1947-06-26, #3: Doctors' Trial (early afternoon)

AFTERNOON SESSION (The hearing reconvened at 1335 hours, 26 June 1947.)

THE MARSHAL: Persons in the Courtroom will please find their seats.

The Tribunal is again in session.

MR. HARDY: May it please the Tribunal, I am informed that the examination of the witness, Jung, will not take much more than an hour. At the end thereof I think Dr. Servatius will be prepared to complete the afternoon by introducing supplemental document books of the defendant Karl Brandt. The Prosecution requests to call, out of order, that is, before the completion of the supplemental documentary evidence of the defense, two witnesses tomorrow. One is Josef Laubinger and the other is Karl Hoellenreiter, both gypsies, who were subjected to the sea-water experiments at Dachau. I would like to be sure that Dr. Steinbauer is informed — he is in the city — and will be available tomorrow when these two witnesses appear, if it meets with the approval of the Tribunal.

THE PRESIDENT: See that Dr. Steinbauer is informed of the fact that these witnesses will be called tomorrow morning.

MR. HARDY: Very well.

DR. HOFFMANN (Counsel for the defendant Pokorny): I should like to call the witness, Jung, at this time.

THE PRESIDENT: The Marshal will summon the witness, Friedrich Jung.

FRIEDRICH JUNG, a witness, took the stand and testified as follows:

JUDGE SEBRING: Please hold up your right hand and be sworn:

I swear by God, the Almighty and Omniscient, that I will speak the pure truth and will withhold and add nothing.

(The witness repeated the oath.)

JUDGE SEBRING: You may be seated.

THE PRESIDENT: Counsel may proceed.

DIRECT EXAMINATION

BY DR. HOFFMANN:

Q: Witness, please tell the Tribunal when and where you were born?

A: On the 21st of April 1915, in Friedrichshafen.

Q: Please describe your scientific training.

A: I studied medicine at Tuebingen, Koenigsberg and Berlin. Since 1938 I have been an assistant at the Pharmacological Institute in Berlin, under Professor Huebner. In 1943, I was at the Pharmacological Institute of Tuebingen as a scientific assistant and since the beginning of 1946, I have been head of the Pharmacological Institute of the University of Wuerzburg and hold the Chair of Pharmacology there.

Q: Witness, are you an expert on pharmacological questions?

A: Yes, I believe so.

Q: Witness, what do you think of homeopathy or bio-chemistry?

A: Homeopathy or bio-chemistry is a very interesting system of healing which, at the time of its origin was a reaction to the one-sided attitude of classical medicine. It is noteworthy and no doubt justified and has many good aspects; but I consider it psychologically remarkable that for 137 years this system has remained essentially unchanged as a doctrine although in the past century the development of modern scientific medicine has come to a certain degree of perfection. I consider this all the more remarkable inasmuch as the advocates of homeopathy at the time, insofar as they are doctors, have the advantage of the high medical training of our universities and medical academies and should realize the unsoundness of the tenets of homeopathy. The latter has been testified to by internists and pharmacologists on many occasions. Schissler's bio-chemistry, which is not to be confused with physiological chemistry, is closely connected with homeopathy and is derived from it.

Q: Witness, is it true that in instruction at the universities a similar antagonistic attitude toward bio-chemistry or homeopathy is expressed?

A: Yes. I, myself, am in the habit of going into these things in detail in my courses. During my own studies at the University of Tuebingen and Berlin, I heard nothing else. I know no German member of my profession, responsible for teaching students pharmacy and related subjects, who is an advocate of homeopathy.

Q: Witness, do you believe the firm Madaus is in favor of this homeopathic tendency in medicine?

A: Yes. I have known the Madaus firm for many years as a leading firm in this connection. I have always had the impression that it publishes propaganda among laymen and doctors very extensively. As an example of the nature of this propaganda, one could mention Madaus year books of all the past years.

Q: Witness, what we are interested in here is that the firm published a paper by Madaus and Koch, on the question of the use of caladium. You know this paper and if you have an opinion on it, I ask you from what point of view do you believe the Madaus firm came to carry out experiments with caladium seguinum?

A: From the final statement of this paper itself one can see that it was carried out in a series of experiments performed by the Madaus firm, to study the influence on the hormone structure by plant material. This question is no doubt extremely interesting and scientifically rewarding but it is an obvious assumption that the aim of the work was rather to find a basis for the use of caladium in homeopathic practice in interruptions of potency, sterility, frigidity, etc. That the Madaus firm had certain propagandistic purposes in publishing this paper can be seen from the publication of the results of the work in a popular magazine, a procedure which is not customary.

Q: Witness, what possibilities are there, in principle, for sterilization?

A: From the papers which have been given to me I have observed that a clear distinction is not made between sterilization and castration, and I should like to clarify that here first. Sterilization, generally, means disturbance of the capacity for reproduction. Sterilization includes castration. That is, nor merely disturbing the reproductive capacity, but removing the reproductive glands from the organism which has deep-seated consequences for the whole human being. There are false disturbances of the psychic and of the working ability. I believe that the problem under discussion here is not the problem of castration, but the problem of the simple disturbance of the reproductive capacity while retaining the other aspects of the personality of the human being. I shall not go into the various procedures which are used in medicine. When a human being, especially a woman, is to be sterilized, temporarily, because what is at issue here is permanent disability of the reproductive capacity, is interruption of the output of the reproductive glands. That can be done by putting an obstruction at any point, that is by performing a surgical operation. The second possibility is that the human being, as a whole, remains normal, the only thing that is lost is the reproductive capacity. The second most radical possibility is the removal of the reproductive glands which involves castration, and various other serious symptoms, reduction of working capacity, serious psychological changes. A procedure which in practice would be out of the question. Another possibility is radiation of the reproductive glands with X-ray or radium rays, and thus damaging them severely. There are certain very definite disturbances, depending on the degree of irradiation. This is in all equivalent to castration. X-ray sterilization or X-ray castration does not guarantee 100 percent, success, unless one is using very large doses. This X-ray sterilization is based on the fact that X-rays effect particularly young, rapidly growing tissue, such as reproductive glands are, but there is no specific procedure for sterilization because X-rays will effect also other quickly growing tissue.

I am thinking of the blood building system of the body. If one were to radiate the whole body with the dose necessary for irradiating the reproductive glands, the person would probably die of a severe blood disease. Another possibility is poison, which also effects specifically quickly growing tissue. As an example I would like to mention Benzol. When these poisons are introduced into the human body, there is no way of controlling the effect. If, for example, Benzol is administered to a human being the reproductive glands are damaged it is true, but before this can take effect, the blood building organs which react similarly, are damaged even more severely, and the human being dies. We have the picture of chronic Benzol poisoning very frequently as an industrial disease. In most such cases we have no complaint about sterilizing effect. Another way of affecting the reproductive glands is to interrupt the sexual life of the organism. One can perform an operation in the central nervous system at a certain spot. That is, of course, not acceptable for practical sterilization. One can do the same by removing the pituitary gland, the hypophysis. It is important for the activity of the reproductive glands. That is also a very difficult operation and very frequently brings about the death of the experimental animal, but one can also administer the hormones produced by this gland to the human gland in larger quantities and thus the regulating mechanism is disturbed. We distinguish two hormones, Prolan A and Prolan B.

MR. HARDY: May it please, Your Honor, I just can't understand the purpose of this testimony. Is this witness an expert on the subject of sterilization or is he testifying as to facts concerning Pokorny's implications in the experiments, or is he testifying as to the reliability of the Madaus Company, or to the effect of caladium segunium?

If he is testifying to the effect of caladium segunium, I don't think the other discussion is necessary.

THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal shares the doubt expressed by the Prosecuting attorney, so far the point of this witness's testimony is not easily discernible. Just what is the purpose of it, counsel? If the witness is going to read a long document it might be better if it were presented in the form of an affidavit and put into the document book.

DR. HOFFMANN: Mr. President, I believe that this expert witness had already finished his general statements. I consider his last statements of value, which refer to specific and non-specific sterilization.

THE PRESIDENT: Concerning what phase of the issues before the court is the witness to testify to?

DR. HOFFMANN: The witness is to testify that specific sterilization is impossible for caladium.

THE PRESIDENT: Then instruct the witness to proceed to give testimony on that subject.

Q: Witness, you have heard, please speak of the possibility of sterilization on the organism as a whole, and not on the reproductive glands specifically.

A: I shall be briefer. I thought it was necessary to go into some detail, because in my opinion the sterilizing effect of caladium can not be understood, and the basis of the procedure can not be understood, unless one is informed as to how human beings and animals can be sterilized at all. If one does not understand sterilization in general one can fall into the error of feeling this is a relative specific work.

THE PRESIDENT: Witness, just a moment.

Counsel, why would this testimony not be more effective if prepared in the form of an affidavit and put into a document book. I can assure you it adds nothing to testimony such as this to have it repeated in open court.

It is even more useful to the Tribunal if it is in the form of an affidavit in the document book, unless the prosecution attorney cares to cross examine the witness.

MR. HARDY: I have no desire to cross-examine this witness, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDENT: Counsel, it seems to me clear that the testimony of this witness would be even more valuable to the Tribunal in the form of an affidavit, that would be submitted as one of your documents.

DR. HOFFMANN: Mr. President, I shall gladly comply with the wish of the Tribunal and shall submit an affidavit from this witness.

THE PRESIDENT: I would ask you, counsel, if this witness can testify directly to any of the activities of the defendant Pokorny in regard to this matter or anything that he did in the matter of caladium or endeavoring to procure caladium to be used as an experimental drug, or is this witness testifying merely to scientific facts as he sees them?

DR. HOFFMANN: He had no direct connection with the defendant Pokorny. He can testify only to the scientific value of the matter, especially what an average doctor would think of this working after studying the results of the animal experiments.

THE PRESIDENT: Counsel for Prosecution stated he did not care to cross-examine the witness. I am sure the testimony of this witness would be equally of value to the Tribunal in the form of an affidavit and save considerable time. The Tribunal accepts your offer to withdraw the witness and put his statement in the form of an affidavit. It must be numbered and submitted in the form of an exhibit when offered. The witness Jung is excused from the witness stand.

DR. HOFFMANN: Witness, you are excused.

THE PRESIDENT: I would ask the Secretary if Defendant Pokorny's counsel has provided these witness sheets if they are available for the witnesses called this morning and this afternoon for Pokorny, the witnesses Trux, Koch and Jung.

MR. HARDY: The Secretary reports he has no such documents furnished.

THE PRESIDENT: They should be prepared and furnished to the Tribunal.

Does counsel for Defendant Pokorny have anything further to offer?

DR. HOFFMANN: No, I am finished with my case then.

MR. HARDY: Your Honor, I believe Dr. Servatius is prepared to submit the rest of his documentary evidence in the case of Karl Brandt. If he does not anticipate he will fill out the rest of the day, I suppose Dr. Nelte will be ready to put in supplemental affidavits or documents for Handloser.

THE PRESIDENT: Is Dr. Nelte, counsel for Handloser, prepared to submit any further documents?

The Tribunal has not only on the bench the subsequent document book, the last document book, prepared by Dr. Servatius, I think they are all in our offices.

MR. HARDY: Your Honor, we have a rather unusual circumstance here. I searched my files and find from Dr. Servatius about five or six supplements. Now he has lined up in order the documents out of these supplements which he will introduce. I think he has prepared one for the Tribunal and one for the Prosecution in addition to the supplement he put out in the book, he has them now and in the order in which he will present them. I wonder if we could recess for about ten minutes, and line up the supplementary books and then the copies for the judges can be lined up at the same time.

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

(A recess was taken.)