1947-02-10, #1: Doctors' Trial (early 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 10 February 1947, 0930, Justice Beals presiding.
THE MARSHAL: Persons in the Court Room will please find their seats.
The Honorable, the Judges of Military Tribunal 1.
Military Tribunal 1 is now in session. God save the United States of America, and this honorable Tribunal.
There will be order in the courtroom.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Marshal, will you ascertain that the defendants are all present in court.
THE MARSHAL: May it please your Honors, all defendants are present in the Court Room.
THE PRESIDENT: The Secretary-General will note for the record the presence of all the defendants in court.
The witness Gutzeit is still on the stand and the witness is reminded that he is still under oath.
Counsel may proceed.
DR. SERVATIUS (Counsel for the Defendant Karl Brandt): May it please the Tribunal, may I first discuss briefly a technical question. On Friday the two witnesses, Reichsminister Lammers and the witness Generalarzt Dr. Gutzeit were led here in handcuffs. I do not know the reasons why Reichsminister Lammers was handcuffed. I do not know if any special reasons existed for that. Professor Gutzeit is a prisoner of war. At present he is in an open cell in prison and is allowed to move around. I believe that it should be avoided to bring a witness here in such a way so that he will not have the feeling of being under pressure and that he perhaps may refrain from telling the truth here. I would be very grateful if the Tribunal would make a ruling in this case.
THE PRESIDENT: This is a matter concerning which the Tribunal has no information. Neither is the Tribunal advised as to the status of these witnesses. The Tribunal will inquire into the matter but that is, of course a matter for the security officer in charge to determine.
The Tribunal will inquire as to the situation.
Proceed with the examination of the witness.
CROSS EXAMINATION OF KURT GUTZEIT BY THE DEFENSE - Continued
BY DR. NOLTE (For the Defendant Handloser):
Q: Witness, at the end of the last session I had document book Number 8 handed to you and I had called your attention to the letter of 24 June 1944 which you addressed to professor Hagen at Strassbourg. This letter is part of correspondence in which the names of Dr. Grawitz, Dr. Dohmen, Generalarzt Schreiber, Professor Hagen and your name is also mentioned in connection with Hepatitis research. Will you please describe to the Tribunal if any and what connections exist between these persons with regard to Hepatitis research and your letter of 29 June 1944.
THE PRESIDENT: Will counsel repeat the number of that document.
DR. NOLTE: I did not understand your question, your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: Will counsel repeat the number of that document.
DR. NOLTE: It is page 11 of Document Book 8, Document No. NO 142. It is Exhibit 193.
A: This letter of 24 June 1944 which was directed from me to Professor Hagan, it is the result of a Hepatitis conference of all research people who were concerned with this problem in Germany. In June 1944 this Hepatitis conference took place at Breslau. Between six and seven — I do not know the exact number — various research men were there who had worked on the Hepatitis experiments on animals, and also many other persons interested, physicians. In the course of the conference the experiences which had been collected in the meantime by the individual research men were publicly printed. It became evident that the various research men had reached completely varying results as a result of their experiments on animals. All these research men strove to find the course of Hepatitis through animal experiments. While one part had carried out these experiments with rabbits and the other part had carried them out with mice, the third group carried them out with rats and the fourth group carried them out with canaries.
They were unable to determine if the bacteria which had been cultivated at different places all represented the same group, or if they included a large variety of different bacteria.
If any human material is vaccinated on animals, or if any animals are vaccinated with material of human beings, and if then the animal becomes sick, then in the beginning it cannot be stated with certainty if the disease of the animal has been caused by the specific bacteria or the disease of the animal has been caused by bacteria which is harmless to human beings.
Then, in the course of the discussion at Breslau which was presided over by Generalarzt Schreiber, Schreiber suggested or ordered that the individual research men and authors should form and follow certain procedures of work, in order to compare the results they had achieved in the course of their experiments on animals. One of these groups consisted of Dohmen, Haagen, myself and several other authors who were very close to Haagen.
The beginning of the letter deals with an assignment of Dohmen to Haagen. This assignment was approved by Generalarzt Haagen as a result of this regrouping, and it was intended that Dohmen, together with Haagen, should compare the results they had achieved in the course of animal experiments in their respective laboratories. That is the first paragraph.
The second paragraph then deals with the fact that during the conference at Breslau I had made a statement which deals with the experiment of crucis hominem. I will have to explain this. In the course of every part of research, medical research, which deals with human being's and which is then continued in the form of experiments on animals, some time the most important part of that research has to be reached; that is, experiments crucis where the results achieved in the course of experiments on animals have to be transferred and applied to the human being because all experiments in animal in the course of research, can only have results when the results of the experiment on an animal are applied to human beings. This part represents the most important phase of the entire research because all research had to be made of use to the human being; the possibilities of diagnosis for the human being, methods of treatment and preventive measures against diseases.
In Breslau I had a number of medical students. I had won them over to the point of view that the virus which had been cultivated by Dohmen after, as is likewise stated in the letter, it had been frozen for a period of week and months, it was tried to be transferred to a human being and it was to be applied to the students and internees to whom I had explained the matter previously.
Since the virus material was frozen and Dohmen did not have any other material, it had to be assumed that these bacteria had already been killed or that with regard to the virulences they had become so weak already that this vaccination became a true vaccination; that is to say, a preventive measure against this hepatitis. It was the same thing, for example, as the small pos vaccine. Since it was not absolutely certain that the bacteria were completely non-virulent it therefor could not cause the infection. It could have happened that in the course of this vaccination, in one or some other case, the real infection still could have occurs in the form of a very weak and very light case of hepatitis.
I then, in the letter, discuss certain criteria which have to be applied if this virus is applied to human beings. Then a certain danger existed that in the case of jaundice, an infection could be transferred from the vaccinated persons to their neighbors. I therefore had to prepare facilities for isolating them so that the people who had been treated in this way were completely isolated from the outside world and these isolation facilities were not so simple to obtain in Breslau at that time because we were subject to severe air raid regulations and the clinic had to be cleared to some extent so that the individual and separate rooms first of all had to be prepared.
This experiment was to be carried out during the holidays, during the academic vacation which was between the middle of August and the middle of September. Since I had students and medical students at my disposal I had asked in this letter if Haagen would and some of his virus material to me so that I could carry out this experiment on his material, on Dohmen's material, and on my material. The experiment was never carried out because the students concerned and the medical students concerned were conscripted for military service at the beginning of their vacation and thus were removed from my field of authority. That is the explanation for the contents of this letter.
DR. NELTE: Mr. President, before I continue my examination I would like to point out that the interpreter has changed the statement by Professor Gutzeit. Professor Gutzeit has stated there and he has translated the statement that the virus was transferred to students and internees. I do not know if the word "internees" in this connection may not perhaps be misunderstood. The doctoranden are students who live in complete freedom. I request that the transcript be corrected if possible.
Q: Professor, you spoke about the Breslau conference —
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal understands that medical students are called interns. If the witness referred to these students who were serving their period as interns you can ask the witness if that is what he intended to say.
DR. NELTE: Mr. President, the witness did not say interns, but he said doctoranden. They are persons who were once students and are about to take their medical examination and who have already completed their studies.
Q: Witness, you spoke about hepatitis research at the Breslau conference and also the attempt at coordinating the various agencies who occupied themselves with hepatitis research. Did Dr. Dohmen also attend this conference?
A: Dr. Dohman attended the conference and presented the results he had achieved in animal experiments; also Professor Haagen who also reported about his experiments on animals and the results he achieved.
Q: On the basis of the Breslau conference, it is determined then, until that time, experiments were only carried out on animals?
A: Yes, in the course of the Breslau conferences only experiments on animals were discussed.
Q: I now request you to read page 3. It is a letter of the Reich Physician SS Grawitz to the Reichfuehrer-SS, Himmler. It is Document No. 010 of the Prosecution. That letter states the following:
The work, namely, the research for the reason of Epidemic Jaundice has been so far carried cut by Oberstabsarzt Doctor Dohmen within the Research Laboratory of the Army Medical Inspectorate, and with the cooperation of Robert Koch Institute, in conformity with results obtained by other German Scientists. This research has led to the discovery that infectious Jaundice is not caused by bacteria but by a virus. In order to extend our knowledge which to date is based only on inoculation of animals with germs taken from human beings, the reverse is now necessary, namely, the inoculation of human beings with virus cultures. Cases of death must be anticipated.
I now leave out the next sentence, and I continue:
Eight persons condemned to death — young if possible,— are needed in the prison hospital of Concentration Camp Sachsenhausen.
The next letter of the Reichsfuehere SS, Document No. 011, on page 5 of Document Book No. 8, contains the approval of the Reichsfuehrer SS that eight criminals condemned to death at Ruschwitz should be used for these experiments. It further contains the approval of Reichsfuehrer SS that Doctor Dohmen should carry out these experiments at Sachsenhausen. You will see that the letter is of June 1943. That is one year before the Breslau conference. You have testified that Dohmen has reported at Breslau about experiments on animals. Do you know anything about the fact that Doctor Dohmen had worked at the Concentration Camp Sachsenhausen?
A: I have already stated in the course of my last examination that the Reich Physician SS Doctor Grawitz showed a very lively interest in obtaining the cultures from Doctor Dohmen in order to personally carry out experiments with these cultures on human beings.
Doctor Dohmen told me about this thing. Dohmen refused to hand these vaccines over, and I supported him in his refusal because Dohmen did not want to lose control ever these cultures and because it appeared a scientific proposition for him and because he had cultivated these cultures. After Dohmen had refused to hand ever these cultures Grawitz himself urged him to personally carry out the experiments which he had previously intended to carry out himself, and carry them out at Sachsenhausen. In order to appease Grawitz, and in order to avoid, unpleasantness Dohmen decided, after he had been urged several times, to work at Sachsenhausen, but not as Grawitz wanted to — infect human beings there. He only wanted to work there in order to make things look proper to the outside and in order to appease Grawitz in this manner. Therefore, in the end he carried out sabotage against what Grawitz had wanted. Then we always discussed our respective Hepatitis research from time to time. Doctor Dohmen always reported about his work at Sachsenhausen. He made examinations there on the prisoners who had been placed at his disposal, in the same way as this was also carried out in field hospitals and hospitals, in the case of people who are suspected of having Jaundice and those who have had it already. Then he also carried out preventitive infections of the liver by use of vitamins, which is also a common medical practice, but he never infected human beings as far as I know.
Q: I want to repeat: Doctor Dohmen, when he reported at Breslau, did not refer to these experiments and did not press them?
A: No.
Q: As far as you know about this work at Sachsenhausen, did you ever discuss this work with Professor Handloser?
A: No, I never did that.
Q: You have stated that Doctor Dohmen in the year 1944 was assigned to Strassburg by Schreiber. Do you know anything about the results of this journey or the discussion with Haagen?
A: As far as I know, Doctor Dohmen carried out some dicing experiments with virus at the laboratory together with Doctor Haagen.
He only spent a few days there. I do not know anything about any far reaching results of this collaboration.
Q: After the journey had been completed, was there anything mentioned about the fact that he had been at Natzweiler?
A: No, I did not know anything: about it.
Q: Do you know where Natzweiler is?
A: I did not know anything about it previously. I did not even know the name. I have new discovered that apparently it was a concentration camp. I, myself, have never been at Natzweiler. I do not know it. I have never visited any concentration camps at all, and I do not know anything about the composition of the concentration camps or anything about their organization. I have never visited any concentration camps.
Q: At the beginning of your examination, you have also mentioned Typhus as a specifically and particularly serious disease, as far as the Army was concerned. Did you discuss the problem of Typhus research or Typhus vaccine with Professor Handloser at the end of 1941?
A: Generally I discussed the treatment of Typhus with Professor Handloser by diagnosis.
Q: Can this be explained by the fact that in 1941 for the army and the medical agencies of the army, for all these agencies, typhus was only a question of medical treatment?
A: In 1941 the research institute for typhus had already been established at Dachau; and there the well-known lice vaccine which had previously been introduced was manufactured. That was the Weigel vaccine. It had proved itself; and as far as it could be produced in larger amounts, the troops who had become endangered were vaccinated with it. Therefore, the typhus vaccination was nothing new for the army; and when typhus made its appearance for the first time, only a certain period of time passed until technically sufficient vaccine was produced in order to inoculate all the troops in all the units.
Q: Did you at any time receive an order to carry out research with regard to typhus?
A: No.
Q: Did Prof. Handloser ever make an expression towards you that it was a necessary in the field of typhus research to make use of experiments on human beings?
A: No.
Q: It has been stated here that on the 21st of December, 1941, a conference is alleged to have taken place which was attended by Prof. Gildemeister, Prof. Reiter, Dr. Conti, Prof. Mrugowsky, Dr. Brandt, and still others; and the prosecution claims that in the course of this conference Prof. Handloser in his capacity as representative of the Wehrmacht suggested then to carry out typhus research through experiments on human beings and to continue them in this certain way by infecting human beings to bring typhus research to completely different fields than had previously been done in accordance with the medical profession and science.
I am now asking you, if Prof. Handloser had actually considered this problem in December, 1941, would he have discussed it with you?
A: I assume that I would have found out something about it. Actually, however. I did not hear anything about these things.
Q: How long were you consulting internist with Prof. Handloser?
A: During the entire time when Prof. Handloser was the army medical inspector.
Q: That is, until the 1st of September, 1944?
A: Yes.
Q: Then why did you not have any more official contact with him afterwards?
A: Because I was consultant to the army medical inspector and Prof. Handloser from that period of time on — and I do not know the exact date — became chief of the army medical service.
Q: Does this show that the chief of the medical service in that capacity did not have any consulting physicians?
A: The chief of the medical service did not have any consulting physicians.
Q: Was he able to issue any direct orders to the consulting physicians of the Wehrmacht branches?
A: He was not able to do that directly as far as I know. I had not received any direct orders from him as chief of the medical service.
Q: Your contact with Professor Handloser makes it possible for you to judge him as a physician, as a soldier, and as a human being. In this trial it will be important for Professor Handloser that a picture of his personality be gained. For this reason I would ask you to describe to the High Tribunal from your own personal knowledge how Professor Handloser appeared to you and to others as a soldier, as a physician, and as a human being.
A: In my opinion, judging Professor Handloser as a clinical man, he was not only a soldier. I cannot judge the qualifications of a soldier because I have always worked in civilian life and because I have not been an active soldier, but I have always belonged to the reserve. I can only judge his particular medical attitude. He did not only personally take care of the organization but I have personally seen and have always heard that in many instance he took personal care of the sick and wounded. That is something which was not always done by all medical officers. As a man I believe that Professor Handloser had a very noble personality and that he had a flawless character.
Q: Now, my final question. From your knowledge of the personality of Professor Handloser are you able to say whether Professor Handloser in his orders and directions had followed any other rules than the acknowledged rule of medical ethics?
A: I have never personally seen any indications of the fact that Professor Handloser had violated the rules of medical science or that he had issued orders which would lead to it.
Q: I thank you very much.
DR. NELTE: I do not have any further questions.
EXAMINATION BY JUDGE SEBRING:
Q: Witness, how many times during the course of your professional career have you actually come into personal contact with Professor Handloser?
A: At the beginning of the war I had been conscripted for military service. I was conscripted from my civilian activity. I was immediately assigned as consulting physician of the army medical inspectorate.
That was without any activity on my part. My first chief was Generaloberstabsarzt Professor Waldmann. Waldmann became ill and was retired. He was succeeded by Professor Handloser. From that moment on I was subordinated to Professor Handloser as his consulting physician. During the time when professor Handloser was chief of the army medical inspectorate I was also at all times his consulting internist.
Q: That continued over how long a course of time?
A: I do not completely remember the exact dates. I believe from December 1940 on. I think that is the date when Professor Handloser became army medical inspector.
DR. NELTE: May I perhaps say that in December he became deputy of Professor Waldmann and in January 1941 became medical inspector.
A: Until his final appointment to the medical service. As far as I know, that was on the 1st of September, 1944.
BY JUDGE SEBRING:
Q: That was a period of more than three years, is that true?
A: Yes sir.
Q: And during that time how often did you actually come in contact with Professor Handloser, either in a social personal way or in a professional way where problems, professional medical problems, would be discussed between you, as often as once a week for example?
A: There were no regular meetings, it was done in such a way that whenever a medical necessity appeared within the Army, Professor Handloser called me and then in accordance with my duties, asked me about these things, but it was also vice-versa, that when I, on my trips or otherwise, in field hospitals, or by means of reports from other consulting physicians, if I had to report something of importance to him then I went to see him or I submitted a report in writing. There was no procedure which called for regular meetings once a week. Sometimes several weeks passed. Therefore, the meetings and the discussions or conferences took place from case to case.
DR. NELTE: May I ask a question in order to complete the subject?
BY DR. NELTE:
Q: Do you know what functions Professor Handloser had?
A: First of all he was Army Medical Inspectorate and at the same time he connected with this the so-called Chief Medical Officer of the Army.
Q: In order to explain and clarify the previous question, every time that Professor Handloser visited Berlin was it the procedure that he would discuss the most important questions with you by asking you to report to him or that you went to see him when you knew that he was in Berlin?
A: Not every tine when Professor Handloser was in Berlin was I called to see him. I have already stated that the discussions took place from case to case. If he had something important he called me. If I happened to be in Berlin I went to see him. When I was in my clinic in Breslau I would receive a telephone call telling me to come to see him at Berlin, and whenever I had something of importance to discuss with him, then when Professor Handloser was not at Berlin I would report this to the Chief of the I G with the request to pass it on to Generalarzt Dr. Schreiber, and when he had sufficient time for me I would go to see him personally.
Q: May I phrase the question in conclusion as follows: In the course of the acquaintance which you had with him, in the course of the three years, was it sufficient that you can judge his character and his understanding of his duties, and that you can give a clear picture of them?
A: I believe that as for as the fields were concerned in which I dealt or negotiated with him, I can make myself a clear picture of his personality as a whole. It was three years, which is a long period too, and I cannot state now in numbers just how many times I saw him, but in the course of the three years, of course, I had frequent opportunity to have such discussions with him.
DR. NELTE: I do not have any further questions.
ATTORNEY FLEMING (Counsel for the Defendant Mrugowsky):
Q: Professor, on 23 January you gave me an affidavit. It's contents have already been clarified for the most part by the questions which have been asked up until now. I only want to ask you the following: Do you know the defendant, Mrugowsky?
A: I do not know Mrugowsky very closely. In the course of the war I have seen him at the conference of the consulting physicians and I have also talked with him there but we do not know each other very closely.
Q: In the course of your hepatitis work was the name Mrugowsky ever mentioned?
A: No.
Q: Did you hear in any way that he occupied himself with hepatitis research?
A: I do not know that. It never became known to me.
Q: Do you believe that you would still remember if the name had been mentioned in that connection?
A: I believe, yes.
Q: And I still have one more question. Attorney Nelte has just told you that the Prosecution claims that on the 29th of September, 1941, a conference had taken place, at which, amongst others, Handloser and Mrugowsky had been present, and whore the experiments on human beings with typhus were decided on.
You have already been questioned as to your relationship to Dr. Handloser. Do you believe that Professor Handloser would have discussed the typhus question with you, and particularly the question if you considered it appropriate to carry out experiments on human beings, after such a discussion had taken place on the 29 December 1941?
A: I believe that I have already answered this question that I would personally believe that if experiments on human beings with typhus had been planned, that Professor Handloser would have told me something about it and that if he said anything I have already stated I have not heard anything about it.
DR. FLEMING: Thank you, I have no further questions.
BY DR. FRITZ (defense counsel for the defendant Rose):
Q: Professor, what did Dohmen do in his civilian capacity, in what institute, and where else did he work before he was conscripted?
A: He was assistant of the Hamburg Clinic for Internal Diseases.
Q: Can you tell me the reason that he was especially selected for hepatitis research?
A: At some earlier period Dohmen apparently had been assistant of Gildemeister or worked with him. I personally do not know that exactly. However, I believe that was the case. I believe that at the time Dohmen was recommended by Gildemeister as somebody who was acquainted with hepatitis research and I have stated earlier that in the course of the clinic work with reward to hepatitis, the necessity had resulted to appoint a physician who was acquainted with virus research in order to find the cause for the jaundice.
Q: Professor, can you tell me when Dr. Dohmen was assigned to the Robert Koch Institute?
A: Apparently that was in the year 1942.
Q: And do you know how long he was assigned there?
A: Until the destruction of the Robert Koch Institute, until the loss of the cultures which had been cultivated by Dohmen. I believe this was in the fall of 1943. I do not know the exact month any more.
Q: And with when did Dr. Dohmen collaborate in the Robert Koch Institute?
A: He worked in the laboratory of Professor Gildemeister and was advised and supported by Professor Gildemeister in his work.
Q: Do you know if Dr. Dohmen had anything to do with Professor Rose?
A: I have never heard anything of it. I do not know.
Q: Do you know after the destruction of the Robert Koch Institute, do you know where Dohmen continued his hepatitis research?
A: After the destruction of the Robert Koch Institute Dr. Dohmen went to Giessen by order of the Commander of Army Group C, to whom he was subordinated, and in Giessen he worked in a laboratory which had been placed at his disposal there by the German University.
Q: Can you tell me, Professor, when and where and why Dr. Dohmen lost his hepatitis cultures?
A: In trying to find the cause for hepatitis on animals Dr. Dohmen in the course of the experiments was very unfortunate. Already in the year 1942 he frequently had had difficulties by animal epidemics and plagues and in the year 1943 he suffered from bombing attacks and then he always lost his material and his cultures. And then when he finally went to Giessen it was again attempted to transfer human material on animals by puncturing livers of patients suffering from jaundice and these cultures did not have any effect on the animals because apparently the available animals were unsuited and there were also difficulties in procuring the animals. Various races of mice reacted differently to these vaccination experiments. These are the apparent reasons: When Giessen was completely destroyed through air attacks again all material which then existed was destroyed.
Q: Do you remember the incident between Professor Hogen and Dr. Dohmen which was caused by the fact that Dr. Dohmen refused to hand over his cultures?
A: At the conference in May 1943 Dohmen spoke about his experiments an animals and his cultivation of the bacteria and Hogen also attended this conference. After the conference Hogen ordered Dohmen to hand over his cultures to him so that he likewise could carry out such experiments. At the time Dohmen felt toward Hogen exactly the same way toward Grawitz. He refused to turn over the cultures to him in order to avoid putting the material into hands which would be removed from his control.
MR. HARDY: If the Tribunal please, this same ground has been covered by the witness when being questioned by Dr. Nelte and I can't see any reason for further questioning along these lines.
THE PRESIDENT: Since the Tribunal considers that the position of Prosecution is correct that the witness has testified at considerable length these matters, the Tribunal does not desire to limit your cross examination but it should be confined to any material which is not already in the record.
BY DR. FRITZ:
Q: Professor, did you ever collaborate with the defendant Rose on hepatitis?
A: No.
Q: As far as you know did Professor Rose take any active part in hepatitis research?
A: I did not hear anything about it.
Q: Do you know that Professor Rose did not participate at the hepatitis conference at Breslau?
A: I believe that he was not there.
Q: At that Breslau conference ail the leading hepatitis research men had been invited of the Wehrmacht and who from the members of the Luftwaffe can you remember attended?
A: I already stated that Hogen was there. Then Kelb attended, also Buechner. And there was the pathologist Lester there because it as also a pathologist's meeting. There were certainly other members of the Luftwaffe but I do not know the exact names. If I would be asked for certain names I might be able to give you more information about them.
Q: That Professor Rose, as a scientist and member of the Robert Koch Institute, had to be interested in the result of your hepatitis research, just like for any other progress in the fields of infections disease, is of course natural, Now, I want to ask you, Professor, in excess of that would you consider Professor Rose as a specialist for hepatitis and would you mention his name if you mentioned all the German hepatitis specialists?
A: No, I would not consider him a hepatitis scientist.
Q: Have you ever heard a lecture by Professor Rose about hepatitis?
A: No.
Q: Have you ever seen any scientific article in medical literature on the subject by Professor Rose?
A: No.
Q: Have you ever heard him speak in any discussion during any scientific meeting about the subject of hepatitis?
A: No, I can't recall such an occasion.
Q: Do you know anything about human experiments on hepatitis by Professors Hogan and Kelb?
A: I do not know anything about the execution of such experiments.
Q: You have previously stated, Professor about the intended human experiments which were planned at Breslau. What else do you know about hepatitis experiments on human beings?
A: I know only of two experiments. One was carried out in 1942 by assistants of my clinic. In these experiments it was discovered for the first time that with the duodenal liquid of the patients and by placing it in the stomachs of the people that this disease could be caused. That was the basic experiment in order to show that hepatitis can be transferred through duodenal liquid and that it is infectious when transferred from one human being to another. This experiment was carried out by assistants and students of my clinic as a uniform group. The second experiment was carried out on me personally. I experimented on myself. That was at the beginning of 1943. I barely infected myself with the bacteria cultivated by Dohmen because I wanted to be able to judge whether the bacteria cultivated by Dohmen were the actual cause of hepatitis. The result was a very light case of the disease on myself and that the whites of my eyes became slightly yellow. In that respect I was certain that the cultures were the actual cause of hepatitis. From any other side I did not hear about such experiments on human beings, whether such assistant experiments or personal experiments were carried out.
In any case I do not know anything about it.
Q: I have no further questions.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will now be in recess.