A. (cont.) There I continued to work in the Bacteriological Section as head of the department for virus and tumor research and when in the course of the incorporation of Prussia into the Reich the Bacteriological Section was dissolved, my colleagues and I moved to the Robert Koch Institute which is also in Berlin. On the 1st of March 1936 I became department chief and professor there. I continued to work there too in the same research field; that is, virus and tumor research. In 1933 I received the Hans Arendsen prize for my work in the field of infectious diseases. On the 1st of October 1941 the Robert Koch Institute made me a regular professor of bacteriology and hygiene at the University of Strassbourg where, at the same time, I became director at the Hygiene Institute. I remained there until Strassbourg was taken in November 1944.
For reasons connect d with the war, on approximately the 1st of September 1944 I already took part of my institute to Oberschreiberhau and, when we had to evacuate this town, we went to Thuringia -- that is, Saalfeld on the Saale -- where in April 1945 I was captured and put under arrest by the Americans.
Q. May I ask you witness to tell the Court briefly about your fate after you were taken prisoner.
A. From Saalfeld I was taken to an American interrogation camp in France. There I was interrogated about a number of questions in the field of virus diseases and from there I was sent to various American PW and internment camps.
On the 10th of November 1945 I was brought to the court prison in Nurnberg and interrogated thoroughly about my work.
Q. Professor, were you interrogated here by the Office of Chief of Counsel for War Crimes?
A. Yes, I was interrogated on behalf of this office on the subject.
Q. And the subject of the interrogations, what was it?
A. I was interrogated on the same charges which are the subject of the indictment in this trial.
Q. Were you shown documents in the course of this interrogation, Professor?
A. Yes, I was shown documents, documents which I have not seen again among the records of this trial.
Q. Can you tell us the result of this interrogation?
A. I was not told the result of the interrogation but after about two months, in January 1946, I was taken from Nurnberg to the Hersbruck internment camp. From there I was sent to Plattling. There is another internment camp. Then on the 15th of June 1946 I was released in Plattling by the American Army to Saalfeld in Thuringia and I returned there.
In Saalfeld I received a call from the Russian Military Government to head a newly founded institute for virus and tumor research in Berlin. I answered this call, and I worked in this institute which is attached to the Institute for Medicine and Biology until the 16th of November 1946 when, on the occasion of a visit at Zehlendorf in the American sector, I was suddenly arrested by a British military policeman without any warrant or any document. I was taken away by force and was kept hidden for two and a half months in an English prison in **den. This was obviously a case of kidnapping.
Only in January 1947 I got out of this prison. I was turned over to the French authorities and was taken to Strassbourg where I have been in custody ever since. On the 16th of May I was transferred here.
In connection with this trial, Professor, we are interested in the military positions which you held during the war. Will you please tell us briefly what they were?
A. From 1936 to 1939 I was in the Reserve. I was always in a position of a consulting hygienist with the air force physician, of the first air Force in Berlin. On the 26th of August 1939 I was called up for war service as Oberarzt in the Reserve, again as consulting hygienist for the physician of the First Air Force. My activity a s consulting hygienist, as the name says, consisted primarily of advising the air force physician on hygienic questions.
This activity made it possible for me, even during the war, to continue working at my civilian job at the Robert Koch Institute.
When I was called to Strassbourg on the 1st of October 1941 I was first given a leave. Then I was no longer working as consulting hygienist. As late as the summer of 1943, at the request of the chief of the medical service of the Luftwaffe, through the mediation of Professor Rose, I resumed the position of a consulting hygienist, this time for air force physician, Reich, who was also in Berlin. My position was again the same advisory activity and I was able to continue my work at the institute in Strassbourg, that is, my research and my teaching activity. My activity as a consulting hygienist thus consisted of primarily of trips to check hygienic conditions with the troops; secondly, of drawing up factual reports which could be important for the air fleet physician; and I held this position until the collapse.
Q. Your military ranks, Professor? Could you list them, too?
A. As I said, on the 26th of August 1939 I was called up as an Oberarst (First Lieutenant) of the Reserve; then on the 1st of April 1941 I became Stabsarzt, (Captain); then on the 1st of January 1944 I was promoted to Oberstabsarzt, (Major).
Q. Then your promotions were quite the normal thing?
A. Yes, quite normal.
A. And one more question on this subject, Professor: in your various positions, civilian as well as military, who were your superiors?
A. First, I shall discuss my civilian positions. As a member of the Reich Health Office my immediate superior was the president of the Reich Health Office and the next superior agency was the Reich Ministry of the Interior. As professor and department chief at the Robert Koch Institute my superior was the president of this institute and this, as long as the Institute was under Prussia, the Prussian Minister of the Interior; later, when it became a Reich institute, the Reich Minister of the Interior.
As a professor at the University of Strassbourg, I was immediately under the rector and the curator of this university arid also under the Minister of Education.
My military superior during the way was always the same air force physician of the First Air Force or air physician, Reich, in Berlin. I may point out that, as consulting hygienist, I was not in a position to issue any orders myself, but if I wanted to have orders carried out I had to make suggestions to the air force physician which he passed on as orders to the subordinate agencies or units. My reports, mostly factual reports, went directly to the air force physician and, when he considered it advisable or when there was an order to that effect, he passed them on to the Chief of the Medical Services of the Luftwaffe.
Q. Professor, did you not hold another position which might be of interest in connection with this trial?
A. Yes, I had another position as hygienic consultant of the health director of the government in Alsace.
Q. That was after you became a professor in Strassbourg?
A. That was from 1941 on.
Q. And who was your superior in this position?
A. In Strasbourg?
Q. Yes.
A. That was the health director with the Alsatian government.
Q And a final question, Professor, were you a member of the NSDAP?
A Yes, I was a member of the NSDAP.
Q Did you hold any office or rank in the party?
A No, I had no office and no rank in the party.
Q Now let's go on to your work, Professor. What specific fields of work did you have in detail?
AAs I have already said my work was that of virus and tumor research, including tissue cultures which has a great significance in this type of research. I dealt primarily with virus research because parts of the tumors are among the virus diseases. Here I was primarily interested in discovering the causes, that is finding the virus responsi ble for the various virus diseases, breeding this virus, making it microscopically visible and in connection with that, questions as to immunity. Then I also dealt with the development of vaccines against virus diseases. Virus production on a large scale, however, never interested me. Since this is not the duty f a research worker in normal times but the war created conditions so that for military reasons and also for general reasons it became necessary to accept such vaccine production assignments.
Q Well, we will come back to vaccine production later. I should like to ask you now, witness, since when had you worked in this specialized field?
A Since I entered the Reich Health Office, since 1926.
Q And what diseases, Professor, were you specifically interested in?
A In the course of the years I worked on quite a number of virus diseases. I can only mention small pox, herpes, influenza, various forms of inflammation of the brain, psittacosis, than tumor diseases and then the diseases which are of interest primarily in this trial, typhus, yellow fever, epidemic jaundice or hepatitis and influenze.
Q Professor, your work is very important here and in connection with your work, the research assignments which were issued to you. First I should like to ask you to speak as generally and briefly as possible on research assignments in general.
A From the files which I have seen here I have seen that the term "research assignment" has been considerably misused. The term "research assignment" is not a clearly defined term with only one meaning. It must be divided into various groups, the majority of the research assignments came about because the scientists asked for assistants because largo funds are generally not available to tho institutes for research but in Germany we had the Reich Research Council which developed from the unfortunate position of German science and. during the war we had an opportunity to ask the medical inspectorate of the various branches of the Wehrmacht for research assignments. Then one made an application, one indicated the subject and the problem one wanted to work with, and the reasons why this work was important and why one needed assistance. If this application was approved, then as a rule this involved financial support but this was especially important during the war. In these research assignments we had an opportunity to obtain material and equipment which had become scarce because of the war and also an opportunity to employ additional personnel and to have some of tho more important workers deferred. It also happened, but rather rarely, that tho agency which I have mentioned, issued the research assignments. These were generally development assignments, especially in the field of technique, physics and chemistry. I cannot remember any such assignments in my field of bacteriology and particularly virus research. Tho third group one cannot call research assignments, but simply production assignments, which the institute did not like to accept, for instance, vaccine production, that was the duty of industry, in this case, the serum and vaccine industry, but during the war we had to subordinate such objections and be willing to take over production assignments.
Q Witness, will you please look at document book 8, look at page 6, The document I should like to discuss with you is Prosecution Exhibit No. 137, Exhibit 189. It is a letter from you to the Rector of the University at Strassburg dated the 7th of October 1943. In this letter you ask that the Hygiene Institute be recognized as a war plant and under the numbers 1 to 5 you cite a number of research assignments. Will you please tell us, Professor, under which category of the question you have just mentioned the various assignments fit?
A I will go into the individual assignments briefly one after the other. The first assignments is a production assignment for yellow fever vaccine given out by the "Reich Aviation Ministry and the Commander in Chief of the Luftwaffe from the Medical Inspectorate. This is purely a production assignment.
The second one also issued by the Inspectorate of the Medical Service of the Luftwaffe is an assignment on typhus vaccine, again a research assignment.
The third assignment is also from the Aviation Ministry, Commander in Chief of the Luftwaffe, Chief of the Medical Service of the Luftwaffe, subject, influenza. It was a pure research assignment to discover the cause of the disease. It included the development of a practical procedure for the development of vaccine, a research and development assignment, but not a production assignment.
The fourth assignment was issued by the Reich Research Council and refers to typhus. It is also a research assignment.
The next one that is listed is also an assignment of the Reich Research Council on hepatitis, or epidemic jaundice, This was a subject I was especially interested in.
Q Now this Tribunal is especially interested in the following question, witness: In working on these research assignments were you under the supervision of the offices which had given you these
A No, in my capacity as director of the University Institute I was working only under the Rector and Curator of this University and then the Reich Ministry of Education.
Q In such research assignments and production assignments, was it customary, Professor, for the work of the scientists to be checked in any way?
A No, there was no right to check the work nor any duty, as an Institute director is in an independent scientific position and no one got the idea of exercising any control. If one had a research assignment one was merely obligated at certain intervals to report on the progress of the work and with the aid of these reports the agency that issued the assignment decided whether it was worth while to continue the work, or not, that is, whether it was worth while to issue further funds and so forth.
Q: Now, was it not another duty, that is, to give an accounting of the money?
A: Yes, of course, accountings were generally given at least that was the case with us. The money was administered by the University Treasury and the accounting went through that office.
Q: Professor, you said you worked with research on small pox, yellow fever, jaundice, influenza, and typhus. Now, I should like to go on to various research work. Going over these research assignments, Mr. President, it will be necessary to use certain specialized terms repeatedly as was shown in the Rose case. In order to avoid long theoretical explanations I have asked the witness to make a brief affidavit of this subject. I believe that will serve the Tribunal's purpose better than a long discussion. I have put the document in Becker-Freyseng Supplemental No. 6, which is not ready yet. I have the necessary number of English and German copies here and I should like to ask the representative of the General Secretary's office to distribute these to the Tribunal, the Prosecution, and the interpreters so that I may read it now.
Professor Haagen was in America for many years and he has given the affidavit in German as well as in English. There are two originals. I think that is the best way to avoid difficulties. I offer this as Becker-Freyseng Document 75, it will be Exhibit 51 for Becker-Freyseng, and here is the original.
THE PRESIDENT: Copies of the affidavit in the German language will in due time be furnished to the Tribunal I assume?
DR. TIPP: Yes. I will bring it tomorrow morning. I am afraid I don't have enough right now. So that it will be understandable, Mr. President, I should like to read the most important parts of this affidavit. No. I deals with the professional concern of the witness. I have already gone into that. I needn't read that I begin on page 2 - 11.
II. Therefore I believe myself able to give the following short statement about the terms, used especially in virus research.
III. 1). Virus means originally poison or better living poison. Today virus means a group of germs of a special kind.
2). Virulence - the total action or effect of the virus.
DR TIPP: Virulent is the adjective.
3). The action of virulence is establishes essentially by the presence of a pathogen and an antigen factor.
a) pathogen - pathogen action - capacity to produce a typical manifest disease.
pathogen for human being - the virus produces a disease in human being.
pathogen for animals - the virus produces a disease in animals. A virus may be either exclusively pathogen for human being or pathogen for animals or pathogen for bath at the same time.
b) antigen - antigen action - capacity to produce a specific immunity or specific antibodies against a later infection in question.
4) One doesn't speak of a virus virulent for human beings, but of a virus pathogen for human beings.
5) Only living virus is virulent, that is to say active in some way. Killed by physical or chemical means it looses at the same time its activity or virulence, that is to say the antigen and pathogen factors disappear. Than the virus is a virulent. It is not able to produce immunity or disease.
6) Infection - introduction of a germ or active parts of it into the body without regard to the special action.
7) Not every infection must result in a manifest diseases.
8) Toxic - poisoning action.
Toxin - poisoning part of virus with a pathogen and an antigen factor.
9) The correct English term for Impfung is inoculation - artificially produced infection.
vaccination - the purpose of the inoculation is immunization.
The German term "Schutzimpfung" corresponds with the English vaccination.
10. Immunization - production of specific protective substances or anti-bodies against a later natural infection with the respective disease. Vaccination is therefore an artificial immunization.
11. An immunization against virus diseases is possibly exclusively with living, i.e. virulent virus, which is however no longer pathogen for human beings.
12. Therefore a vaccine against virus diseases has to contain living, i.e. virulent virus, the antigen or immunizing action of which is preserved, but the pathogen, disease producing action for human beings of which has disappeared.
13. The virus used for vaccines is modified or attenuated by animal passage or culture so much that the pathogen action is suppressed, the antigen action however is preserved. The virus grown in the animals is pathogen to the, but no longer for human beings.
14. The introduction of living virus containing vaccines is therefore a real infection with virulent virus which is however not more pathogen for human beings.
DR. TIPP There follows the signature and the certification. Mr. President, I now come to the work of Professor Haagen in detail. Since we have only five minutes I believe it would be better to start tomorrow morning.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will now be in recess until 9:30 o'clock tomorrow morning.
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 18 June 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 court.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Marshal, will you ascertain that all the defendants are present in the court?
THE MARSHAL: Hay it please your Honors, all the defendants are present in the court.
THE PRESIDENT: The Secretary General will note for the record the presence of all defendants in court.
The witness is reminded that he is still under oath and is also reminded that he need not answer any question which he feels would incriminate himself.
Counsel may proceed.
EUGEN HAAGEN - Resumed DIRECT EXAMINATION - Continued BY DR. TIPP (Defense Counsel for defendants Schroeder and BeckerFreyseng):
Q Professor, yesterday afternoon we stopped with your general work. Now, I should like to go on to the individual experiments with which my two clients are accused. First, I should like to discuss your work in the field of influenza. Professor Schroeder and Dr. Becker-Freyseng are accused of allegedly criminal human experiments in this field. There is no evidence of this in the documents and I therefore do not know on what the prosecution bases its assertions, but I can assumed that the connection between my two clients and such allegedly criminal experiments is supposed to have been through your person. Will you please describe briefly to the Tribunal how the work in the field of influenza came about and what work you carried out in detail?
A First, I must protest energetically against the charge repeatedly raised by the prosecution that I carried out criminal experiments on human beings. I have found this several times in the documents.
My influenza work goes back to 1935 and 1936. The nature of the influenza germ was debated for decades. The so-called "Pfeiffer" bacillus was, for years, considered the cause of influenza, but in the big epidemic of the first World War, where there were millions of cases, the opinion began to prevail that influenza was caused by a virus-like germ, but only when virus research had reached a certain level - that was after the World War, in the 1930's - could we systematically begin to try to discover the cause of influenza. In several countries, first in America, it was possible to isolate a filterable, invisible virus, the specific qualities of which were soon ascertained by animal experiments. Attempts to breed this virus followed, and a number of immunology works. In approximately 1936, we heard the first news, again from America, that it had been possible to develop a living virus vaccine against influenza, and soon we could begin to realize and practice the plan.........
MR. HARDY (Interrupting): Nay it please your Honor, it doesn't seem to me that it's necessary to go back to the years 1936, 1937 and 1938 and discuss the whole development of the influenza problem. The question here is whether or not Dr. Haagen experimented on human beings with influenza in a concentration camp, whether or not they were volunteers, and whether or not he received orders from the Medical Inspectorate, if Dr. Tipp is interested. I don't see any reason to discuss the whole history of influenza. The point is as simple as that.
THE PRESIDENT: The witness may continue. This preliminary talk should not consume too much time, but he may make some preliminary explanation if he desires.
THE WITNESS: (continuing answer) I had intended to be brief anyhow, but I believe in the interest of what will follow it is necessary to give a brief introduction.
Successful vaccinations were performed in America, -in America, England and other countries, This question interested us in Germany too, of course. In 1936 I succeeded in isolating a good virus strain from an influenza case which became known as the Blau strain, and the vicissity which I proved in an experiment on myself. Then we went on to develop a vaccine. I carried out the first work while I belonged to the Robert Koch Institute. The work was continued in Strasbourg. In the winter of 1943-1944, which was the year when there was very serious influenza epidemic in England, we were able to perform prophylactic vaccinations. The epidemic, as usual, went from the west to the east, so that we had to expect the epidemic to spread to Germany. At the request of the Director of the Medical Clinic, and that is in Strasbourg, Professor Stein, we inoculated about 200 persons of the clinic personnel with this influenza vaccine. There were only very slight reactions observed with a part of the persons who had been vaccinated, which did not, however, reduced the working efficiency of these persons in any way. At the same time I vaccinated in the Schirmeck concentration camp about 20 women who worked in an especially dangerous spot, and that is to say they were taken from various barracks to their working places, and in this way if the first influenza cases occurred they would be in danger themselves, but more especially that they would carry the germs to the other barracks. So that there was an outspoken need of immunization here for this group. Here again there were no reactions which in any way effected the working ability of these women.
Q. Professor, how did the developmental work for this vaccine take place?
A. Well, vaccine production was essentially based on the experiences gathered in other countries. There were Francis and Mengal in America, and other scientists.
Q. Thus, if I understand you correctly, you had a vaccine which was proved in practice, you took it from literature to produce your own vaccine?
A. Yes, we used the experiences gathered from the publications of other authors.
Q. Now, before the vaccine was used in practice, did you carry out animals experiments on yourself?
Yes, of course, we did. The immunity studies were performed on myself and experiments on myself and my laboratory personnel to test the effectiveness of the tolerance, especially of the vaccine, We did this for our own protection because we expected influenze, and because then we would no doubt be in very close contact with the germ.
Q. Now, the decisive question, Professor, which will interest the prosecution most; to prove the immunization effect of this vaccine did you over perform experiments by first vaccinating with this vaccine and then testing the effect by the introduction of the pathogens virus?
No, we never performed such experiments. I do not know what the purpose of such experiments could have been. I may point out the procedure of Hirst we have been able to test the immunity quite clearly through laboratory methods.
Q. Then in conclusion, Professor, I can say you worked in the field of influenza, you produced vaccine according to the procedure published by foreign officials, you used in practice in small amounts as animal and self experiments, and the experiments which are under discussion here were not performed by you in this field, is that true?
Yes, that is true. We never performed experiments such as are mentioned here by the Prosecution, but we performed the vaccinations which are known the world over for years.
Q. Now, a formal question, Professor, from the document NO-137 which was discussed yesterday we see that you received a research assignment from this field; you told us yesterday that this was a research assignment in the real sense, that is research on the disease itself. Now, I should like to ask you, did you receive a production assignment from the Medical Inspectorate to produce vaccine?
A. No, we never received an assignment to produce vaccine from the medical Inspectorate of the Luftwaffe.
Q. Did you report the results of this work, your research assignment, to the medical Inspectorate?
A. I no doubt sent the customary reports. That was in the conditions when a research assignment was issued.
Q. With whom, Professor, did you speak within the medical Inspectorate about your work?
A. In general I spoke to the Consulting Hygienist, to the Chief of the Medical Service, Professor Rose, and to the competent gentleman in the hygiene refer at, that was Stabarzt Attmer at that time, and the money question I talked over with the administrative officials, that was Amtsrat Wenzel.
Q. Did you talk to Professor Schroeder about your work?
A. Yes, I am sure that I must have talked to Professor Schroeder about this work. I told him more or loss what I have just described.
Q. Can you toll us when these conversations or one of these conversations took place?
A. I believe definitely that that was at the end of hay 1944 when Professor Schroeder visited me in my institute at Strasbourg. And I remember I told him my wishes about obtaining animals, obtaining materials, but I cannot remember all the details of the conversation after such a long time.
Q. Did you talk to Dr. Becker-Froyseng about this subject, witness?
A. That is possible of course, especially in connection with the obtaining of animals. That was a big problem for me. Dr. Becker-Freyseng dealt with this question when, --I think it was in July 1944 when he visited me in Strasbourg. Of course I told him my worries about animals.
Q. Now, one basic question, on this occasion, professor. You said before something about the Hygiene Referat, and as referent is mentioned Stabarzt Attmer; can you perhaps explain in which Referat of the medical Inspectorate your work was dealt with?
A. That can really be seen from my own activity as well as from the name of the referent. I worked on hygiene questions, and a competent referent for hygiene at the time was Stabarzt Attmer.
Q. Professor, the prosecution holds the point of view chat Dr. Becker-Freyseng was the competent man in whose Referat hygiene matters were dealt with, and that according to the prosecution you supervised and directed this work?
A. I personally know nothing about that. At any rate I dealt only with Stabarzt Attmer, who did this work in the hygiene referat. That was more or loss the first authority for me and if I wanted to go to a higher authority I wont to the Department Chief. If I wanted to go to a still higher agency I wont to the Chief of Staff in the Inspectorate, and finally to the inspectorate of the Medical Service. In all the years when I had official business to do with the Medical inspectorate, I never had any dealings with Dr. Becker-Freyseng with the exception, as I said, of obtaining animals, but this question only became acute in the summer of 1944.
Q. I shall now leave this subject, witness, and go on to the next charge of the indictment to be dealt with, jaundice experiments. Professor Schroeder and Dr. Becker-Freyseng are charged wish responsibility for experiments on epidemic jaundice, which, according to the Prosecution, were performed in the concentration camp Sachsenhausen by Dr. Dohmen and you and also in the concentration camp Natzweiler by Dr. Dohmen and you. I should like to ask you, Professor, first of all to describe your work in the field of epidemic jaundice; please keep the introduction as brief as possible.
A. In 1941-42, I have to say first of all, we received the first reports about the threat of epidemic jaundice, especially in the eastern theater of war, that is in the Balkans and Russia. From a study of this disease, I already knew that the cause may be a filtrable virus and since I saw certain connections between influenza and hepatitus epidemica, therefore it was obvious that I should perform ethnological tests on hepatitis epidemica. This was in collaboration with Professor Kalk, who gave me material from his military hospitals, but since it had to travel for some time it did not prove of value. Then I relied on the clinic in Strassbourg and received material from Professor Stein, the director of the internal clinic there and through the mediations of the chief physicians of the research hospital in Strassbourg they gave me the necessary material for my first tests.
Q. You spoke of material, witness; will you please tell the Tribunal what material it was and how this material was obtained?
A. It was essentially the eliminations of the patient's liquid from their stomach, intestines, gall and urine and finally blood tests as well as liver punctures.
Q. You said that the material was obtained in clinics from patients; now how was this material obtained, witness?
A. It came from jaundice patients, who had been admitted to the clinics in question. It was obtained by the clinicians there, according to the diagnostic procedure customary throughout the world, from the patients.
Then we used this material on animals, primarily mice and rats. The mice developed a very characteristic symptom, especially of the liver and with the material thus obtained we were able to isolate a virus strain or several virus strains, which could continuously be cultivated on mice. The animal material by Professor Buechler in Freiburg or that received through the pathology diagnosis, he was able to check our findings, he isolated a virulent virus there, about the characteristics of which, I will say only as briefly as possible, The main thing was that its filterable filter, which leaves no bacteria through and in the mouse it causes characteristic changes in the liver, kidneys and lungs and was made visible microscopely for the first time by me.
Unfortunately because of the war conditions this work could not be published, but it is now printed. The virus can be built in mice and also in tissue cultures and which is important for our consideration, it is a parently limited on the one hand like the typhus germ in the feces and on the other hand like many lung diseases through the discharge of that as means of transmission. We have to consider the disease, also the origin of transmission. The English term would be "airborne". For the epidemiological significance that was a very important fact. That essentially covers the hepatitis work as performed in my institute.
Q. Now before I go on to the alleged experiments, Professor, a preliminary question; the Prosecution has submitted a number of documents maintaining that hepatitis is a very dangerous disease which brings about cases of death on human beings; can you tell us something about that Professor?
A. I am not a clinician myself. As far as I know from literature, however, and from reports of experience gain'd in this war, I can say that as far as mortality, the disease is not dangerous, I know of no definite death, however, epidemic jaundice has great epidemiological significance, since the conditions under which it is transmitted are more or less unknown.