Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Nuremberg doctors' trial: the 60th anniversary

  • Legal and Ethical Issues in Clinical Research
  • Published:
Intensive Care Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Notes

  1. Seven reports to the London-based Combined Intelligence Operative Subcommittee (CIOS), among them: “The treatment of shock from prolonged exposure to cold, especially in water” and “Neuropathology and neurophysiology”

  2. Alexander and after him Ivy tried to base their argumentation on the Hippocratic Oath, which rapidly proved to be a failure, first because Hippocrates did not consider research, but only treatment, and also because the Oath proscribes very clearly doing any harm to patients

  3. Ivy's three main principles were: (1) Only volunteers can be solicited; necessity of informed consent. (2) Experiments should be based on previous animal experimentation and should yield results for the good of society. (3) Experiments should avoid physical and mental suffering and be conducted by scientifically qualified persons

References

  1. Katz J (1992) The consent principle of the Nuremberg code: its significance then and now. In: Annas G, Grodin M (eds) The Nazi doctors and the Nuremberg code. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 227–239

    Google Scholar 

  2. Taylor T (1946) Opening statement of the prosecution, December 9, 1946. In: Annas G, Grodin M (eds) The Nazi doctors and the Nuremberg code. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 67–93

    Google Scholar 

  3. Berger R (1990) Nazi science; the Dachau hypothermia experiments. New England J Medicine 322:1435–1440

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Schmidt U (2004) Justice at Nuremberg: Leo Alexander and the Nazi Doctors' trial. St Antony's Series. Palgrave; Macmillan

  5. Grodin M (1992) Historical origin of the Nuremberg code. In: Annas G, Grodin M (eds) The Nazi doctors and the Nuremberg code. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 121–144

    Google Scholar 

  6. Vollmann J, Winau R (1996) Informed consent in human experimentation before the Nuremberg code. BMJ 313:1445–1447

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Shuster E (1997) Fifty Years Later: The Significance of the Nuremberg Code. N Engl J Med 337:1436–1440

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Weindling P (1996) Human guinea pigs and the ethics of experimentation: the BMJ's correspondent at the Nuremberg medical trial. BMJ 313:1467–1470

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Intensive Care Unit, Henri Mondor Hospital, Creteil, France

    François Lemaire

Authors
  1. François Lemaire
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to François Lemaire.

Additional information

This article is discussed in the editorial available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00134-006-0468-z

Pictures from the US Holocaust Memorial Museum: http://www.ushmm.org/research/doctors/index.html

Electronic supplementary material

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lemaire, F. The Nuremberg doctors' trial: the 60th anniversary. Intensive Care Med 32, 2049–2052 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-006-0467-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-006-0467-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation