Cliquez pour suivre le lien.
Nazi Medical Experiments - A student essay from Dr. Elliot Neaman's History 210 class (historical methods - fall 1995)

Nazi Medical Experiments

by E. F.

A student essay from Dr. Elliot Neaman's History 210 class (historical methods - fall 1995)

© Elliot Neaman / PHDN
Reproduction interdite par quelque moyen que ce soit / no reproduction allowed


It is certain that the Holocaust, the almost complete destruction of the Jews in Europe by Nazi Germany, did indeed occur. At least six million Jews died at the hands of the Nazis. However, mass genocide was not the only atrocity they committed. The prisoners of the death camps were also subjected to medical experiments, particularly sterilizations. These experiments will be the focus of this paper.

Despite the overwhelming body of historiographical evidence which supports the currently accepted interpretation of the Holocaust, one group of writers would have us believe that it never occurred. While these writers, known as "Holocaust Deniers," have a number of motives for their activities, their primary motive is anti-Semitism. Although the deniers' arguments are ludicrous, it is important to address them, especially in the light of polls which suggest that Americans are susceptible to their nonsense. (1)

In the following pages, the parts of the deniers' arguments which refer to the medical experiments performed on the prisoners of Nazi concentration camps will be articulated. Subsequently, the deniers' methodology and credibility will be scrutinized, and a variety of sources which refute their arguments will be introduced. Finally, an account of Nazi medical experimentation based on recent historiography will be provided.

It is necessary to summarize the established historical facts concerning Nazi medical experimentation before articulating the deniers' arguments against its existence. McVay explains that the experimentation was part of "seventy or more medical-research projects conducted by the Nazis between the fall of 1939 and spring of 1945." (2) He classifies the experiments into three categories: those conducted by the German Air Force, those involving medical treatment, and those which were racial in nature. (3) The German Air Force used prisoners of concentration camps to study the effects of high altitude, freezing temperatures, and the ingestion of seawater. Doctors sterilized many of the prisoners, and used them to study the treatment of battle injuries, gas attacks, and to test vaccines. The racial experiments included comparative studies of dwarfs, twins, and skeletal structure. The majority of these experiments resulted in the deaths of their subjects.

The Holocaust Deniers' Arguments

Arthur R. Butz, one of the "Holocaust Deniers," attempts to exonerate the Nazis of any wrongdoing involving medical experimentation in The Hoax of the Twentieth Century. To achieve this goal, Butz offers several arguments which differ from those offered by established historians. For example, while Butz admits that experimentation took place in the Buchenwald concentration camp, he argues that the experiments were performed only on the bodies of the dead. Subsequently, Butz argues that the inconsistencies between two statements made by SS Captain Josef Kramer prove that no prisoners were executed for experimental purposes during his tenure as commandant of the Natzweiler concentration camp.

To support his interpretation of experimentation in the Buchenwald camp, Butz cites the written testimony of Christopher Burney, a former inmate. He points out the following comment from Burney's book: "[W]hen a Buchenwald inmate died the camp doctors looked his body over and if they found something interesting they saved it." (4) According to Butz, this comment proves that a collection of medical specimens gathered at Buchenwald, including tattooed skin and a human head, were not the remains of people murdered there. Instead, argues Butz, the medical specimens were simply the remains of people who died of natural causes at the camp.

Butz offers another example to support his assertion that Nazi medical experimentation involved no wrongdoing. The central figure in Butz's second example is SS Captain Josef Kramer, who served as the commandant of the Natzweiler and Birkenau camps, and later at the Belsen camp. Butz explains, "[It is claimed] that Kramer, as commandant of Natzweiler, had eighty people gassed there for purposes of medical experiments." (5) People with specific characteristics were required to perform these experiments, and no appropriate candidates were found at Natzweiler. Consequently, eighty prisoners of Auschwitz which met the criteria set by the experimenters were sent there. The prisoners were gassed at Natzweiler, instead of Auschwitz, because the "bodies were needed fresh" in Strasbourg, which was located nearby. (6)

This allegation against Kramer is clearly based on the assumption that the Nazis murdered prisoners of their concentration camps to use as specimens for medical experimentation. Butz claims that the allegation is untrue, and introduces two statements made by Kramer as evidence. In the first statement, Kramer states, "I have heard of the allegations of former prisoners in Auschwitz referring to a gas chamber there, the mass executions and whippings, the cruelty of the guards employed, and that all this took place either in my presence or with my knowledge. All I can say is that it is untrue from beginning to end." (7) However, in his second statement, Kramer acknowledged the existence of a gas chamber in Auschwitz, but denied that it was under his control. Butz suggests that Kramer changed his position at the insistence of his lawyers, and comments that his original statement would have been met with considerable skepticism in court. As a result, Butz considers Kramer's second statement devoid of value.

Although he is unwilling to accept Kramer's second statement, Butz argues that Kramer's first statement contradicts the allegation against him. He refers readers to the appendix of The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, where the full text of Kramer's statements are printed. The portion of Kramer's initial statement which Butz finds most compelling follows: "I cannot remember that . . . prisoners have been lent for experiments to a doctor in Strasbourg. . . . It is quite impossible that experiments of any kind on prisoners have been carried out without my knowledge, as in my [various positions,] . . . I would have known." (8)

Interestingly, Butz does not deny the possibility that "some people were executed at Natzweiler when somebody else was commandant, and that the bodies were then used at the anatomical institute in Strasbourg (which certainly possessed bodies for its research purposes)." (9) Yet, he disputes the idea that murders took place prior to or during Nazi medical experiments every time they are mentioned in The Hoax of the Twentieth Century. Thus, one might conclude that Butz does not believe that any such murders were committed, although he does not explicitly make this admission.

Butz's Methodology

The strategies Butz uses throughout the preceding paragraphs mirror those of other Holocaust-denial publications. For example, although deniers always claim that survivors' testimony of the Holocaust is not credible, they cite their own eyewitnesses. Butz employs this strategy in his first example. Despite citing the written testimony of Christopher Burney, Butz claims that the differences "between the scenes the author actually claims to have witnessed or the claims he has read or heard," and the "inferences he has drawn or pretended to draw" are "often most stark." (10)

Deniers' claims are frequently based on convoluted logic. This is evident in Butz's argument that camp doctors at Buchenwald examined the dead and kept anything they found interesting to conclude that the medical specimens found there were from people who died of natural causes. It is also evident in his discussion of the conflicting statements of SS Captain Josef Kramer. In Denying the Holocaust, Lipstadt explains, "The attempt to deny the Holocaust enlists a basic strategy of distortion. Truth is mixed with absolute lies." (11) Butz clearly engages in this type of distortion, as evidenced by his willingness to accept the possibility that deaths relating to medical experimentation occurred at Natzweiler, in spite of his prior attempts to discredit evidence which proved this "possibility" a reality. Perhaps most interestingly, while the majority of Butz's text is dedicated to the refutation of atrocities at Auschwitz, he does not address any of the medical experiments performed there.

The Credibility of Holocaust Denial

The above analysis of Butz's methodology raises serious doubt abouthis credibility. However, Lipstadt's Denying the Holocaust destroys whatever credibility he has left. First, Lipstadt exposes Butz's connections to neo-Nazi, extremist, and racist groups. Then, she demonstrates the shortcomings of his book's academic veneer. Finally, Lipstadt attacks his inconsistent use of footnotes and his arguments against the integrity of court testimony and internal Nazi documents.

Lipstadt begins her demonstration of Butz's involvement with anti-Semitic organizations by making a reference to his work: "In order to mainstream Holocaust denial and attain for it scholarly respectability," she writes, "Butz . . . had to acknowledge that denial books, articles, and journals are published by neo-Nazi, extremist, and racist groups." (12) Butz portrayed the relationship between these groups and Holocaust deniers as little more than a marriage of convenience. However, Lipstadt points out that "his books are promoted and distributed by the Ku Klux Klan." (13) Furthermore, "his book . . . was serialized in the neo-Nazi German weekly Deutsche National Zeitung, . . . [and] in 1985 he presented his hoax ideas . . . [to the] Nation of Islam." (14)

Lipstadt also exposes the failings of Butz's attempt to make The Hoax of the Twentieth Century appear as an impartial, scholarly work. "Anything that disagreed with Butz's foregone conclusion . . . that the story of Jewish extermination in World War II was a propaganda hoax and that the Jews of Europe had not been exterminated," she explains, "was dismissed as 'obvious lies,' 'ludicrous,' 'breathtakingly absurd,' 'absolutely insane,' 'fishy,' 'obviously spurious,' and 'nonsense.'" (15) In addition, Lipstadt notes that while Butz's book exhibits the outward characteristics of legitimate research, including footnotes and a bibliography, he inserts footnotes only when it is to his advantage to do so. Specifically, his argument against the validity of the claim that Kramer had people gassed in Natzweiler so their bodies could be used in medical experiments (16) does not contain footnotes.

One possible explanation for Butz's discriminating use of footnotes is that he feared skeptical readers would check his sources, thus revealing how few of his assertions were grounded in fact. However, Butz had two more serious problems to deal with, as Lipstadt explains. First, he had to discredit the testimony of war crimes defendants who admitted that medical experiments were performed on the inmates of concentration camps. Then, he had to discredit the plethora of documents which confirmed their admissions. Butz claimed that war crimes defendants considered admitting their guilt to be a viable method of avoiding the death penalty. In response, Lipstadt asks, "If the end result promised to be the same---a death sentence---what purpose was served by falsely pleading guilty to such a vicious act?" (17) She subsequently attacks Butz's assertion that "documents could be discounted as forgeries, declared to have been 'tampered with,' or interpreted in a tangled fashion to satisfy a particular ideological bent," by pointing out that Jews could not forge "thousands of pages of documents in record time without being detected," nor could they win "the defendants' cooperation in their own incrimination." (18) By demonstrating that Butz's assertions are implausible, Lipstadt establishes that court testimony and internal Nazi documents are concrete, irrefutable sources.

The Evidence Against The Deniers

Using these sources and secondary literature, the arguments offered by Holocaust deniers can be refuted. Butz's arguments concerning experiments involving prisoners of Buchenwald and Auschwitz are no exception. His first argument, that no experiments were performed on living prisoners at Buchenwald, is easily refuted by Robert Jay Lifton's The Nazi Doctors. Lifton explains that many German soldiers died after using a special type of serum which contained phenol. To determine whether phenol was responsible for the soldiers' deaths, Mrugowsky, the head of the SS Hygienic Institute in Berlin, ordered the commencement of experimentation with phenol at Buchenwald. (19)

The second argument offered by Butz is that no Auschwitz prisoners were gassed at Natzweiler in preparation for experiments to be performed at Strasbourg. This argument can also be refuted using Lifton's The Nazi Doctors. Lifton explains that the female inmates of Auschwitz were subjected to "anthropological measurements . . . of all the parts of the body." (20) Based on these measurements, a group of women were selected, and taken to the concentration camp at Natzweiler. Upon arriving, they were gassed, and their bodies were taken to the Strasbourg University Hospital. Interestingly, the gassing of these women itself was considered an experiment by the Nazis; it marked the first time cyanide salts were used to kill in the Natzweiler gas chamber. (21)

However, the women were not brought to Strasbourg just to test out a new gas chamber. SS Captain Dr. August Hirt planned to "[preserve their] heads, and [ship them] to [a] research institute where various studies could be performed on the skull and brain, including those of 'racial classification' and 'pathological features of the skull formation.'" (22) However, the Nazis encountered difficulties in severing heads without damaging the skull. As a result, they began analyzing complete skeletons. A letter from SS-Standartenfuehrer Sievers to SS-Obersturmbannfuehrer Dr. Brandt confirms that high officials in the Nazi biomedical program were aware of these experiments. "As you know," Sievers writes, "the Reichsfuehrer-SS has directed that . . . Dr. Hirt be supplied with everything needed for his research work. For certain anthropological researches - I already reported to the Reichsfuehrer-SS on them - 150 skeletons of . . . Jews, are required, which are to be supplied by the KL Auschwitz." (23)

Lifton adds that Hirt's experiments were not limited to women. Shortly after the women mentioned above arrived at Natzweiler, two shipments of men followed. Each of these men had their left testicle removed; the testicles were sent to Hirt's lab for analysis. (24)

Lifton's observations on medical experimentation, in conjunction with original Nazi documents, easily prove that Butz's attempts to deny the existence of homicidal experiments in the Third Reich are futile. Since the doubts raised by Butz have been dismantled, facts accepted by established historians can be used to reconstruct the Nazi medical program. This program developed in several stages. It began as a sterilization program, evolved into a "euthanasia program," and finally, culminated in selections and homicidal medical experimentation in the death camps.

The Nazi Biomedical Vision

The Nazi medical program evolved out of the German fascination with the idea of the "Aryan" race. Once Adolf Hitler came to power in Germany, he stressed the importance of protecting the genetic integrity of this race. Hitler expresses such a plan in Mein Kampf. "There is only one holiest human right," he writes, "and this right is at the same time the holiest obligation, to wit: to see to it that the blood is preserved pure and, by preserving the best humanity, to create the possibility of a nobler development of these beings." (25) Nearly all of Hitler's acts were motivated by this idea of racial hygiene.

Six months after Hitler took power, a sterilization program went into effect in Germany. The ideas which culminated in the establishment of this program were present in Mein Kampf, in which he argued, "The demand that defective people be prevented from propagating equally defective offspring is a demand of the clearest reason." (26) The sterilization program was introduced by the minister of the interior, William Frick. Its provisions included the surgical sterilization of those afflicted with mental deficiency, schizophrenia, manic depressive insanity, epilepsy, Huntington's chorea, hereditary blindness, hereditary deafness, or grave bodily malformation. (27)

Lifton suggests that the bureaucracy which developed to carry out the sterilization program marked the beginning of the "nazification" of medicine in Germany. This "nazification" of medicine is evident in his description of patient-doctor confidentiality in the Third Reich. According to Lifton, no such confidentiality existed. "All physicians were legally required to report to health officers anyone they encountered . . . who fell into any of the . . . categories for sterilization," he explains. (28) In fact, physicians were expected to present their conclusions in court.

The Euthanasia Program

It did not take long for doctors to assume an even more insidious role in the Third Reich. In 1935, Hitler approached Dr. Gerhard Wagner and expressed interest in eliminating the mentally and incurably ill. Three years later, the Nazis established a system for doing exactly that. Several doctors, most notably Karl Brandt, were intimately involved in this program, known as the "euthanasia" project. Its victims were of all ages: "[N]ewborns or infants with severe deformation and brain damage" were killed, as were patients of mental hospitals. (29)

Hitler sought the extermination of the insane and mentally ill for two reasons. First, he believed that the hospital space and resources necessary to adequately care for these people could not be justified during wartime. (30) Also, he saw such exterminations as a vehicle to achieve his goal of removing "threats" to the Aryan "master race."

Fleming points out that Hitler's "euthanasia" project, which was later referred to as "Action T4," caused many more problems than he anticipated. Prominent religious figures attacked the policy of eliminating what Hitler called "useless life" in gas chambers. For example, the Bishop of Limburg cited "a concrete example of destruction of so-called 'useless life'" in a letter to the Reich Minister of Justice, and drew this conclusion: "All God-fearing man [sic] consider this destruction of helpless beings a crass injustice." (31)

The Death Camps

As a result of the uproar, Hitler ordered the discontinuation of Action T4 on August 28, 1941. Although he did not successfully eliminate all of the "useless life" he intended to, it is safe to assume that Hitler was encouraged by the success of killing by gas on a small scale, and realized that it could be employed to perform mass exterminations. (32)

With an efficient method of killing in place, the prisoners in Nazi concentration camps faced certain death. The order in which prisoners would be executed was determined by a process called selection. In a letter to von Herff and Himmler, SS-Sturmbannfuehrer Gricksch explained that at Auschwitz, selections usually took place at night. (33) In specially designated areas, newly arrived Jews were divided based on their health and ability to work. Those with incurable illnesses were immediately gassed. The remaining Jews, which became workers, were sent to other areas of Auschwitz. A similar procedure was used to perform selections in other concentration camps.

The Jews who survived these selections did not only serve as workers, however. They were also subjected to a variety of horrific medical experiments by Nazi doctors. Like the "euthanasia" program, these experiments were an expression of Hitler's desire to prevent the tainting of the "Aryan master race" by those he considered inferior. They included investigations into the effects of hypothermia and high-altitudes. Other experiments involved the development of effective methods of mass sterilization, the treatment of battle injuries and gas attacks, and the testing of vaccines. Another group of experiments focused on twins, dwarfs, and skeletal structure.

Hypothermia and High-Altitude Experiments

Some of these experiments, which explored subjects relating to search-and-rescue missions, including the effects of high altitudes and freezing temperatures, were performed by the German Air Force. McVay notes that similar experiments, in which the effects of ingesting seawater were studied, also were performed. (34) The existence of altitude and freezing experiments is confirmed by internal documents between SS officials and doctors.

The first of these documents, a letter, was written by SS-Sturmbannfuehrer Brandt to SS-Obersturmbannfuehrer Sievers, on March 21, 1942. It states that Himmler approved a series of "subatmospheric pressure experiments," provided that SS-Untersturmfuehrer Dr. Rascher, who was an official in the air force, would be allowed to participate. (35)

Dr. Rascher performed several of these experiments himself, and reported their results to Himmler. In a letter written on April 5, 1942, Rascher describes "a continuous experiment without oxygen at a height of 12 Km. conducted on a 37 year old Jew in good general condition." (36) The victim's spinal marrow was severed, and his brain was removed, revealing "a heavy subarchnoid oedema" and "a considerable quantity of air." (37) One month later, Rascher sent another, comparably graphic, summary of the high-altitude experiments being conducted at Dachau. In these, the victims were "Jewish professional criminals who had committed race pollution." (38)

Roger L. Berger asserts that Nazi doctors also performed a series of experiments in which they attempted to determine the best treatment for victims of immersion hypothermia at Dachau. Like the experiments involving high altitudes, these were performed for the benefit of the German air force. Berger explains that the results could be used to help "crew members of the German air force who had been shot down into the cold waters of the North Sea." (39) He notes that subjects in these experiments were of diverse religious and national backgrounds, and included Russian prisoners of war.

According to Berger, the experiments consisted of immersing subjects in ice water. Subjects were allowed to wear a variable amount of clothing; in some experiments, the subjects were naked. While Berger does not question whether the experiments actually occurred, he doubts the validity of written evidence that body temperatures, physical responses, biochemical effects and physiological effects were monitored. (40)

The written evidence Berger refers to is a comprehensive report delivered to Himmler on the Dachau experiments. In a shorter report, the doctors involved made the following observations: "If the . . . subject was placed in the water under narcosis . . . the subject began to groan and made some defensive movements . . . [which] ceased after about 5 minutes . . . There followed a progressive rigor . . . The rigor increased with the continuation of the cooling . . . [then] it suddenly ceased. . . . These cases ended fatally." (41)

Sterilization Experiments

While the primary goal of the hypothermia and high-altitude experiments was helping the German air force, sterilization experiments were clearly inspired by Hitler's notion of racial hygiene. The relationship between sterilization and racial hygiene is evident in the written testimony of Olga Lengyel, a survivor of Auschwitz. In Different Voices, Lengyel chronicles her observations of sterilization experiments in Auschwitz, as well as her discovery of the Nazi goal of sterilizing all non-Germans prior to the completion of the war in Europe. (42)

Butz and other deniers argue that survivors' accounts of their experiences in the concentration camps are unreliable. However, the validity of Lengyel's assertions are confirmed by correspondence between Brack and Himmler. For example, Brack writes, "[T]here are at least 2-3 million men and women well fit for work among the approximate 10 million European Jews. In consideration of the exceptional difficulties posed for us by the question of labor, I am of the opinion that these 2-3 million should . . . be taken out and kept alive . . . if they are . . . rendered incapable of reproduction." (43)

Lengyel points out the experiments performed on Jewish men and women in Auschwitz were equally horrific. The genitals of male prisoners were exposed to X-rays, while prisoners were injected with various substances. (44) These assertions are also confirmed by Nazi documents. A letter from Blankenburg to Himmler verifies that X-rays were employed to sterilize males in Auschwitz: "I submit to you . . . a work of Dr. Horst Schumann on the influence of X-rays on human genital glands. . . . [T]his work shows that by those means castration of males is almost impossible . . . [O]perative castration . . . can be performed more reliably and more quickly." (45) Another document verifies the fate of women: "The method I contrived to achieve the sterilization of the female organism without operation is as good as perfected," wrote Professor Dr. Carl Clauberg, one of the leaders of the sterilization experiments at Auschwitz, "It can be performed by a single injection made through the entrance of the uterus in the course of the customary gynecological examination known to every physician." (46)

Medical Experiments

McVay groups sterilization experiments, experiments designed to find treatments for battle injuries and gas attacks, and to test vaccines in the category "medical experiments." (47) Members of the SS, including the Nazi doctors, especially feared epidemics of disease in the camps. As a result, they placed great emphasis on finding cures to contagious diseases. This is exemplified by Graum's correspondence with Himmler: "The fuehrer's Commissioner-General, SS Brigadefuehrer Professor Dr. Brandt . . . request[ed] that I . . . assist him by placing prisoners at his disposal for research work into the cause of contagious jaundice [Hepatitis epidemica] which he was furthering considerably." (48)

Josef Mengele

The final category of experiments identified by McVay are "racial experiments," which include comparative studies of dwarfs, twins, and skeletal structure. (49) As mentioned above, SS Captain Dr. August Hirt intended to compare the skull and brain of gassed Jews to those of other types of people. The studies of dwarfs and twins were the pet projects of Josef Mengele, who Lifton refers to as "Dr. Auschwitz." (50) Mengele isolated dwarfs and twins from other prisoners in the camp, and performed an array of experiments on them, many of which resulted in their deaths. Lifton argues that Mengele's interest in these groups is indicative of his obsession with Jewish abnormality. (51)


The above description of medical experiments performed on concentration camp inmates directly contradicts the assertions of Arthur Butz. Unlike Butz's assertions, however, it is grounded in fact. None of Holocaust denial can make this claim. Almost all denial publications argue that the Holocaust was an invention of Jewish and Israeli leaders; that Germany did not plan to kill Jews, but rather, intended to transport them to other countries; that Jewish deaths were the responsibility of the Soviet Union, not Germany; and that Jews who died did something to deserve their fate. (52) Each of these statements can be disproved by research and historiographical evidence. Thus, Holocaust denial can be described as little more than a group of hateful lies packaged as conventional academic writing.

Despite the illusion of scholarly credibility deniers try to convey in their writings, anti-Semitism is the cornerstone of Holocaust denial. Lipstadt explains that "[t]he central assertion for the deniers is that Jews are not victims but victimizers." (53) Deniers paint the Holocaust as a Jewish conspiracy with three main goals. Their first goal was simply to defile the Germans, making them look like monsters in the eyes of the world. Secondly, they wanted the state of Israel to be reestablished. Finally, the Jews desired huge sums of money from Germany as "reparations." The assertion that they invented the Holocaust as a vehicle to achieve these goals is ludicrous.

Although anti-Semitism is the main motive for Holocaust deniers, other motives exist. They include the effort to resuscitate National Socialism as a viable political system, and the desire of German nationalists to exonerate their country from its crimes against the Jews. For example, Ernst Zündel, a denier who disseminates his opinions on the World Wide Web, asserts that he is "In a Struggle to Free Us [Germans] from The Lie of the Century," and writes, "Germany is still an Occupation Government today - controlled and terrorized by alien interests, suppression, treason and subversion. . . . In Germany and, for that matter, most of Europe, you are allowed to say you 'doubt the Holy Ghost' but you will go to prison for 'questioning the Holocaust.'" (54)

Perhaps the most disturbing aspect of Holocaust denial is its longevity. The initial efforts to deny the Holocaust were made by the French fascist Maurice Bardeche in 1947. (55) Yet denial literature is still produced and distributed today. In the Preface to the Paperback Edition of Denying the Holocaust, Lipstadt warns, "All those who value truth, particularly truths that are subject to attack by the plague of hatred, must remain ever vigilant. The bacillus of prejudice is exceedingly tenacious and truth and memory exceedingly fragile." (56) The persistence of denial justifies her warning.


(1) Deborah Lipstadt, preface to the paperback edition of Denying the Holocaust (New York: Penguin Books USA, 1994), xii.
(2) Kenneth N. McVay, "Holocaust FAQ: Auschwitz-Birkenau: Layman's Guide." Available via anonymous ftp from in pub/usenet/news.answers/holocaust/auschwitz/part01 (and ~/part02), 19.
(3) Ibid., 19.
(4) Arthur R. Butz, The Hoax of the Twentieth Century (Newport Beach, CA: Institute For Historical Review, 1976), 42.
(5) Ibid., 176.
(6) Ibid., 176.
(7) Ibid., 176.
(8) Ibid., 267.
(9) Ibid., 177.
(10) Ibid., 42.
(11) Deborah Lipstadt, Denying the Holocaust (New York: Penguin Books USA, 1994), 2.
(12) Ibid., 125.
(13) Ibid., 126.
(14) Ibid., 126.
(15) Ibid., 126-127.
(16) Butz, Hoax, 176.
(17) Lipstadt, Denying the Holocaust, 130.
(18) Ibid., 129, 131.
(19) Robert Jay Lifton, The Nazi Doctors (New York: Basic Books, 1986), 256.
(20) Ibid., 284.
(21) Ibid., 285.
(22) Ibid., 285.
(23) Sievers to SS-Obersturmbannfuehrer Dr. Brandt, 2 November 1942, in Nazi_Doc [document online]. Available from gopher://; INTERNET.
(24) Lifton, The Nazi Doctors, 285.
(25) Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, trans. Ralph Manheim (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1943), 402.
(26) Ibid., 255.
(27) Lifton, The Nazi Doctors, 25.
(28) Ibid., 25.
(29) Ibid., 50.
(30) Philippe Aziz, Karl Brandt, The Third Reich's Man In White, trans. Edouard Bizub and Philip Haentzler, vol. 1 of Doctors of Death (Geneva: Ferri, 1976), 72.
31) Sievers to SS-Obersturmbannfuehrer Dr. Brandt, 2 November 1942.
(32) Gerald Fleming, Hitler and the Final Solution (Berkeley, CA: University of California, 1984), 24.
(33) Gricksch to SS-Col. von Herff and Reichsfuehrer-SS Himmler, report, Resettlement of Jews in gricksch.rpt [document online]. Available from; INTERNET.
(34) McVay, Auschwitz-Bikenau, 19.
(35) Brandt to SS-Obersturmbannfuehrer Sievers, 21 March 1942, in Nazi_Doc [document online]. Available from gopher://; INTERNET.
(36) Rascher to Reichsfuehrer-SS Himmler, 5 April 1942, in Nazi_Doc [document online]. Available from gopher://; INTERNET.
(37) Ibid.
(38) Rascher to Reichsfuehrer-SS Himmler, 11 May 1942, in Nazi_Doc [document online]. Available from gopher://; INTERNET.
(39) Robert L. Berger, "Nazi Science - The Dachau Hypothermia Experiments," The New England Journal of Medicine 322 (17 May 1990): 1435.
(40) Ibid., 1435.
(41) Holzloehner, Rascher, and Finke, report, 10 October 1942, in Nazi_Doc [document online]. Available from gopher://; INTERNET.
(42) Olga Lengyel, "Five Chimneys," in Different Voices, eds. Carol Rittner and John K. Roth (New York: Paragon House, 1993), 124-125.
(43) Brack to Reichsfuehrer-SS Himmler, 23 June 1942, in medical.001 [document online]. Available from; INTERNET.
(44) Lengyel, Five Chimneys, 124-125.
(45) Blankenburg to Reichsfuehrer-SS Himmler, 29 April 1944, in medical.007 [document online]. Available from; INTERNET.
(46) Carl Clauberg to Himmler, 7 June 1943, in medical.003 [document online]. Available from ftp://; INTERNET.
(47) McVay, Auschwitz-Bikenau, 19.
(48) Graum to Reichsfuehrer-SS Himmler, 1 June 1943, in Nazi_Doc. Available from gopher://; INTERNET.
(49) McVay, Auschwitz-Bikenau, 19.
(50) Lifton, The Nazi Doctors, 347-356, 360.
(51) Ibid., 360.
(52) Lipstadt, Denying the Holocaust, 99.
(53) Ibid., 23.
(54) Ernst Zündel, "The Zündelsite." Available from; INTERNET.
(55) Lipstadt, Denying the Holocaust, 50.
(56) Lipstadt, Preface to the Paperback Edition, xvii.


Aziz, Philippe. Karl Brandt, The Third Reich's Man In White. Translated by Edouard Bizub and Philip Haentzler. Vol. 1 of Doctors of Death. Geneva: Ferri, 1976.

Berger, Robert L. "Nazi Science - The Dachau Hypothermia Experiments." The New England Journal of Medicine 322 (May 17 1990): 1435.

Blankenburg. Letter to Reichsfuehrer-SS Himmler, 29 April 1944. In medical.007 [document online]. Available from; INTERNET.

Brack. Letter to Reichsfuehrer-SS Himmler, 23 June 1942. In medical.001 [document online]. Available from; INTERNET.

Brandt. Letter to SS-Obersturmbannfuehrer Sievers, 2 November 1942. In Nazi_Doc [document online]. Available from gopher://; INTERNET.

Butz, Arthur R. The Hoax of the Twentieth Century. Newport Beach, CA: Institute For Historical Review, 1976.

Clauberg, Carl. Letter to Himmler, 7 June 1943. In medical.003 [document online]. Available from; INTERNET.

Fleming, Gerald. Hitler and the Final Solution. Berkeley, CA: University of California, 1984.

Graum. Letter to Reichsfuehrer-SS Himmler, 1 June 1943. In Nazi_Doc [document online]. Available from gopher://; INTERNET.

Gricksch. Report to SS-Col. von Herff and Reichsfuehrer-SS Himmler. Resettlement of Jews. In gricksch.rpt [document online]. Available from; INTERNET.

Hitler, Adolf. Mein Kampf. Translated by Ralph Manheim. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1943.

Holzloehner, Rascher, and Finke. Report, 10 October 1942. In Nazi_Doc [document online]. Available from gopher://; INTERNET.

Lengyel, Olga. "Five Chimneys." In Different Voices, edited by Carol Rittner and John K. Roth, 124-125. New York: Paragon House, 1993.

Lifton, Robert J. The Nazi Doctors. New York: Basic Books, 1986.

Lipstadt, Deborah. Denying the Holocaust. New York: Penguin Books USA, 1994.

Lipstadt, Deborah. Preface to the paperback edition of Denying the Holocaust. New York: Penguin Books USA, 1994.

McVay, Kenneth N. "Holocaust FAQ: Auschwitz-Birkenau: Layman's Guide." Available via anonymous FTP from in pub/usenet/news.answers/holocaust/auschwitz/part01 (and ~/part02).

Rascher. Letter to Reichsfuehrer-SS Himmler, 5 April 1942. In Nazi_Doc [document online]. Available from gopher://; INTERNET.

Rascher. Letter to Reichsfuehrer-SS Himmler, 11 May 1942. In Nazi_Doc [document online]. Available from gopher://;  INTERNET.

Sievers. Letter to SS-Obersturmbannfuehrer Dr. Brandt, 2 November 1942. In Nazi_Doc [document online]. Available from gopher://; INTERNET.

Ernst Zündel, "The Zündelsite." Available from; INTERNET.

[ Holocaust denial (french) | Gravediggers of Memory | Tout PHDN ]