Q: Well, isn't it rather dangerous to use a man who, perhaps, just recovered or is on the road to recovery from an illness as indicated by the temperature curve in an experiment?
A: Well, that depends upon what illness he had. If someone has a little inflammation of the throat which has already disappeared, that really is not a serious illness.
Q: I note that on the dates from 1 September to 10 September that this man's pulse rate rose continually, stayed about normal for an extensive period of time, and that in some instances when the pulse rate rose above normal the fever curve was below normal. Now, doesn't that indicate a rather dangerous condition?
A: Well, the subnormal temperature which is recorded here is 36.5, 36.2, 36.8; if that is a subnormal temperature, then all of humanity has subnormal temperatures.
Q: Do you know what happened to this patient?
A: He remained there until the end.
Q: Did you see him after the 12th of September?
A: Well, I saw him until the 15th.
Q: We note in the last day that the temperature and pulse curves arc recorded, that the temperature and pulse curves cross one another?
A: Every human being in the course of a day has slight variations of his body temperature. And the falling of the temperature curve in this case occurred to the alarming extent of 36 degrees, and that is the most normal temperature you can imagine. That is, these are absolutely normal values which are recorded here for the last days, and the patient after he had lost 5 kilograms during the course of the experiment also gained almost 6 kilograms; that is, when he was discharged he weighed somewhat more than he weighed at the beginning of time experiment. At the beginning of the experiment he weighed 60.3 kilograms and on the 12th, 61.5 kilograms.
Q: Doctor, obviously some one here has made a drastic error in that throughout these reports we notice that in ink weight has been placed on the charts; that is, on all these charts.
That is indicated on chart C-14, that is the weight on the 12th of September was 59 kilograms, on chart C-14, and I have called the attention of the Tribunal throughout to these pencil marks, in some cases it is made with a blue pencil and in some cases in ink. Now, here we see that this patient on the 12th of September, his weight is recorded as 61.5 kilograms, and somebody at a later date put 60.5 kilograms for the 12th of September. Now, can you maintain that these weights were put in all these other charts, in ink, and in this chart in blue pencil, some of the other charts also in blue pencil, were put in at Dachau or were they also put in here at Nurnberg, in as much as the ink is rather fresh and does not look to be three years of age?
A: I can tell you with certainly that this was not done in Nurnberg. And if you look at the figures which are written in such a characteristic manner are thus in the handwriting of the French medical student. If you will compare them with the other figures you can see that it is the same handwriting I believe, however, that in the case of the second experimental group the final weight, one or two days later, perhaps even only on the last day, was taken, and that was not recorded quite correctly. If I may ask you to show me other fever curve from the experimental group No. 2, from 2 to 44, I can probably clarify that quite easily.
Q: We will cover two or three of those, Doctor, before we finish. How do you account for the discrepancy here: Now, the fact -- on this chart, which in NO. B-36, under the date of 12 September, we see the man has two different weights -
A: (Interposing) I have just tried to explain that to you. This one group from 1 to 32, was weighed on one day, and the medical student apparently recorded it in ink; while the second experimental group, in my opinion, was weighed later; and, that is what he had done incorrectly, it was not that he wrote these weights later but he wrote it down there. I believe that it can be seen from the entire second experimental group, from 32 to 44.
Q: In view of the constant rise in temperature in the patient, A-36, and chart A-36 and B-36, indicating that his temperature remained above normal during the entire time that he was subject to the drinking of sea water, and that you had to interrupt it after four days, and had to give the man some injections of Steriofundin and so forth.
Are you certain that the subject was not one of the men whom the witness Viehweg saw being taken to the morgue?
A. This experimental subject on the 12th September still gained 2 kilograms in weight above the body weight at the beginning of the experiment. That is how the subject is recorded here. I don't know why a person who gains weight so well should die and anyhow from a throat inflammation he doesn't die.
Q. It isn't certain on these charts that the man weighed 61.5 kilos on the 12th September or whether he weighed 60.5 kilos. It is apparent from the chart, and the chart speaks for itself, that you don't know what he did weigh, isn't that so?
A. I am telling you the weights which are recorded here on the lower line are the daily weights that were taken. These figures that were recorded up here - that is the final weight. That is the last weight that was taken. I would like to say for sure that the medical student recorded it on a wrong day because we had agreed that the final weight will be recorded up here.
Q. Did he do the same for all those charts in the second series? Record the final weights on the wrong day?
A. Yes, that is what I suppose. That is the final weight, the last weight, that was taken. The same medical student recorded on all the charts in the same handwriting and apparently he recorded the final weight on the 12th perhaps only later.
Q. I request, your Honor, to mark....
THY PRESIDENT: IF we are starting on a new chart the Tribunal will be in recess.
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
MR. HARDY: May it please the Tribunal, before proceeding with the examination of these records, I might add that I have only two more charts to go over with the defendants, and then perhaps three or four other questions which raise questions and my cross examination will be completed. I understand that Dr. Steinbauer has redirect exanimation of the defendant. In any event, the Prosecution has now Dr. Ivy her in Nurenberg. Dr. Ivy is the Vice President of the University of Illinois and performed tests with sea-water, and is qualified to testify as an export witness on the part of the Prosecution. Inasmuch as Dr. Ivy's connections and associations in the States require that he return on next Tuesday, the Prosecution respectfully requests that we be allowed to call Dr. Ivy out of order and have him take the stand this afternoon at 1:30, inasmuch as it is anticipated that his direct examination will take a considerable the length of time, and in addition thereto it is anticipated that defense counsel will have a considerable number of questions to ask in cross examination. So, if it meets with the approval of the Tribunal, I should like to call Dr. Ivy on direct examination at 1:30 this afternoon.
DR. STEINBAUER: Mr. President, for purely formal reasons, I should like to speak against the calling of an expert at this stage of the proceedings. As far as I know, Dr. Ivy was in Nurnberg on the 20th of January, during the prosecutions case. He could have been examined as an expert at that time by the prosecution and, of course, I think it important considering certain occurrances that the matter be investigated by an objective third party. I will not object particularly because, in my opinion Dr. Ivy is only a cross examination witness for Schaefer for whom he has given an affidavit, but I ask permission that, instead of the written opinion of Professor Glatzel, which is in my document book, I be allowed to call this expert too as a witness so that he can comment on the material submitted by Professor Ivy. I was not able to give him this material before when he wrote his opinion because I did not have it in my possession, but I merely gave him some tables supplied to me by Professor Beiglboeck. The opinion of Glatzel I shall not submit for the time being, but shall ask for permission to call this expert as a witness here personally, and then the prosecution will also have an opportunity to examine him so that we will have two experts.
THE PRESIDENT: When will this witness be available, counsel?
DR. STEINBAUER: I believe, if he is asked to come by telegramhe is in Flensburg, in Northern Germany, near Kiel-I think he could be here in a day and a half.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well.
MR. HARDY: Your Honor, I might state in that connection that Professor Volhard has already appeared as an expert in the sea-water experiments for the defense counsel. I have no objection to further experts if he wishes to call them, however.
TEE PRESIDENT: That is a matter which can be determined later. The Tribunal will afford the defendants reasonable opportunity to call witnesses who can be of assistance to the Tribunal in determing these issues.
While the Tribunal is of course reluctant to interrupt the examination of a witness, particularly one of the defendants, it appears to the Tribunal that Dr. Ivy, being here, should be heard and the request of the prosecution will be accordingly granted. Dr. Ivy may take the stand at 1:30 this afternoon.
At that time, the Tribunal will sit, as it did yesterday, from 1:30 to 5:00, and will observe those same hours tomorrow, and will sit certainly Saturday morning and possibly Saturday afternoon, in order to complete the testimony of this witness.
Counsel may proceed.
BY MR. HARDY:
Q. I wish to turn to Case #39. I respectfully request the Tribunal to mark it please.
Would you kindly read the subject's name from the top of Chart A-39, Professor Beiglboeck?
A. Johann Jablonski.
Q. What is his age here, please?
A. 49.
Q. Was a man 49 years of age a suitable subject to be used in an experiment?
A . I remember this man very well. I did not want to take him into the experiment, but then he wanted to remain at the station and I assigned him to the experiment with 500 cc of sea-water and the LF probably means Lactoflavin, and he was in the experiment for three days altogether. He lost 2 kilograms.
Q. Well, a man 49 years of age didn't meet with the qualifications of the Luftwaffe, did he?
A. I have already said I did not want to take him in the first place, but he wanted to stay there and I accepted him into the experiment symbolically, as it were. It was an experiment which meant practically nothing. During these two days the man lost about 2 kilograms or, in three days, rather, and then he went back to his original weight.
Q. Did he receive 500 cc of sea-water?
A. Yes.
Q. For a period of three days?
A. Three days, yes.
Q. Was that sea-water treated with the Berka method or was that plain sea water?
A. That was Berka and Lactoflavin.
Q. Due to the age of this subject, why didn't you use him in the Schaefer experiment? That is, subject him to drinking seawater treated by the Schaefer method? He would have been a more fit subject to have drunk the Schaefer water inasmuch as the Schaefer water was harmless.
A. I said it was not my intention to keep him in the experiment. He was taken out immediately. He would have probably lost much more weight with the Schaefer water than in this symbolic experiment, and besides he drank water in between. One can see from the end to the 3rd he dropped from 40.2 to 40 kilograms. That is, in effect, he actually did not participate in the experiment at all.
Q. Did this man become ill at all during the course of these experiments?
A. No.
Q. Did his condition become below normal?
A. I didn't understand.
Q. Was he below normal at any time during the experiment?
A. No he was unchanged.
Q. Then, why was it necessary to give him a sterofundin injection, together with glucose and calcium?
A. I did that more or less regularly because that was the best method to break off. I treated this case very, very carefully. He was in the experiment for three days, then he was put into the easiest group.
Lactoflavin was an aid for him. Third, I broke off with all possible precautions. It was not because he needed it, but to help him.
Q. The easiest group of the experiments actually was those that were drinking the Schaefer water, isn't that true?
A. But they were in the experiment for 12 days. If I had let him go without eating for 12 days he certainly would have suffered more than he did in this three day experiment. Actually the experiment lasted only for one day. I did not want to take him in the beginning.
Q. Let us turn now to Case #40. Will the Tribunal kindly mark that, please? Here we have, on Chart A-40, an obvious erasure of the name of the subject. Do you see that, Doctor? I have been able to decipher that to read Ferdinand Daniel. Would that be correct?
A. Yes, that's right.
Q. How old was that young man?
A. 16, it says here.
Q. Did you have the consent of his parents?
A. I have already said, neither in this case nor in the case of any other patient, did. I negotiate with the parents.
Q. What did he do to be branded Asocial at the age of 16?
A. I have already testified about that. I said that I do not know the causes of this classification.
Q. Let us look at his charts more specifically, Doctor. What was his weight on the first day of the experiments. That is, the 31st day of August?
A. 52.5, the first day was 52.7.
Q. Was this young man subjected to 1,000 cc of sea-water?
A. Yes.
Q. What was his weight at the end of the experiment?
A. 47.9.
Q. What was his weight when you discharged him and left Dachau?
A. 50.7.
Q. Approximately four pounds underweight at that time?
A. Not quite.
Q. Now, the water balances--that is, the urinary output and the intakes which are indicated on these charts A-40 and B-40 show that he did not take the entire 1,000cc because the effect of what he did take--that is, perhaps he got normal water--that on the middle of the fifty day, nevertheless, it was necessary for you to support his heart action by an injection of sterofundin, glucose and calcium, wasn't it?
A. I broke off a large part of the experiments by intraveneous injections of liquids and for the reasons which I have already given. Because suddenly the amount of blood in the circulation is increased, not as a treatment but as a support, a precautionary measure,I administered a circulation: and not because he needed it. One con see from his pulse rate very clearly that he was quite normal.
Q. How many aviators did the German Luftwaffe have aged 16? Pilots?
A. Pilots of that age? There were none, only assistants, socalled A A gunners.
Q. You mean you had boys of 16 years of age in gun crews in airplanes?
A 15 to 17 year olds worked anti-aircraft guns in large numbers in 1944.
Q They were working anti-aircraft guns, were they flying in the planes?
A No.
Q It wouldn't have been very likely that a young boy of 16 years of age would be isolated on a raft at sea as far as the Luftwaffe was concerned?
A That was unlikely, yes, but in the case of a young person, of course, one would expect that he would suffer less from the medical point of view. A 16-year old would be able to hold out better than a 20 year old.
Q Is that why you permitted a boy of 16 to be subjected to these experiments, or didn't you concern yourself with his age?
A He was quite well developed. In my opinion 16 years is not a reason why a person can't drink sea water for a few days. You can see the experiment was stopped very suddenly on the 5th day. The entire loss of weight--he drank water in the meantime - for example, from the third to fourth day not only doesn't he lose anything but he gains weight. The total loss of weight in the experiment was 4 kilo.
Q Did you perform any surgery on this subject on 6th of September?
A No.
Q Was it necessary to give him a series of injections, or what are those penciled notations below the black line in the middle of page 40, under the date "6th Sept."?
A These words under the black line mean after the experiment was broken off, he was given water several times in doses of 200,one, two, three, four, that is he took a liter of water in doses of 200 cc. every hour or every two hours. That was not infusion, that was the amount he drank.
Q What was the room temperature of the room in which the subjects were kept?
A I can't tell you at the moment. It was the beginning of September or of August, and probably not very hot.
Q Does the temperature at which a room is kept have any bearing on the outcome of the experiment?
A Of course the temperature has a certain influence as far as there is perspiration high temperature has an influence. When secretion stops, this influence is no longer important.
Q Did you attempt to keep this room at a temperature simulating temperatures that may be found at sea?
A In my opinion temperature at sea varies considerably. It depends on whether one is at the equator or near Greenland.
Q Would you repeat that again. I don't believe I understood you.
A I said temperature at sea varies considerably. It makes a big difference whether one is in distress at sea on the equator or whether one is near Greenland.
Q To simulate temperature would be necessary only for a very specific case. Here we just took the temperatures that happened to be.
Q Did you consider the temperature of a room had no bearing on the results of effects of the experimentation in sea water research?
A Of course the temperature has a certain influence, but it cannot be done in practice any other way than to carry out the experiments in a room.
Q It is pretty warm in August and September in the area of Dachau, is it not?
A The end of August or beginning of September it was not so warm anymore. It was the beginning of fall.
Q Well, the climate in Dachau is similar to the climate here in Nurnberg, isn't it?
A I presume so. I don't have any exact information on the subject.
Q Did you make any effort to install fans or to put in cooling apparatus in the barracks or the experimental station wherein the experiments on these 44 subjects were performed?
A There was ventilation constantly. All the windows were open and besides the temperature was not very high at the time of the experiments. It is possible when the people arrived, which was the beginning of August, it might have been warm for awhile, but when the experiments proper started the temperature was quite bearable, no special heat.
Q We have seen in most of these charts that you had a 7-day or 8-day, or perhaps a 6-day observation period of each subject prior to the commencement of the experiment, and during that observation period the experimental subjects received additional rations. In addition to that what physical routine did the experimental subjects go through?
A The subjects were not given any further treatment. They were given this just this diet; we made urine tests and sometimes blood tests; they could move freely, go walking in the courtyard; they had complete freedom of movement within our area.
Q Well, now, on the weight charts we have been considering here for the last day or two, you show the weights of the experimental subjects prior to the 7-day observation period, wherein they received additional rations. What can you tell us as to the weights of those subjects as compared to the weight, or the normal weight of a person of their particular height and stature, were they of average weight, underweight or overweight?
A For the most part they were within the normal deviations from the average. I will read that: One was one meter 69, 63.5 kilo.
That is quite normal. The next was 169, 64 kilo. The next was 160, with 56 kilos. The next 168 with 62 kilos. The next was 167, with 61 kilos. On the whole perhaps there were a few who were a little below average, but only a very few, a very few exceptions.
Q How would their weights or sizes compare to that of a Luftwaffe aviator, wore they of the normal German aviator type?
A I believe that in the year 1944 these weights were quite the average weights in Germany.
Q Now, these men averaged about 60 kilos, that is striking an average, isn't that so, or about 120 pounds?
A Yes. But you must consider that these are rather short persons; I have just given you the height. They are about 160. Some of them are even under 160, one 157, 159, one 162, one 160. Some of them were taller, but the average was quite noticeably shorter. It makes a difference whether a person is 159 cent. tall or 180 in regard to the normal weight.
Q Could a person underweight endure a sea water experiment better than a person of normal weight?
A Most of them had normal weight or even increased under the special diet. At least their weight was in such proportion to their height that they could endure the experiment.
Q For instance, could an overweight like myself endure a sea water experiment as well as a person of normal weight?
A I do not consider it impossible that it would be worse for him. Someone who is much overweight has the water in his body much more firmly and suffers more from a lack of water than a thinner person, that is a fact.
MR. HARDY: I have no further question to put to Dr. Beigelboeck.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will be in recess 5 minutes until the Tribunal is re-arranged.
MR. HARDY: Does Dr. Steinbauer have any questions about the charts that he wants to ask while the Tribunal is here?
THE PRESIDENT: I should have asked that. I will ask counsel for defendant Beigelboeck if he has any redirect examination of the defendant on these charts we have just been looking at.
DR. STEINBAUER: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Then we will proceed with that matter here.
Redirect Examination.
DR. STEINBAUER: How many liver punctures can you see in this chart?
THE WITNESS: It will take me quite a while to find them. I believe, however, I can remember even though I only have a vague recollection; there were eight.
MR. HARDY: I suggest that when he names the case where there was a liver puncture, he will state the case number.
THE PRESIDENT: Will the witness observe that when a liver puncture is named, he will state the case number.
THE WITNESS: Numbers 12, 13, 20, 24, 29, 30, 31, 32, and 38; that is all.
BY DR. STEINBAUER:
Q. The Prosecutor showed you a number of charts, I should like to ask you now to look at the charts which he did now show you; the first was No. 2, so let us discuss No. 1. Tell us briefly how it was and how long this person was in the experiment and especially if he drank water. I consider this last point especially important.
A. I believe No. 2 has already been discussed.
Q. Yes.
A. Yes, No. 2. I think for certain that he drank water once between the 25th and 26th.
Q. And the next one, No. 5?
A. No. 5 certainly drank a larger amount of water between the 26th and 27th. It is quite certain in this case. In 24 hours he went from 57.2 to 57 Kilograms, a loss of only 200 grams. That is impossible.
Q. And then 6?
A. I believe that he observed the conditions of the experiment the whole time, and it was interrupted on the fifth day.
Q. No. 10, where there is no number on it?
A. No. 10 is a Schaefer case and there is no question of drinking water against the rules. The next one which is not marked is No. 12. On the 4th day of the experiment, from the fourth to the fifth lost 100 grams, so he drank at least one half liter or three-quarter liter of water. From the 28th to 29th he not only does not lose, but he gains 600 grams. I must assume on that day he drank at least a liter of water. That is a case where I would be certain that he drank on and one half to two liters of water, and what I figured out theoretically would correspond to that.
We have discussed No. 13, we have discussed No. 14. Of course, in the cases which we have discussed here some drank water, without its having been mentioned expressly, and I shall put this in the statement for the Tribunal which I shall write down about this matter of weight.
No. 15 has not been discussed. On the 4th day of the experiment, weight was 55.9 kilograms and the next day 56 Kilograms. That is also an increase in weight. He had 500 cc of sea-water for six days in the experiment and drank at least one liter of fresh water.
No. 16 is a typical case where the sea water drinking had the same effect. He got so much fresh water in between that he hardly had any loss at all, at least in the beginning. From the 25th to the 26th he loses only 400 grams. From the 26th to the 27th his weight remains the same. From the 27th to 28th he loses 200 grams. That is no of the cases who drank water constantly.
Case 19 on the second day weighed 48.7 kilograms, on the third day 48.2; on the fourth day 48.1, and on the fifth day 48.3, and then he starts to lose weight and was in the experiment for two more days. That is another case, he he drank water daily.
He was in the experiment a second time during which he drank water constantly again, his loss from the 2nd to 3rd was 500 grams; 3rd to 4th 200 grams, then the experiment was interrupted for the second time because he failed to carry out the experiment.
No. 20 from the 2nd to 3rd day he loses 400 grams, this is much too little. From the 4th to 5th day he loses 100 grams; after the 6th day the experiment is broken off. He was also in the experiment twice. The second time for five days he lost a total of four kilograms and from the 2nd to the 3rd day of the experiment shows an increase of 100 grams. He failed to conform to the conditions of the experiment for the second time too.
Case No. 24 from the 3rd to 4th day loses 200 grams, from the 4th to the 5th day he loses 300 grams, from the 5th to the 6th day he loses 300 grams and then for two more days about 1 kilogram per day and then the experiment is broken off. The experiment lasted for nine days, bat the total loss of weight was six kilograms. That is a certain sign that he drank water constantly. Those were the cases which deceived me where I did not know what the cause of the failure to lose weight was, because I could not know that. That is why the experiment was continued.
No. 26 was not discussed either. He had a regular loss of weight. The experiment is broken off on the 6th day.
Case 27 is a typical example. From the 3rd to the 4th day he loses 200 grams, from the 4th to the 5th day he loses 600 grams, from the 30th to 31st, 500 grams; another case that drank water.
Case 28, that shows such a slight average loss of weight that one can assume that the experiment was interfered with by drinking water, which he began on the second day and from and from the 2nd to 3rd day the loss of weight was only 100 grams.
At the beginning of the experiment, the losses are usually more pronounced; later the loss of weight is relatively less. This shows he drank small amounts of water every day.
Case 29 possibly drank little. From the 26th to 27th I think that he drank something. The experiment was broken off on the 7th day. In the second experiment, from the 3rd to 4th day he loses 200 grams and the experiment went on only to the fifth day.
I should like to say that in the second group, when I knew their devices from my experiences with the first group, I knew what to do and broke off the experiments. If I had wanted to continue the experiments, I would have done it in the second group too. This I did in the first group only because at first I did not realize the significance of the failure to lose weight.
Case 31. That is a case of a thousand cc, where one would expect relatively great losses of weight. From the third to the fourth day he loses only six hundred grans; from the fourth to the fifth day only three hundred grams; so that one can assume a water intake of one and a half liters, at least.
Case 32 probably cooperated rather well. He was taken out on the sixth day. A careful examination of these charts will show that when nothing was drunk the experiment was always short. Where a great deal was drunk, the condition was such that there was no reason to interfere with the experiment.
Case 33. From the third to the fourth day he loses two hundred grams; from the fourth to the fifth day again two hundred grams, and, nevertheless, it is stopped on the sixth day.
Case 34 is one of the Schaefer group.
Case 35 from the first to the second day loses only five hundred grams although the amount of urine alone has this weight, so that the loss of weight through hunger or through the reduced amount of food in this case and the loss of water through the lungs does not amount at all. He must have drunk something. From the third to the fourth day the weight remains the same. From the fourth to the fifth day he loses five hundred grans although the amount of urine is eight hundred cc greater than the intake of water. These three hundred cc more that he loses must be included in these five hundred so that this means that he drank something. In suite of all the amount that he has drunk, he was taken out of the experiment on the sixth day.
Q. Is that the one with the inflammation of the veins?
A. No, that case was not discussed. That was not an acute inflammation. Many of these gypsies had old skin infections as the picture will show, what medicine calls Vagrant's Skin, from insect bites or going barefoot, and this caused chronic thrombophlebitis. That is not a disease but a chronic change of the veins.