Summary:
“The judgment by the war crimes tribunal at Nuremberg laid down 10 standards to which physicians must conform when carrying out experiments on human subjects in a new code that is now accepted worldwide. This judgment established a new standard of ethical medical behavior for the post World War II human rights era. Amongst other requirements, this document enunciates the requirement of voluntary informed consent of the human subject. The principle of voluntary informed consent protects the right of the individual to control his own body. This code also recognizes that the risk must be weighed against the expected benefit, and that unnecessary pain and suffering must be avoided. This code recognizes that doctors should avoid actions that injure human patients. The principles established by this code for medical practice now have been extended into general codes of medical ethics.” - http://www.cirp.org/library/ethics/nuremberg/
History:
“Fifty years ago in Nuremberg, Germany, 23 physicians and scientists stood trial for war crimes committed before and during the second world war. The medical trial, and its more famous predecessor, the international military tribunal,1 have left us with defining statements of ethical principle. But, as several articles in this anniversary issue of the BMJ make clear, the records of these trials have also left us with a legacy we still shrink from confronting.
“The decision to hold the trials in Nuremberg was made for practical and symbolic reasons. Germany was in ruins, and, although the city had received substantial shelling, Hitler's Palace of Justice had survived largely unscathed. Imposing and capacious, it included large courtrooms and an adjoining prison. The city's symbolic value derived from its prominence as Hitler's administrative and judicial offices and as the site for his more stupendous mass rallies.
“The international military tribunal convened on 20 November 1945. With allied judges presiding, it brought accusations of war crimes against 24 defendants, including Goring, von Ribbentrop, Hess, and Speer. Twelve were found guilty and sentenced to death, seven were found guilty and sentenced to variable terms of imprisonment, and three were acquitted. Two others, Krupp and Ley, did not go through the trial: Krupp sustained injuries in a car accident just before the proceedings, and Ley committed suicide before the trial began.”
https://www.bmj.com/content/313/7070#NUREMBERG
It’s important to note that out of the “hundreds of thousands of Germans that were responsible for numerous war crimes and atrocities during WW2, only 19 were convicted and were held accountable for those monstrous crimes.
“Subsequent mass trials that were held in post WW2 Germany convicted another number of token of German Nazi businessman and politicians and sentenced some of them to death and most of them to a few years in prison.
“All the other hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of German psychopathic murderers and criminals got away Scot free.
“Thousands of them were even shipped to the US, while the Nuremberg Trials were going on, where they ended up on the US government payroll, in what was code named “operation paperclip”. https://adarapress.com/2020/02/03/the-nuremberg-trials-were-the-biggest-farce-of-modern-history-dispropaganda/
Journalist Annie Jacobsen was interested in the history of the United States military and wrote a book called “Area 51” about top-secret military testing sites. She then wrote another book, “Operation Paperclip, The Secret intelligence Program That Brought Nazi Scientists to America”, which gave a detailed and disturbing account of how these criminals were allowed into America to assist in the U.S. development of weapons of war and instruments to explore space. Some joined the CIA, NASA and Military creating chemical weapons of war. https://listverse.com/2018/03/21/10-nazi-scientists-who-survived-the-war/
THE TEN PRINCIPLES OF THE NUREMBERG CODE
The great weight of the evidence before us to effect that certain types of medical experiments on human beings, when kept within reasonably well-defined bounds, conform to the ethics of the medical profession generally. The protagonists of the practice of human experimentation justify their views on the basis that such experiments yield results for the good of society that are unprocurable by other methods or means of study. All agree, however, that certain basic principles must be observed in order to satisfy moral, ethical and legal concepts:
Read more on Operation Paperclip here: https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/esp_sociopol_mj12_18.htm
NIH displays the history of the Nuremberg Code - https://history.nih.gov/display/history/Nuremberg%2BCode
PDF to download: https://history.nih.gov/download/attachments/1016866/nuremberg.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1589152811742&api=v2
“The judgment by the war crimes tribunal at Nuremberg laid down 10 standards to which physicians must conform when carrying out experiments on human subjects in a new code that is now accepted worldwide. This judgment established a new standard of ethical medical behavior for the post World War II human rights era. Amongst other requirements, this document enunciates the requirement of voluntary informed consent of the human subject. The principle of voluntary informed consent protects the right of the individual to control his own body. This code also recognizes that the risk must be weighed against the expected benefit, and that unnecessary pain and suffering must be avoided. This code recognizes that doctors should avoid actions that injure human patients. The principles established by this code for medical practice now have been extended into general codes of medical ethics.” - http://www.cirp.org/library/ethics/nuremberg/
History:
“Fifty years ago in Nuremberg, Germany, 23 physicians and scientists stood trial for war crimes committed before and during the second world war. The medical trial, and its more famous predecessor, the international military tribunal,1 have left us with defining statements of ethical principle. But, as several articles in this anniversary issue of the BMJ make clear, the records of these trials have also left us with a legacy we still shrink from confronting.
“The decision to hold the trials in Nuremberg was made for practical and symbolic reasons. Germany was in ruins, and, although the city had received substantial shelling, Hitler's Palace of Justice had survived largely unscathed. Imposing and capacious, it included large courtrooms and an adjoining prison. The city's symbolic value derived from its prominence as Hitler's administrative and judicial offices and as the site for his more stupendous mass rallies.
“The international military tribunal convened on 20 November 1945. With allied judges presiding, it brought accusations of war crimes against 24 defendants, including Goring, von Ribbentrop, Hess, and Speer. Twelve were found guilty and sentenced to death, seven were found guilty and sentenced to variable terms of imprisonment, and three were acquitted. Two others, Krupp and Ley, did not go through the trial: Krupp sustained injuries in a car accident just before the proceedings, and Ley committed suicide before the trial began.”
https://www.bmj.com/content/313/7070#NUREMBERG
It’s important to note that out of the “hundreds of thousands of Germans that were responsible for numerous war crimes and atrocities during WW2, only 19 were convicted and were held accountable for those monstrous crimes.
“Subsequent mass trials that were held in post WW2 Germany convicted another number of token of German Nazi businessman and politicians and sentenced some of them to death and most of them to a few years in prison.
“All the other hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of German psychopathic murderers and criminals got away Scot free.
“Thousands of them were even shipped to the US, while the Nuremberg Trials were going on, where they ended up on the US government payroll, in what was code named “operation paperclip”. https://adarapress.com/2020/02/03/the-nuremberg-trials-were-the-biggest-farce-of-modern-history-dispropaganda/
Journalist Annie Jacobsen was interested in the history of the United States military and wrote a book called “Area 51” about top-secret military testing sites. She then wrote another book, “Operation Paperclip, The Secret intelligence Program That Brought Nazi Scientists to America”, which gave a detailed and disturbing account of how these criminals were allowed into America to assist in the U.S. development of weapons of war and instruments to explore space. Some joined the CIA, NASA and Military creating chemical weapons of war. https://listverse.com/2018/03/21/10-nazi-scientists-who-survived-the-war/
THE TEN PRINCIPLES OF THE NUREMBERG CODE
The great weight of the evidence before us to effect that certain types of medical experiments on human beings, when kept within reasonably well-defined bounds, conform to the ethics of the medical profession generally. The protagonists of the practice of human experimentation justify their views on the basis that such experiments yield results for the good of society that are unprocurable by other methods or means of study. All agree, however, that certain basic principles must be observed in order to satisfy moral, ethical and legal concepts:
- The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, overreaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision. This latter element requires that before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonably to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment.
The duty and responsibility for ascertaining the quality of the consent rests upon each individual who initiates, directs, or engages in the experiment. It is a personal duty and responsibility which may not be delegated to another with impunity. - The experiment should be such as to yield fruitful results for the good of society, unprocurable by other methods or means of study, and not random and unnecessary in nature.
- The experiment should be so designed and based on the results of animal experimentation and a knowledge of the natural history of the disease or other problem under study that the anticipated results justify the performance of the experiment.
- The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury.
- No experiment should be conducted where there is an a priori reason to believe that death or disabling injury will occur; except, perhaps, in those experiments where the experimental physicians also serve as subjects.
- The degree of risk to be taken should never exceed that determined by the humanitarian importance of the problem to be solved by the experiment.
- Proper preparations should be made and adequate facilities provided to protect the experimental subject against even remote possibilities of injury, disability or death.
- The experiment should be conducted only by scientifically qualified persons. The highest degree of skill and care should be required through all stages of the experiment of those who conduct or engage in the experiment.
- During the course of the experiment the human subject should be at liberty to bring the experiment to an end if he has reached the physical or mental state where continuation of the experiment seems to him to be impossible.
- During the course of the experiment the scientist in charge must be prepared to terminate the experiment at any stage, if he has probable cause to believe, in the exercise of the good faith, superior skill and careful judgment required of him, that a continuation of the experiment is likely to result in injury, disability, or death to the experimental subject.
Read more on Operation Paperclip here: https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/esp_sociopol_mj12_18.htm
NIH displays the history of the Nuremberg Code - https://history.nih.gov/display/history/Nuremberg%2BCode
PDF to download: https://history.nih.gov/download/attachments/1016866/nuremberg.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1589152811742&api=v2
