Human guinea pigs and the ethics of experimentation: the BMJ's correspondent at the Nuremberg medical trial.
other · Level V
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 8973237.
- Also identified by PMC identifier 2352949.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
Though the Nuremberg medical trial was a United States military tribunal, British forensic pathologists supplied extensive evidence for the trial. The BMJ had a correspondent at the trial, and he endorsed a utilitarian legitimation of clinical experiments, justifying the medical research carried out under Nazism as of long term scientific benefit despite the human costs. The British supported an international medical commission to evaluate the ethics and scientific quality of German research. Medical opinions differed over whether German medical atrocities should be given publicity or treated in confidence. The BMJ's correspondent warned against medical researchers being taken over by a totalitarian state, and these arguments were used to oppose the NHS and any state control over medical research.
Medical subject headings
- Editorial Policies
- Ethics, Medical
- Human Experimentation
- National Socialism
- Political Systems
- War Crimes