1947-04-28, #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 Nuernberg, Germany, on 28 April 1947, 0920, Justice Beals presiding.

THE MARSHAL: Persons in the courtroom will please find their seats. The Honorable, the Judges of Military Tribunal I. Military Tribunal I is now in session. God save the United States of America and this honorable Tribunal. There will be order in the courtroom.

THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Marshal, you ascertain if the defendants are all present in court.

THE MARSHAL: May it please Your Honor, all defendants are present in the court.

THE PRESIDENT: The Secretary General will note for the record the presence of all defendants in court.

Counsel may proceed.

SIEGFRIED RUFF — Resumed DIRECT EXAMINATION (Continued)

BY DR. FRITZ SAUTER (Counsel for the defendant Ruff):

Q: Dr. Ruff, I would like to remind you that you are still under oath. Before the adjournment we discussed the experiments which you generally performed in your institute and it would interest me new to hear something from you as to what extent you were yourself an experimental subject, and I am not only speaking about the Dachau experiments but all the others.

A: The experiments in our institute were performed upon my collaborators and upon myself in the case of 90% of the experiments. In the case of certain experiments which were not carried out for purposes of research but in order to teach the crews which had to fly in high altitude, soldiers were furnished to us by the Luftwaffe, and we carried out high altitude experiments with them in order to show them what effects high altitude has on human organisms. To a very slight extent we also used one or the other members of the experimental institute for aviation for our experiments.

Q: All these were voluntary subjects, were they?

A: Yes, as far as this concerned experimental research they were voluntary people. However, the soldiers were detailed by the Wehrmacht for these lecture experiments.

Q: Do you know whether the detailing of soldiers of the Wehrmacht for those experiments was in any way something special or whether that is also the case with other nations who carried out aviation research?

A: This is customary with all air forces because it has shown itself that it is necessary to make the crews acquainted with how high altitude would affect them.

Q: Dr. Ruff, could you estimate approximately what the amount of all the experiments was which you carried out during those years at your institute?

A: We never counted them, but a superficial estimation of that amount would show that it is somewhere between nine to twelve thousand.

Q: In that case the amount of experiments carried out at Dachau was only very small in comparison?

A: Yes.

Q: Did you gain any personal advantages because of your numerous experiments upon your own persons?

A: No, on the contrary my collaborators as well as I had to pay our own life insurance.

Q: Did you have any disadvantages because of these experiments on yourself? I am thinking in particular about disadvantages of health.

A: I already said Friday that we had no very serious incidents in the course of these experiments, and that in effect any lasting damages to health did not occur.

DR. FRITZ SAUTER: Mr. President, in this connection I should like to ask you to accept an affidavit which mainly deals with the general aspect of these experiments. This is Document No-8 to be found in Document Book Ruff on pages 27 to 30. This document originates from a physician, Dr. Loeckle, who from the year of 1937 on was a member of that institute and personally participated in numerous experiments.

He confirms mainly that all the experiments carried out by Dr. Ruff were at first performed by him as experiments upon himself, that is, Dr. Ruff, and that his assistants in the institute were acting as voluntary experimental subjects.

I ask you to take notice of this document, and I should only like to read a few excerpts of a very important nature on page 2. I shall read the paragraph before the last. Here the witness says from his own experience, and I quote:

The danger of the different experimental conditions could never be settled ahead. We therefore always proceeded with the greatest possible care and took all imaginable precautions. The demands were only increased gradually. We worked exclusively on voluntary experimental subjects; I never heard of a single case when anyone was induced to undergo certain experiments or was forced in any way. Some employees of the institute, who had an aversion towards certain experiments, did not, of course, have to take part in them. I cannot remember any incidents worth mentioning. Minor complaints, such as headaches, over-tiredness, and similar complaints were observed occasionally. Of course, the Primum Nil Nocere [latin for first do no harm] was the motto for all work. There never was even the slightest suspicion that any unscrupulous experiments were carried out or any atrocities committed.

I shall skip the next paragraph and I shall now read the last paragraph. It says:

Dr. Ruff showed the same courage and devotion to duty, in research duties, which he was working on himself; he was always the first to undergo the dangers which, at the beginning, could never be calculated, and he always cooperated also as an experimental subject in the experiments of others. As head of the institute, Dr. Ruff always showed an exemplary, liberal attitude. In that period of intolerance and force, of spiritual rape and suppression of individuality, he always appeared to me to be an estimable representative of true humanity.

The witness furthermore describes the liberal attitude of Dr. Ruff. He says at the end:

I cannot believe that Mr. Ruff ever took part in any unscrupulous experiments and I am convinced that if ever at that time he came across atrocities, even in the research, he would have opposed them with all his might. Furthermore, I never heard that Dr. Ruff worked on other than voluntary experimental subjects; I consider this out of the question in view of his whole attitude.

This is an affidavit and I should like you to take notice of its entire contents. It was certified in the customary manner.

There is another affidavit with similar meaning by a certain Franz Scheiber.

THE PRESIDENT: What number did you assign to this exhibit?

DR. SAUTER: The exhibit which I have just submitted, or rather the document which I have just read, Document No. 8, will receive the exhibit number 6, Ruff No. 6.

Regarding the general aspect of the experiments, the physician Dr. Scheiber makes a general statement. This affidavit you will find in document Ruff under No. 1, Exhibit No. 7. I ask you to take notice of this affidavit in its entirety. I shall only read a few paragraphs on pages 2 and 3. This Doctor Scheiber, from whom this affidavit originates, is a physician who ever since 1936, that is, for a period of eight years, had collaborated with Dr. Ruff, and had had occasion to make his very close acquaintance. In his affidavit he at first describes the entire attitude and professional conception of Professor Ruff, and then he says on page 2 at the bottom:

These demands made on the experimental persons were unpleasant to bear individually, but all —

I don't think the interpreters have these document books, Your Honors.

INTERPRETER: The interpreters have the document book.

THE PRESIDENT: The translation did not come through/first, doctor.

DR. SAUTER: I shall start once mere on page 2 at the bottom of the page and I quote:

These demands were disagreeable, but out of all the experiments known to me, not one person undergoing an experiment suffered any kind of bodily injury. I would certainly have noticed such cases because I could follow these experiments from a medical point of view, and also I was well informed of everything that went on in the Medical Section of the Experimental Institute for Aviation.

THE PRESIDENT: From what part of the exhibit are you reading?

DR. SAUTER: Document No. 1, page 2, the bottom of page. I think it is the last paragraph. I think you will find it also in the English document book.

It starts:

In none of the cases described was any person forced to undergo such experiments. All the experimental subjects I knew came from among the German clerks and assistants of the medical institute of the German Experimental Institute for Aviation, and they were all volunteers. I repeatedly became clearly conscious of Dr. Ruff's acute feeling of medical responsibility towards the experimental subjects and of the almost exaggerated Caution with which he conducted these experiments in order to avoid injury to health in every case.

Dr. Ruff considered the healthy well-being of the experimental subjects entrusted to him as the supreme medical law and he would rather have abstained from the desired highest scientific knowledge than run any risks regarding the health of these persons.

This is the end of the quotation. The witness goes on the describe Dr. Ruff's action in individual cases and I should only like to quote a sentence at the end of page 4, the next to last paragraph. Here the witness says:

The frequent experiments Dr. Ruff underwent in the course of years, however, led to an irreparable heart injury which I and others who had known him when he was in perfect health and had observed him constantly could not fail to notice. This heart defect caused us frequently to ask him to take more care of himself, but we could not influence his actions at all. I was never of the impression that an insatiable urge for knowledge or personal ambition made him pursue the experiments to the utmost limit of scientific possibility. Cruelty or force towards an experimental subject are to my mind quite inconceivable when passing judgment on Dr. Ruff's character.

End quote. The affidavit is certified in the customary manner. I have one last question regarding animal experiments.

MR. HARDY: Your Honors, it seems to me that—

First of all, I can't understand what the defense counsel is attempting to do here and I request the Tribunal to ask him, regarding all of the experimental work which the defendant Ruff has worked on since he graduated from medical school.

It would seem to me that the experiments he conducted at his institute are not in issue here and the methods by which he conducted them ere not at issue here. It would be comparable to a situation where a man who has been driving the automobile for several years finally drives the automobile criminally, and we would have to discuss every trip he took for ten years. I think all of this is immaterial, Your Honors. I don't see why we have to go any further unless counsel has some definite reason.

THE PRESIDENT: Counsel, what is the reason, what is the materiality of the probative value which these affidavits carry with the charges upon which the defendant is on trial?

DR. SAUTER: According to my opinion as to what the Tribunal deems of importance, I think it is of importance that one learn that a defendant who is accused, how he was carrying out his professional activities. It is impossible to gain a clear and reliable picture about his character and his entire activities if you merely confine yourself to the one or the two visits which he paid to Dachau. Nothing at all can be seen from that. The possibility must be given to the defendant to prove in the course of many years he was active as a researcher and as a scholar and was particularly following in these matters a conscience.

I shall come back to these matters in my final plea because this is not the time to argue in detail. Furthermore, Mr. President, I had intended anyhow, as I already stated, to put only one more question regarding these general aspects of Dr. Ruff's experiments, which can be finished with one sentence. I intended to ask him—

THE PRESIDENT: Counsel may propound the question to the witness.

BY DR. SAUTER:

Q: Witness, one last question regarding these general problems. Why did you apply the possibility of the experiments on animals to such a small degree, and what is the situation of animal experiments in that special field of aviation research?

A: In the entire aviation medicine and that not only in Germany but in all other nations, the use of animals in experiments is very slight, and if one would estimate it one would arrive at the figures of 30 to 35 percent. Furthermore, these experiments have to be performed on human beings because otherwise many questions could not be clarified in any other way. In flying I mentioned a series of experiments during which it was to be ascertained what the stomach can stand in the case of crash landings. Such experiments cannot be performed on animals since the bodily construction of animals is completely different than that of human beings.

Q: Dr. Ruff, I should like now to pass to the charge which is raised against you in this trial which concerns your participation in high altitude experiments in Dachau. This is the only count under which you are indicted in the indictment, Those experiments as they were performed in the Spring of 1942 in the low pressure chambers at Dachau were they earlier performed in your Berlin institute?

A: Experiments regarding parachute descent from high altitudes were carried out before and after the Dachau experiments at our institute in Berlin.

Q: Would you briefly describe to us what the actual aim of such high altitude experiments with a low pressure chamber is?

A: Quite generally one could summarize that in one sentence. The sense of those experiments with a low pressure chamber is to find out the influence of high altitude on the human or animal organism.

Q: Were such high altitude experiments with a low pressure chamber a specialty of the German Air Force or were they also known abroad?

A: The low pressure chamber belongs to the experimental equipment of every aviation institute. It is known since the end of the last century and it is everywhere applied in the case of such experiments.

Q: Would you perhaps describe to us briefly how such a low pressure chamber is furnished and upon what basic principles the experiments with it rest?

A: The low pressure chamber is a space from which air can be drawn with the help of pumps. Through this drawing out of air the air pressure in the chamber is being decreased in accordance with the conditions as they arise when an airplane ascends to high altitudes. This speed of the ascent, that is to say the speed of the decrease of pressure, can be regulated by ventiles. In the case of our experiment in addition to this actual low pressure chamber we had a second very small low pressure chamber for experiments with sudden drop in pressure. These experiments are carried out in order to perform very speedy ascents into high altitudes. High altitude ascents as they occur in airplanes with so-called pressure cabins. If such a plane is flying, say, at 1500 meters altitude and the pressure cabin is damaged, the passengers in that pressure cabin go through an altitude ascent within one second amounting to 3 to 5 thousand meters. The descent with low pressure chamber is effected by letting in air from the outside into the chamber through a ventile.

Then the pressure in the chamber is increased — and that would be in accordance with the condition which prevails when an airplane descends from high altitudes.

Q: Dr. Ruff, in the course of this trial we repeatedly heard that in the case of these experiments so-called altitude sickness occurred. I should now like you to explain to us what altitude sickness actually means and in what way your experiments took altitude sickness into consideration and exploited it?

A: Under altitude sickness one understands the damages to the health of a human being by reason of lack of oxygen. And, that is also true in the case of animals. The expression altitude sickness is often misunderstood. In the case of altitude sickness we are not really concerned with a sickness but this is a deficiency of the body the same as thirst or hunger. In the case of thirst there is a deficiency of water. In the case of hunger there is a lack of nourishment or food. And, in the case of altitude sickness there is lack of oxygen. It would be best to explain altitude sickness by briefly observing what happens to a human being when he ascends into altitudes without a supply of oxygen. Let us assume a speed of ascent of one minute per thousand meters. If such a human being is observed either in the plane or in the low pressure chamber one finds in the first four minutes, that is up to 4000 meters, that no change has occurred in his body. The body is in a position to adjust because of certain compensatory provisions in his body for the lack of oxygen. From 4000 meters upwards certain deficiencies occur which can at first be found in the central nervous system. This occurs in the following manner: His senses and his power of observation are decreased. For instance, a lamp which may be burning in that space appears less bright to the experimental subject than before. Very high sounds are no longer heard. As soon as altitude increases his power of thinking and his memory are decreasing. His attention, his power of concentration, and his power to carry out criticism decreases as soon as altitude increases.

His emotional life, too, undergoes a strong change. In few cases we have a depression but in most cases we have an euphoria which is the opposite of a depression — an elated emotion. For that reason because of the change of his emotions one often compares the effect of high altitude with the effect of alcoholism. In aviation medicine one often speaks of the altitude drunkenness and in the same way as alcohol reacts differently on different people so does lack of oxygen react differently One experimental subject becomes particularly active and overjoyed. The other one becomes tired and sleepy. This entire condition develops gradually as the altitude increases and becomes progressively more severe. In altitude of 7500 to 8000 meters this condition goes over into complete unconsciousness. This condition in high altitude was already described at the end of the last century by the Frenchman Dissanthier and he used the followed condition:

In the case of altitudes of 7500 meters the rigid condition which a person has to undergo is surprising. Body and mind become weaker and weaker and that gradually and hardly recognizable. One experiences no pain on the contrary one feels an inner joy. One no longer thinks of the dangerous condition. One ascends and one is glad of the ascent.

Because high altitude sickness brings about no unpleasant symptoms, such as for example, lack of breath, it is particularly dangerous for aviation, which are here to warn the flyer that altitude sickness is beginning and that means that he is not warned of danger.

I was just saying that in altitudes of 7500 to 8000 meters, unconsciousness appears. Shortly before unconsciousness comes about, one finds that there are slight and painless twitches in one's hand. Then a person's consciousness disappears entirely. If one then continues to ascend with the plane, or the low pressure chamber, one finds changes in the breathing of this unconscious person. Breathing becomes irregular. One finds that there are a few breathing movements following quickly upon one another, then a lengthy pause, then again a few quick movements, and this is how it goes on. Simultaneously with this severe change of breathing, cramps occur in the condition of this unconscious person. Because of these cramps, one sees a picture which can be compared with a person who is suffering from an epileptic attack or it may correspond to cramps as they are artificially caused for therapeutic reasons, that is, for treatment, with the aid of insulin, or cardiazol, or electrical current. In the case of all these conditions of cramp — high altitude cramps, epileptic cramps, or therapeutic cramps — the person concerned does not notice anything. He has lost his consciousness.

I was just saying that in an altitude of approximately 4,000 meters one can see the first symptoms. For that reason, it is a regulation in all states who carry on aviation that, starting from that altitude, the passengers of airplanes would have to be supplied artificially with oxygen. For that purpose, the airplanes carry oxygen equipment. They have bottles of oxygen, and this oxygen is introduced into the passengers of the plane through the medium of breathing masks.

When one designates the altitude which a human being can reach without oxygen equipment as his summit, one arrives at the altitude of 4,000 meters. In that case, it is presupposed that the summit altitude is considered the point where no symptoms at all will occur yet. When breathing pure oxygen, the summit altitude is increased to 12,000 or 13,000 meters. That is to say, if the human being is inhaling pure oxygen, he can ascend to 12,000 or 13,000 meters altitude without any symptoms of illness. If going beyond that altitude, there develops, as the altitude increases, the same picture as one can see starting from 4,000 meters without the aid of oxygen.

This picture develops in the some sequence and in the same manner.

In aviation one seldom sees that altitude sickness occurs in the case of an ascent. The altitude sickness usually begins when, for some reason, the supply of oxygen is interrupted. If that case occurs in any altitude, starting from 6,000 meters, the altitude sickness will occur after a certain period of time. This period of time which elapses from the point of interruption up to the beginning of the altitude sicknesses designated in aviation medicine as "time reserve". This is the period of time which is still available to the person concerned in order to do something on his own initiative to defend himself against the beginning of altitude sickness. This so-called "time reserve" changes as altitude increases. The higher up this incident occurs, the shorter becomes the "time reserve". In the case of an altitude of 8,000 meters, we have approximately four minutes! "time reserve". In the case of 12,000 meters altitude, we have forty to fifty seconds, and in the case of 20,000 meters, approximately ten seconds.

If the plane descends after having experienced altitude sickness, cramps and breathing difficulties — these symptoms disappear in the reverse sequence they began. At first, the cramps disappear, breathing becomes more regular, then the person comes slowly back to consciousness, and the experimental subject finally is again able to act. The experimental subject is again capable to act in an altitude which can be compared with the altitude where air sickness started when the plane ascended. If, during an ascent, there was unconsciousness at 7,000 meters altitude, and then the person was brought up to 12,000 meters altitude in this unconscious condition, his awakening will approximately take place at 8,000 meters altitude during the descent. The inner procedures — that is, what happens within the body of the human being during such ascents and descents — is not quite known. It is important that after the awakening from altitude sickness almost immediately there is a full ability to act.

No complaints of any sort exist, and exceptions from this rule are only those cases where the lack of oxygen has lasted for a considerable length of time. And the awakening is similar to the awakening from an anesthetic. That is, it takes from one to two hours. But, contrary to any awakening from anesthetics; this awakening has generally no complaints for the person and has no after effects.

A further fact which may be of some importance is that — during the time of altitude sickness — the person concerned does not remember what happened. Experimental subjects often cannot state whether an experiment was carried out on them or not. They state that they had a very light feeling of warmth; but that otherwise nothing much had happened.

Q: Dr. Ruff, these difficult technical questions you may have to supplement in one regard. How is it possible, in the airplane or in the low pressure chamber, to ascend to an altitude of 20,000 meters if, on the other hand, you say that in an altitude of, I think, 14,000 meters, in spite of the introduction of oxygen, unconsciousness occurs? This question does not seem to be clear to me. Perhaps you could clarify it for us laymen.

A: In the airplane, the ascent to heights of over 14,000 meters is possible only if the airplane is equipped with the so-called pressure cabin. In these pressure cabins one takes a so-called "private climate" along with him for the benefit of the passengers. This is a climate as one experiences it in an altitude of 3,000 meters. Only in this manner is it possible to fly higher than 14,000 meters for any length of time.

In the low-pressure chamber we can ascend to such heights by increasing from 12,000 or 13,000 meters to 20,000 meters within a very short time, but that can only be done in the low-pressure chamber. The period of time has to be short enough to fall within the time reserve, of which I was speaking earlier. That is, in the case of 20,000 meters, it has to be within ten seconds.

A: Dr. Ruff, did you often perform these experiments which you just described to us—including altitude sickness, etc—upon yourself? And I want to ask you: Can you tell us from your own experience that these altitude sicknesses, this unconsciousness, these cramps, which occur—are without any pain for the experimental subject, and do not bring along with them any disadvantageous after-effects?

A: All these matters which I have described by me as a result of personal experience on my own body.

Q: Thank you, Dr. Ruff. Then Doctor, I should like to pass to the experiments at Dachau which were carried out in the spring of 1942. Then, for the first time, was the thought entertained to carry out experiments in concentration camps?

I ask you to take into consideration that all the witnesses who have testified up to this moment have said under oath that as a rule such experiments were not performed with inmates, especially not in a concentration camp.

A: In December 1941, Prof. Weltz visited me at my institute. We discussed a few questions of an aviation-medical nature in which both of us were interested, and on this occasion also discussed the problem of saving people from high altitudes. Prof. Weltz had received a report about experiments which we had performed in regard to that subject. The report comprised experiments for the purpose of saving people from high-altitudes, up to altitudes of 13,000 meters. We spoke about the continuation of these experiments which we planned — a second part of these experiments — and on that occasion Prof. Weltz suggested to me to carry out this second part of the experiment on inmates at Dachau.

One of his assistants, a certain Dr. Rascher, had received Himmler's approval to perform high altitude experiments at Dachau; so that it would be quite possible to perform these experiments at Dachau.

Q: Dr. Ruff, you said the beginning of your negotiations about Dachau started in the year 1941. That was December 1941. I should like to remind you that in the Prosecution Document Book No. II a letter was submitted which at that time was sent by Dr. Rascher on already the fifteenth of May 1941 to the Reichsfuehrer-SS. This is Document 1602-PS, Exhibit of the Prosecution 44. In this letter, which originates from May 1941, Rascher writes, and I quote:

The experiments are performed at the experimental station for high-altitude research, and cannot be carried out on monkeys, as was the case up to this period of time, since there are entirely different situations in the case of the monkey.

Dr. Rascher continues:

I discussed these matters confidentially with the representative of the Air Fleet Physician who is carrying out those experiments, and he is also of the opinion that the problems in question can only be carried out by performing experiments on human beings.

Dr. Rascher, in parentheses, adds

As experimental material, feeble-minded people could also be used.

How, I am asking you, Dr. Ruff, when in December 1941 you were at first concerned with the performance of experiments in a concentration camp, had you then known of the proceeding negotiations between Dr. Rascher and Reichsfuehrer-SS? And, in particular, had you not known of that letter which I just mentioned, dated the fifteenth of May 1941? Weren't you participating in those negotiations, Doctor?

A: This letter, itself, and its contents, I learned for the first time here upon looking at this document book. During my conversation with Weltz in December 1941, he told me, however, that already a few months earlier a conference had taken place between Rascher and the then Medical Inspector, Hippke; and that Hippke had already agreed to these experiments in principle. From this remark, I could have, of course, deduced that there had been some negotiations pending during the proceeding months, but I knew no details about them.

Q: Witness, in the letter which I just mentioned, dated the fifteenth of May, 1941, Rascher writes to Himmler; and there is the following sentence there, and I quote:

The experimental subjects could also die.

Now, on the other hand, you are telling us—and that also becomes apparent from the affidavits of various witnesses—that the experiments which you were carrying out entitled no danger to life. Now, Dr. Ruff, can you tell us how this apparent contradiction can be clarified, or can you perhaps tell us what experiments were meant by Dr. Rascher in his letter of the fifteenth of May, 1941, when he took into consideration the possibility of the death of experimental subjects?

A: I didn't know at that time what experiments Rascher was intending, and I had had no knowledge of that letter. For that reason I cannot say today what experiments Rascher was referring to on the basis of that letter.

Q: In that case, you still don't know that today?

A: No.

Q: During those negotiations which you carried on with Prof. Weltz and later with Dr. Rascher, did Rascher make the suggestion to you that feeble-minded people were also to be used for those experiments—the same suggestion which is contained in the letter of the fifteenth of May, 1941? What would your attitude have been? Or What was your attitude to any such suggestion?

A: Rascher never made this suggestion to use feeble-minded people for these experiments; and, seen from an experimental point of view, it would have been entirely impossible for us to use feeble-minded persons for these experiments.

Q: Why?

A: During those experiments we needed the cooperation of the experimental subjects. During the experiment, the experimental subject had to carry out reasonable reactions, and these are matters for which feeble-minded people could not be used.

Q: Dr. Ruff, Mrs. Rascher has stated in a letter, which was already submitted here, addressed to the Reichsfuehrer SS, dated 24 February 1942, contained in a Document of the prosecution, page 59, Document No. 263, Exhibit 47, that Dr. Hippke and Dr. Weltz were delaying the beginning of the experiments continuously, although Hippke and Weltz knew the importance of the experiments. Frau Dr. Rascher continues:

In December of 1941, Dr. Weltz got in touch with the chairman of the Aerial research institute at Berlin — Adlershof and asked whether the chief, Drs. Ruff and Romberg could make the experiments with Dr. Rascher. These two persons immediately agreed and delivered the low pressure chamber and came here. There was a conference between Rascher, Romberg and Ruff at Dachau.

Are these statements correct, and I am referring particularly to the time where Frau Dr. Rascher says the first conference took place in December 1941?

A: No, some of the details are incorrect in that letter; however, these details are of no special importance. For instance, I was never the chief of the German Institute for Aviation, but Frau Rascher possibly did not know these things. It is correct that in December of 1941 the conference just mentioned between Professor Weltz and I took place, and in the course of this conference Professor Weltz made the suggestion to me to carry out the second part of our experiments for the purpose of saving people from high altitude in Dachau.

Q: Where were these conferences with Professor Weltz held?

A: At my institute in Berlin.

Q: Did Professor Weltz come to you in Berlin for the particular purpose of getting your cooperation concerning these experiments with you that were to be carried out in Dachau; or why was it Professor Weltz came to you?

A: No, Professor Weltz visited me once or twice a year. We usually discussed scientific problems, and within the frame-work of these conversations touched upon the question of saving people from high altitude. On this occasion Professor Weltz made this suggestion to me.

Q: You say that the first suggestion for the execution of experiments in concentration camps was made by Professor Dr. Weltz; at any rate you were approached with it by him, and at that time you had known him for some time?

A: Yes.

Q: What impression did Weltz personality make on you at that time?

A: I had known Professor for many years. As far as I know, he was at that time an Oberstabsarzt [Chief Medical Officer] of the Luftwaffe, and he was also the head of the testing station for the effects of high altitude or the Aviation Medical Institute at Munich, both of us belonged to the Luftwaffe. As a scientist, Professor Weltz enjoyed the highest reputation within Aviation Medical and also within the x-ray research work. His own scientific work, as well as the work published by his institute, were always considered to be reliable. He had had considerable practice in x-ray, which showed to what extent he was regarded by his patients and his colleagues. The relationship of our institutes toward one another was a friendly one, and I already mentioned that he came to visit me once or twice a year. On the other hand, whenever I had an opportunity to do so, I visited him at his institute in Munich. Therefore, I was certain on the basis of my acquaintance and knowing Weltz, that he did not suggest anything to me at that time where he himself had any legal or ethical misgivings.

Q: Dr. Ruff, when Professor Weltz made the suggestion with you, or did you ask him, what kind of experimental subjects were to be used; of course it was natural that they were inmates, but what other qualifications did they have to have and what did you discuss in that regard with Professor Weltz?

A: Naturally, we discussed that point, which was possibly the most important point during our conversation after his initial suggestion. Professor Weltz told me that we were concerned with professional criminals in the case of these experimental subjects who could volunteer for these experiments.

Q: Did you agree to that suggestion immediately, or did you voice any misgivings?

A: I told Professor Weltz that I would have to take this matter under consideration, that I would further discuss it with Dr. Romberg, who was in charge of the experiments for the purpose of saving people from high altitude, and that in particular, I would have to discuss this matter with the Medical Inspector Hippke.

Q: What further action did you take in that matter?

A: After Professor Weltz departure, either on the very same day or the next day, I discussed this with my collaborator, Dr. Romberg; and when he also agreed to carry out these experiments, under the conditions as stated by Weltz, I visited the Medical Inspector Hippke and asked him whether it was true that he had already agreed to these experiments in Dachau in principle. This he affirmed, and I received permission from him to carry out those experiments on the inmates in Dachau and to use a mobile low pressure chamber for that purpose, which belonged to the Medical Inspectorate, but which at that time was with us at the experimental institute.

Q: Professor Hippke, who after all was your highest superior; didn't he discuss with you what kind of experimental subjects you were to use; did Professor Hippke know who was to be used and did you say anything to him about that?

A: Professor Hippke told me on the occasion of this conversation that we were here concerned with professional criminals, who were in a position to volunteer for these experiments and who after the experiments were to be rewarded in some form by either sentence or complete pardon.

Q: Witness, why weren't these experiments performed in your Berlin Institute also instead of goin to Dachau?

A: In that connection I have to speak at some great length. In the spring of 1941 we investigated low pressure chambers and demonstrated them to the crews on the Western Front. During such experiments Romberg and I participated. We used that opportunity of informing ourselves at individual fighter units whether they had experienced any medical difficulties. All of the units complained that the pilots were not clear as to how they would have to act in the case of parachute descents from high altitudes. In the German air force there was at that time no oxygen apparatus available for the case of parachute descent. The crew feared that after their parachutes had unfolded and they were descending, that when landing on the earth or in the water, they would still suffer altitude injuries or would drown. We couldn't help them on that question since we had no experimental basis for any information.

After our return we reported to the medical inspectorate about that question, and we received the order to carry out experiments for the purpose of saving persons from high altitudes. The technical progress of high altitude flying had reached the following stage: Fighter planes in large numbers were flying at the front which were reaching ten thousand to 11 thousand kilometer altitudes. The fighter planes of our enemies, however, could reach higher altitudes. For that reason it was worked with haste in all research institutes and all motor factories to find a way to increase the high altitude performance of the motors. Apart from these normal planes which were already flying at the front, we had a rocket fighter plane which was still in its testing stage. This was the Messerschmitt 163.

With that plane it was possible to reach ten to twelve thousand meters within a space of two minutes. The summit altitude of that plane depended only upon the fuel which the plane was carrying. For jet propulsion is completely independent of height. Furthermore, larger motors were being constructed and larger planes were being built which could reach altitudes of at first 16 thousand meters. On the basis of this stage of technical development, there was the energetic demand to clarify the question of how human beings could, be saved from high altitudes up to 20,000 meters.

The technical development had gone beyond the results obtained in aviation medicine; and as I said before, we had no medical basis at all to effect any saving from high altitude. In accordance with the urgency of the problem, this task for the saving from high altitudes was divided into many stages. At first, the question of saving from high altitude up to 12 kilometers was clarified; and this was considered to be the most urgent question, since we already had a number of planes already in action which would, achieve that height. The experiments for that purpose were carried out at our institute. The second point which was to be clarified, was to ascertain whether escaping from 20,000 meters height, with or without oxygen, is possible. As a subdivision to this question we had to clarify whether a very sharp decrease in pressure in a short time can be tolerated by human beings. For instance, jumping the pressure from 12 to 20,000 meters. This question was dealt with by us after the experiments of 12,000 meters, and we experimented upon ourselves. This problem was simultaneously worked upon by a number of other Institutes. The actual bailing out experiments, from 20,000 meters height were clarified, at Dachau.

Subsequently the influence of cold had to be cleared up in these heights. There are temperatures as low as minus 50 to 60 degrees. These experiments were also worked upon at our institutes while experimenting upon ourselves. Throughout those questions we were concerned with urgent, practically important question for aviation. After these experiments the technicians were to be told what special safe-guarding equipment was to be constructed in order to save people from the respective altitudes, and these experiments were to provide a basis in order to give directives to the crews as to how to act during the parachute descent from various altitudes.

DR. SAUTER: I believe, Mr. President, you could recess here, because the defendant is embarking upon a new paragraph.

THE PRESIDENT: Very well, the Tribunal will be in recess.

(A short recess was taken)