions of their senses." In order to avoid confusion, that refers to the experiments that were conducted together with Romberg. In the second part of the report Dr. Rascher describes the experiments which he performed alone and he writes, I quote: "Only continuous experiments above ten and a half kilometers were fatal. The third experiment of this type was so unusual that - since I carried out these experiments by myself, that is, without Romberg - I called in an SS doctor of the camp. This was a continuous experiment without oxygen at a height of 12 kilometers on a 37 year old Jew."
Dr. Ruff, this secret report of Dr. Rascher alone seems to be of special significance, therefore, I should like to ask you when did you learn of this secret report of Dr. Rascher for the first time? This is the secret report of the 5th of April 1942 which is signed by Rascher alone.
A I saw this report for the first time when it was submitted by the prosecution here in the courtroom.
Q Dr. Ruff, did you receive knowledge of these experiments of Dr. Rascher concerning which he writes that he carried them out alone, that is, without Romberg, and when he called in an SS doctor as a witness for a third experiment? When did you learn of these experiments?
AAt the same time when this report was submitted here in the courtroom. In the preliminary interrogations I also did not hear anything about these experiments.
Q Witness, according to your expert opinion, these experiments which Dr. Rascher carried out alone and which led to fatal results, did they have anything to do with your own experiments, that is, with the experiments which you approved which were included in the working program for Dr. Romberg and which alone you desired in the interest of aviation?
A These experiments have nothing to do with the experiments for rescue from high-altitude, they have no connection with them.
Q Dr. Ruff, do you know whether this secret report, or interim report, by Dr. Rascher of the 5th of April 1942 was received by the Luftwaffe, especially the Chief of the Medical Inspectorate for the Luftwaffe, Professor Hippke? Did he talk to you about it, or do you know anything else about it?
A I do not know that any Luftwaffe agency over received this report. Hippke in particular never talked to me about such experiments or about such a report. I should think that if Hippke had received such a report he would no doubt have said something to me about it, since he knew that at the time when Rascher was carrying out these experiments in Dachau we, that is Romberg in this case, at the same time carried out the experiments for rescue from high altitude. I would assume that if Hippke had received such a report I would have heard something about it.
Q Then I have a final question concerning Rascher's secret report. Dr. Ruff, yesterday we discussed the fact that Dr. Rascher once in the evening called for 16 Russians, that he did something with these 16 Russians we don't know what it was - and that on the next morning these 16 Russians were dead, all of then. Yesterday you told us that in that case there could have been no question of any medical or any other type of experiment. You recall saying that?
A Yes.
Q Now, it is noticeable that in this secret report which Rascher sent to Himmler fatal experiments are mentioned, that is, experiments which Rascher carried out alone, but that he does not mention this affair with the 16 Russians at all. Can you give us any explanation for this? How could this be explained in your opinion?
A It is difficult to say why Rascher did not report these deaths of these Russians, but I imagine that this confirms the opinion of the prosecution's medical export which completely agrees with mine, that in the case of these Russians it was not an experiment but an execution. Otherwise, I do not see any reason why Rascher in his report to Himmler, in which he was constantly reporting deaths, failed to report these deaths.
Q Witness, I shall then leave this secret report from Dr. Rascher to Himmler, and I ask you, was a report also made about the experiments which were made with your approval and with your knowledge, of which you have knowledge?
A Of course, we reported on these experiments which were performed by Romberg in Dachau with my approval and sanction. We made up a very detailed report. Romberg and Rascher drew up this report together. This is the report of the 28th of July 1942 which is in document book 2, document 402. This report was sent to my superior agency in aviation medicine, that is Hippke, through Himmler and Milch, and at least five or six copies and probably even more, went to a number of agencies of the Aviation Ministry and Aviation Industry which need ed these results for the construction of rescue equipment and in the construction of planes.
It was the purpose of these experiments to create material for rescue from high altitudes and consequently the results had to be made available to the agencies which needed the information.
Q This report is written on a sheet of paper headed "German Experimental Institute for Aviation". It is signed by Dr. Romberg, Ruff, and Rascher, isn't it?
A Yes.
Q How did it happen that you also signed this report although you were present on only one day at the experiments, that is only at a relatively small part of the experiments, and although you consequently could say nothing from your own observation about the majority of the experiments?
A It is customary in such scientific reports that the head of the Institute countersigns the report which is drawn up by the persons who actually performed the work. The head of the Institute thus assumes co-responsibility for the conclusions drawn from the results of the experiments. For the head of the Institute is responsible to superior agencies, or in general scientific life, to other scientists, that with his name he confirms the scientific accuracy of his associates, who, it is possible, no one in the scientific world or among superiors may know, he takes the responsibility for it.
Q Is that tho general custom in such scientific work?
A It is customary in such a report that the head of tho Institute countersigns. In publications that is done by putting a head over the work "From the Institute So and So - head Dr. So and So". By putting this head above the report the head of tho Institute assumes co-responsibility for the scientific contents.
Q This report, which I may perhaps call the official report, was sent to a number of offices and persons who were interested you said. Who sent it out? Did you do that yourself or did you have it done?
AAs far as I can recall we sent three copies to Himmler at his request. One copy is here in the Document Book with the accompanying letter. The other reports, on the basis of a distribution list set up by the Aviation Ministry, were sent to offices of the Aviation Ministry and people in industry. They were sent out by the office that had mimeographed the report, that was the Central Office for Scientific Reports in the Research Administration of the Aviation Ministry.
Q You said that the report was sent to Himmler, among other people, and if I am not mistaken it was addressed to the Reichsfuehrer-SS.
A Yes.
Q Dr. Ruff, did you also report to Himmler orally about the Dachau experiments?
A My associate Romberg, together with Rascher, reported to Himmler orally. I believe that was in July 1942. On some day in July Romberg called me up and told me that Rascher was in Berlin, and had told him that Himmler had ordered an oral report. That was between four and five in the afternoon when I received the call and in the evening at eight the two gentlemen already had to go to the Fuehrer's Headquarters by special train. As the Prosecution's document show Rascher made this report. We did not initiate it.
Q Dr. Ruff, we know from the documents which have been submitted by the Prosecution, that on the 11 September 1942 a film was shown in the Reich Aviation Ministry dealing with the Dachau high altitude experiments. The lecture which was intended at the same time from Field Marshal Milch was not made, as we heard, because Milch did not appear, The details are shown from the Document in Document Book II, No. 1610PS, Exhibit 73. Were you present at the showing of this film at the Reich Aviation Ministry, and what rid you hear and see?
A I was not present at the showing of this film. AS the documents show, this film showing had been arranged at Rancher's suggestion by Himmler with Milch and quite a number of people from Milch's office had been invited, but I was not among them.
Q In your official report, which you also signed which was drawn up by Romberg and Rascher, there is no mention of any fatal results of any experiments in Dachau. Now, we note the following, Dr. Ruff: When this report was drawn up and sent out you doubtless already were aware that, I believe, three, deaths had occurred. The report says nothing about that.
How can you explain this, and why, when you signed this report, did you not object?
A I knew that these deaths had not occurred in the experiments for rescue from high altitudes but in other experiments which Rascher carried out on orders from Himmler. There was hence no occasion to mention these deaths in this report.
Q Then, if I understand you correctly, the official report which you also signed was to be merely a scientific presentation and evaluation of the experiments which had been approved by you and in which Romberg had participated. On the other hand, the independent experiments which Rascher carried out secretly were none of your business and consequently had nothing to do with your scientific paper. Therefore, these three deaths were not mentioned. Did I understand you correctly?
A Yes, that is correct. I was not supposed to know anything about the deaths which had occurred in Rascher's experiments as far as Rascher was concerned. Because of the fact that Romberg had told me about these deaths, he had violated his obligation to secrecy to which he signed his name before entering the concentration camp.
Q Now, witness, let us assume that on the basis of Dr. Romberg's report, and perhaps after consultation with Rascher, and on the basis of your knowledge of all these circumstances, you had come to the conclusion that these three deaths had occurred during your own experiments, that is, during the official experiments in which Dr. Romberg participated and of which you had knowledge. If you had come to this conclusion what would you have done? Would these three deaths have been omitted in your official report, or would you have seen to it that they were mentioned if that had not been done up to that time? This is only a hypothetical question.
A It is a matter of course that in such a case the deaths would have been mentioned. Yesterday I spoke briefly about the experiences of American scientists with experiments at 12000 meters. These men, also were afraid - which an honest scientist must net be - to report these incidents and accidents.
Q Do you believe, Dr. Ruff, that if these three deaths had been mentioned, let us say, that you would have had any official difficulties, that reproaches would have been made, or that you would have been called to account?
A Of course, if these deaths had been listen or had to be listed because they had occurred during the experiments, I would have had to explain the reasons for the deaths as far as possible, but I would have had to list them no matter whether I would have gotten into difficulties or not. But I do not believe there would have been any difficulty because our superior agencies know both Romberg and myself and know that such deaths could not have occurred because of negligence or deliberately.
Q Dr. Ruff, you are acquainted with those times by experiences. You know Dr. Rascher personally. You can, therefore, form some judgment of him, and you heard of his close relationship with Himmler. Do you believe, on the basis of your knowledge of conditions, that Dr. Rascher was pursuing any definite aim by failing to mention these three deaths in the official report of the 28th of July, which you also signed, or do you believe that Dr. Rascher could have said that in a report to Himmler if it had anything to do with the experiments?
A From the interim reports to Himmler which we have here it is quite clear that Rascher had no occasion to keep any deaths secret from Himmler. If deaths had occurred in our experiments, Rascher would have had no reason to urge that they be omitted from the report. The report was first sent to Himmler for release, and, therefore, there was no occasion to conceal the deaths.
Q Dr. Ruff, you were always a serious and conscientious research worker in the field of aviation medicine. You have told us that your Dachau experiments were in the interest of technical progress in the field of aviation. They were to clear up the question "in what way can one rescue aviators from great altitudes in cases of accidents?"
That was the problem which you were to solve. Now, if deaths had occurred in your own experiments, and if these deaths had been concealed in your own report, must one not say that an incomplete and false report would distort the whole problem of the development of rescue apparatus and would have led it into quite wrong channels; that you, as the scientist responsible would have influenced technical developments in a totally wrong manner?
A Of course, if as a scientist, I had been willing to conceal deaths which actually occurred - that is, make a false report - I would have violated the most primitive principle of the research worker that is, the one that he must report the results of his experiments correctly and honestly. One forgives any scientist for drawing false conclusions from his results, but one never forgives a scientist if, in his work, he misrepresents his results and would have been what this would have amounted to. Moreover, the concealing of deaths would, of course, have affected tho whole technical development of rescue apparatus. It would have directed it into false channels. With this report we assumed the responsibility. We said that to a height of 20 kilometers rescue by parachute is possible under certain circumstances. If death had occurred, such a rescue would not be possible or, at least, would not be definitely possible. For this reason alone, it was impossible for us to be able or be allowed to conceal deaths.
Q Dr. Ruff, in your report,you drew certain conclusions from tho results in order to show, in this way, what technical science and aviation can learn for the future from this report. These conclusions are under #4,in the report which I have just read. In these conclusions you deal with the problem of cold.
That is the problem which is added to the problem of altitude and also had to be investigated and solved. For this cold problem I now refer you, Dr. Ruff, to the letter which the Inspector of the Medical Service of the Luftwaffe, Professor Hippke, sent to Himmler with the date of the 10th of October, 1942, after the Dachau altitude experiments were finished. It is in Document Book 2 of the prosecution, #289, and it says: - I quote in order to recall this sentence to your memory because every word is important here:
"The Dachau high altitude experiments are for us a very valuable and important addition to our knowledge. The fact that an altitude with so little oxygen can be endured at all for some time is most encouraging for future research."
Then comes another sentence, and Hippke writes:
"It is true that no conclusions as to the practice of parachuting can be drawn for the time being as a very important factor, that is cold, has so far not yet been taken into consideration. It places an extraordinary excess burden on the entire body and its vital movements so that the result in actual practice will very likely prove be far more unfavorable than in the present experiments."
And later comes the sentence:
"In the meantime, the supplementary tasks required now..", that is apparently on the cold problem," ".. have been begun."
Now, Dr. Ruff, as a layman, I can not judge the significance of this cold problem in connection with the high altitude experiments and how it was solved. Perhaps you can explain to us what tho practical value of your Dachau high altitude experiments was for the needs of aviation.