Cincinnati Radiation Experiments

Last updated

The Cincinnati Radiation Experiments were a series of total and partial body irradiation tests performed on at least 90 patients with advanced cancer at the Cincinnati General Hospital, now University of Cincinnati Hospital, from 1960 to 1971. Led by radiologist Eugene L. Saenger, the experiments were funded in part by the Defense Atomic Support Agency within the Department of Defense to study how soldiers in nuclear war would be affected by large doses of radiation. [1] [2] The experiments were conducted without patient consent in the first five years of the study and with disputed levels of consent thereafter. [3] The irradiated patients experienced nausea, vomiting, cognitive impairment, and death. [4] Twenty one patients died within one month. [5] The contract between the researchers and the DOD terminated in 1972 under pressure from Senator Edward Kennedy, [6] marking the end of major human irradiation experimentation in the U.S. [7] that began after World War II and continued throughout the Cold War Era. [8]

Contents

Although initially fading from public eye, the controversy resurfaced in 1993 [9] and was soon investigated by President Bill Clinton's Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments. [10] In 1994, families of the patients filed a class-action lawsuit against the team of 15 researchers. [11] Five years later, the University of Cincinnati settled the case for over $4 million. [12]

Experiments and controversies

Department of Defense funding

On September 25, 1958, Saenger sent a grant proposal entitled "Metabolic Changes in Human following Total Body Radiation" to the Department of Defense, requesting $25,085 to analyze the amino-aciduria levels in the urine of total body irradiated patients. [13] Although multiple military researchers, including the Director of the Division of Nuclear Medicine and Chemistry, wrote to the US Army Medical Research and Development Command that they doubted the practical value of Saenger's proposed study, the DOD approved the grant proposal due to its possibility of evaluating the combat effectiveness of soldiers in nuclear warfare. [13] The initial grant proposal evolved into an 11-year contract, in which the DOD provided a total of $671,482.79 in funds. [14] Detailing the progress of the experiment were a series of 10 progress reports sent to the DOD from 1960 to 1972, the first five of which were entitled "Metabolic Changes in Humans Following Total Body Irradiation" and the last five "Radiation Effects in Man: Manifestations and Therapeutic Efforts." [15] The irradiation experiments only began after the DOD funding was received, with the first known experiment occurring on May 24, 1960. [16]

There is controversy regarding how the DOD funds were allocated. Saenger maintained that while the DOD funds were used to buy irradiation equipment, run laboratory tests, and hire personnel, only University funds directly financed the patients' irradiation treatment. [14] [17] However, the Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments held that without the DOD funds, Saenger could not have begun the irradiation tests. [17]

Military purpose

As part of the DOD contract, the radiation experiments attempted to imitate nuclear wartime conditions in order to accurately evaluate the cognitive and physiological effects of radiation on a soldier. [18] During irradiation, patients' bodies were positioned to mirror a soldier's defensive position; the radiation was intended, but not proven, to be administered unidirectionally to reflect a soldier's exposure; and the irradiation was administered all at once, which diverged from the standard medical practice at the time, where cancer patients were given small doses cumulatively to maximize destruction of cancer cells. [19] Even so, in the progress reports sent to the DOD and in his testimony to the Subcommittee on Administrative Law and Governmental Relations in 1994, Saenger maintained that the primary goal of the study was to provide palliative and therapeutic care to the patients. According to Saenger, the study of radiation effects on a soldier's performance was a secondary goal. [20] [14]

Patient selection

The patients were referred to Dr. Saenger's experiments by the Cincinnati General Hospital's Tumor Clinic. [14] All the patients had advanced stage cancers, including breast, lung, colon, pancreas, skin, sinus, ovarian, lymph, cervical, rectal, liver, stomach, esophagus, bowel, tongue, brain, tonsil, rectum, intestinal, and bone cancers. [16] Although they were all cancerous, Saenger sought patients that were in good nutritional health, and who had not been exposed to previous radiation treatment. [21]

The patient selection process was the subject of another controversy. David Egilman, a doctor practicing in Massachusetts at the time, criticized the patient selection and irradiation processes in a statement to the Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments, writing that many of the cancers were radio-resistant and could not have been treated effectively without killing the patient. [22] On the other hand, the American College of Radiology, after sending representatives to Saenger's laboratory during the irradiation experiments, concluded in a 1972 peer review that the patient selection process and the experiments as a whole "conformed with good medical practice." [23]

Health effects

The experiments administered between 25 and 300 rad of Cobalt-60 total body and partial body irradiation, comparable to 20,000 chest x-rays, within hours. [24] [25] There were also plans to increase the radiation dosage to 600 rad. [26] In addition, bone marrow was occasionally extracted prior to the irradiation and later reinfused in an effort to alleviate the debilitating health effects of the radiation. [24]

The irradiated patients experienced a wide variety of side-effects: nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, emaciation, hemorrhaging, fatigue, cognitive impairment, and hallucinations. [27] In the first month 21 patients died. [5] 1/4 of the patients died within 2 months of irradiation, and over 3/4 of the patients died within a year. [14] In his testimony, Dr. Saenger maintained that assessing the direct contribution of the irradiation to the mortality rates is impossible due to the variety of health factors acting as confounding variables: prior chemotherapy treatment, localized radiation treatment, and the advanced stage cancer itself. He claimed that the cancer was the primary factor in the patients' deaths, and that the irradiation had palliative benefits for 31% of the patients. [14]

From 1960 to 1965, no written consent forms were used in the experiments, [28] in accordance with the requirements of the Cincinnati General Hospital; the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare; and the Department of Defense. [14] In April 1965, the patients were given consent forms that, according to Dr. Saenger, appropriately discussed the dangers of the irradiation. [14] However, David Egilman claimed that these forms did not mention any relevant side effects of the irradiation. [28]

In 1969, the National Institutes of Health evaluated the Cincinnati General Hospital's ethical practices, prompting Saenger to adopt a new consent form outlining the purpose, procedure, and risks of the irradiation tests to the patients. [14] [29] Even so, no consent form used mentioned possible death. [30]

During the 1994 trial, family members of the patients alleged that the researchers forged certain patients' signatures on the consent forms. [31]

Researchers

  • Dr. Eugene L. Saenger
  • Dr. Edward B. Silberstein
  • Dr. Bernard S. Aron
  • Dr. Harry Horwitz
  • Dr. James G. Kereiakes
  • Dr. Harold Perry
  • Dr. Ben I. Friedman
  • Dr. Thomas Wright
  • Dr. I-wen Chen
  • Dr. Robert L. Kunkel
  • Dr. Louis A. Gottschalk
  • Dr. Theodore H. Wold
  • Dr. Goldine Gleser
  • Dr. Warren O. Kessler
  • Dr. Myron I. Varon

[11]

Patients

Statistics

Although only 89 patients have been identified, medical records indicate that at least 90 patients were involved in the experiments. Moreover, the progress reports sent to the DOD suggest that 10 additional individuals were irradiated whose treatments were not included in the medical records. [32]

Approximately 43% of the known patients were female, and 57% male. [16]

The average age of the patients was 59, but three children aged 9, 10, and 13 were also irradiated. [33] [16]

To see a list of the 89 identified patients, see Appendix 1 of The Treatment: The Story of Those Who Died in the Cincinnati Radiation Tests by Martha Stephens. [16]

Socioeconomic status

The average patient had 5 years of formal education, with an average IQ of 89. [33] 62% were African-American, and the majority were working class. [34] A report published in 1972 claimed that the socioeconomic status of the patients matched the general makeup of the Cincinnati General Hospital. [14]

Institutional review (1958–1972)

From the initial budget proposal in 1958 to 1966, the University of Cincinnati had no institutional review boards (IRBs) that evaluated the ethical practices of the Cincinnati Radiation Experiments, and IRBs were not formally required by law for government-funded research until 1974. [26] In 1966, however, the University created the Faculty Committee on Research (FCR) in compliance with an order from the US Public Health Service, [35] an IRB that conducted multiple reviews of the experiments' proposed research protocols. [36]

In March 1966, Dr. Saenger proposed an additional research plan called "Protection of Humans with Stored Autologous Marrow" in an effort to expand his research to investigate the palliative effects of bone marrow extraction and reinfusion. [36] [26] While the FCR initially deemed the plan inadequate for not properly informing the patients of potential risks of the treatment, [36] a revised proposal in 1967 entitled "The Therapeutic Effect of Total Body Irradiation Followed by Infusion of Stored Autologous Marrow in Humans" received varying levels of approval by the members of the FCR. [26] [36] Dr. George Shields claimed the mortality rate of the experiments at that point in the experiments (25%) was too high, stating that if the proposal was to be approved, the patients would have to be explicitly told of the "1 in 4 chance of death within a few weeks due to treatment." [37] [38] Other members of the FCR such as Dr. R. L. Witt and Dr. Edward P. Radford recommended approval of the study only under the provisions that the researchers clearly outline the therapeutic goals and palliative likelihood of the experiments. [39] [40]

On May 23, 1967, the new bone marrow transplant protocol was approved with the provision that the experiments solely focus on the "therapeutic efficacy of whole body irradiation." [41] [26] The FCR did not follow up on its provisions, however, until 1970, when it deemed the experimental protocol to be inadequate, particularly with regard to the effectiveness of the bone marrow infusions in alleviating the debilitating effects of the total body irradiation. Even so, the FCR reapproved the experiments on August 9, 1971. [41] [42]

In April 1972, another proposal entitled "Evaluation of the therapeutic effectiveness of total and partial body irradiation as compared to chemotherapy in humans with carcinoma of the lung and colon" was sent to the FCR, but the president of the University of Cincinnati soon terminated the contract between the DOD and the UC researchers in a deal with Senator Edward Kennedy following negative press coverage of the experiments. [43] [44] The new protocol was put on hold until August 1972, when it was finally approved by the FCR as part of a grant proposal sent to the National Institutes of Health. The NIH, however, rejected the proposal in February 1973, cutting off all outside funds for the experiments. [43]

Press coverage and Department of Defense contract termination (1971–1972)

Dr. Saenger's contract with the Department of Defense first gained public attention when the Washington Post broke the story on October 8, 1971, following investigative journalism by Roger Rapoport. [45] [46] [47] Three days later, the University of Cincinnati held a news conference on the experiments, which prompted three separate investigations of the experiments by the American College of Radiology, the Ad Hoc Review Committee of the University of Cincinnati, and the Junior Faculty Association of the University of Cincinnati, whose reports were all published in January, 1972. [48] [41]

The Junior Faculty Association's report, entitled "Report to the Campus Community," was written by Martha Stephens, an English professor at the University of Cincinnati. Stephens based the report on Saenger's progress reports sent to the DOD, which were released to Stephens by Dr. Edwall Gall, the then Director of the University of Cincinnati Medical Center. [49] The JFA's report evolved into a news conference on January 25, 1972, [50] which prompted the Washington Post to publish the JFA's report's findings the next day. [51] While Saenger and Dr. Silberstein criticized the JFA's report, asserting that "the only unfavorable comments had come from a handful of local, and non-medical junior faculty members" in their unpublished article "Ethics on Trial: Medical, Congressional and Journalistic," [52] the report and the accompanying Washington Post article drew Senator Edward Kennedy's attention, who was already investigating medical experimentation in the United States. [51]

As part of his investigation of the Cincinnati Radiation Experiments, Senator Kennedy sought interviews with the patients, an effort resisted by Saenger and Silberstein. [44] In April 1972, Senator Kennedy, Ohio governor John Gilligan, and Warren Bennis, the then president of the University of Cincinnati, met and agreed to halt the political investigations of the Cincinnati Radiation Experiments if the contract between the UC researchers and the Department of Defense was terminated. [48] [44]

Renewed press coverage and Congressional Hearing (1993–1994)

Although initially fading from public eye after the termination of the DOD contract and the discontinuation of the Kennedy investigation, the Cincinnati Radiation Experiments resurfaced in November 1993 as a result of Eileen Welsome's investigative journalism in the Albuquerque Tribune. [9] While primarily concerned with the Cold War tests at Los Alamos, Welsome's articles prompted the Department of Energy to renew investigations of Cold War human experimentation, and in January 1994, Cincinnati's WKRC Channel 12 news contacted Martha Stephens, the original author of the JFA report. WKRC then aired a program featuring a debate between Stephens, who attacked the experiments, and Congressman David S. Mann, who defended the experiments and the Cincinnati General Hospital. [53]

Following this televised program was a tide of local press coverage which led to the Cincinnati Radiation Experiment's story being covered in the New York Times. [54] According to Martha Stephens, the widespread publicity forced David Mann to reverse his political position on the experiments to appeal to his constituents in the upcoming 1994 Congressional Democratic primary election, and David Mann soon called for a Congressional hearing on the experiments. [55] Occurring on April 11, 1994, in Cincinnati, The Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Administrative Law and Government Relations of the Committee on the Judiciary provided information on the experiments to President Bill Clinton's Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments, [10] [56] and featured testimonies of the relatives of the patients as well as Dr. Saenger's only public testimony on the experiments. [57] A primary concern of the hearing was to evaluate whether or not the families of the patients should be monetarily compensated. [56]

Trials (1994–1999)

The renewed publicity also prompted Martha Stephens and Laura Schneider, a graduate student at the University of Cincinnati, to investigate the identities of the patients and their family members. [58] Bob Newman, a human rights attorney, agreed to represent the identified families in a class action lawsuit filed on February 17, 1994, against the individual researchers, the University of Cincinnati, and the City of Cincinnati. [58] [11]

In the lawsuit, the families alleged that the experiments violated the patients' rights to due process of law, equal protection under the law, privacy, and access to the courts. [11] Although the individual researchers sought immunity as "publicly employed physicians," District Court Judge Sandra Beckwith dismissed the defendants' claims, citing the Nuremberg Code's ethical guidelines for human experimentation established in the Nuremberg Nazi doctor trials following World War II. [11] [59] [47] [60]

After numerous hearings in In Re Cincinnati Radiation Litigation, on May 4, 1999, Judge Beckwith settled the case for over $4 million, paid by the University, the City, and the individual researchers. [12]

In addition to the settlement, the trial demanded the creation of a memorial plaque for the patients of the Cincinnati Radiation Experiments. [61] In October 1999, the plaque with the words "In Memoriam: Radiation Effects Study 1960–1972" was erected near the building of the Cincinnati General Hospital where the experiments were performed. [62] However, in June 2001, the building housing the General Hospital was demolished to construct a parking garage, and the plaque was moved to a courtyard near the current University Hospital's outpatient treatment clinic. [63]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">MKUltra</span> CIA program involving illegal experimentation on human test subjects (1953–1973)

Project MKUltra was an illegal human experiments program designed and undertaken by the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to develop procedures and identify drugs that could be used during interrogations to weaken people and force confessions through brainwashing and psychological torture. It began in 1953 and was halted in 1973. MKUltra used numerous methods to manipulate its subjects' mental states and brain functions, such as the covert administration of high doses of psychoactive drugs and other chemicals without the subjects' consent, electroshocks, hypnosis, sensory deprivation, isolation, verbal and sexual abuse, and other forms of torture.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Acute radiation syndrome</span> Health problems caused by high levels of ionizing radiation

Acute radiation syndrome (ARS), also known as radiation sickness or radiation poisoning, is a collection of health effects that are caused by being exposed to high amounts of ionizing radiation in a short period of time. Symptoms can start within an hour of exposure, and can last for several months. Early symptoms are usually nausea, vomiting and loss of appetite. In the following hours or weeks, initial symptoms may appear to improve, before the development of additional symptoms, after which either recovery or death follow.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Tuskegee Syphilis Study</span> 1932–1972 human experiment in Alabama, United States

The Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis in the Negro Male was a study conducted between 1932 and 1972 by the United States Public Health Service (PHS) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) on a group of nearly 400 African American men with syphilis. The purpose of the study was to observe the effects of the disease when untreated, though by the end of the study medical advancements meant it was entirely treatable. The men were not informed of the nature of the experiment, and more than 100 died as a result.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Horst Schumann</span> Nazi SS doctor at Auschwitz (1906–1983)

Horst Schumann was an SS-Sturmbannführer (major) and medical doctor who conducted sterilization and castration experiments at Auschwitz and was particularly interested in the mass sterilization of Jews by means of X-rays.

M. Krishnan Nair was an Indian oncologist. He was the founding director of the Regional Cancer Centre, Thiruvananthapuram, a director of the S.U.T. Institute of Oncology, and Trivandrum Cancer Center(TCC), part of SUT Royal Hospital in Thiruvananthapuram (Trivandrum) and a professor at the Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences & Research in Kochi. The Government of India awarded him the fourth highest civilian award of the Padma Shri in 2001 for his contributions in the cancer care field.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Joseph Gilbert Hamilton</span> American professor and physicist

Joseph Gilbert Hamilton was an American professor of Medical Physics, Experimental Medicine, General Medicine, and Experimental Radiology as well as director (1948–1957) of the Crocker Laboratory, part of the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. Hamilton studied the medical effects of exposure to radioactive isotopes, which included the use of unsuspecting human subjects.

Eugene Saenger was an American university professor and physician. A graduate of Harvard University, Saenger was an extremely controversial pioneer in radiation research and nuclear medicine, at the expense of human autonomy and dignity. He taught at the University of Cincinnati for more than thirty years.

The ringworm affair refers to circumstances involving an alleged number of 20,000 to 200,000 Jews who were treated between 1948 and 1960 for tinea capitis (ringworm) with ionizing radiation to the head and neck area within Israel. The population suffering from the disease in Israel at the time was composed primarily of newly-arrived immigrants and populations who were expected to emigrate, mostly from North Africa, as well as some from Middle East and elsewhere, but many Jewish children were irradiated in their home countries regardless of their intent to emigrate.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Human radiation experiments</span> Studies of radiation effects on humans

Since the discovery of ionizing radiation, a number of human radiation experiments have been performed to understand the effects of ionizing radiation and radioactive contamination on the human body, specifically with the element plutonium.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Nazi human experimentation</span> Unethical experiments on human subjects

Nazi human experimentation was a series of medical experiments on prisoners by Nazi Germany in its concentration camps mainly between 1942 and 1945. There were 15,754 documented victims, of various nationalities and age groups, although the true number is believed to be more extensive. Many survived, with a quarter of documented victims being killed. Survivors generally experienced severe permanent injuries.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Albert Stevens</span> Subject of radiation experiment

Albert Stevens (1887–1966), also known as patient CAL-1 and most radioactive human ever, was a house painter from Ohio who was subjected to an involuntary human radiation experiment and survived the highest known accumulated radiation dose in any human. On May 14, 1945, he was injected with 131 kBq of plutonium without his knowledge because it was erroneously believed that he had a terminal disease.

<i>The Plutonium Files</i> 1999 non-fiction book by Eileen Welsome

The Plutonium Files: America's Secret Medical Experiments in the Cold War is a 1999 book by Eileen Welsome. It is a history of United States government-engineered radiation experiments on unwitting Americans, based on the Pulitzer Prize–winning series Welsome wrote for The Albuquerque Tribune.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Holmesburg Prison</span> Former detention center in Pennsylvania, United States

Holmesburg Prison, given the nickname "The Terrordome," was a prison operated by the city of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania and the Pennsylvania Department of Prisons (PDP) from 1896 to 1995. The facility is located at 8215 Torresdale Ave in the Holmesburg section of Philadelphia. It was decommissioned in 1995 when it closed. As of today, the structure still stands and is occasionally used for prisoner overflow and work programs.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Unethical human experimentation in the United States</span> Experiments that were performed on humans in the US that are deemed unethical

Numerous experiments which are performed on human test subjects in the United States are considered unethical, because they are performed without the knowledge or informed consent of the test subjects. Such tests have been performed throughout American history, but some of them are ongoing. The experiments include the exposure of humans to many chemical and biological weapons, human radiation experiments, injections of toxic and radioactive chemicals, surgical experiments, interrogation and torture experiments, tests which involve mind-altering substances, and a wide variety of other experiments. Many of these tests are performed on children, the sick, and mentally disabled individuals, often under the guise of "medical treatment". In many of the studies, a large portion of the subjects were poor, racial minorities, or prisoners.

Human subject research legislation in the United States can be traced to the early 20th century. Human subject research in the United States was mostly unregulated until the 20th century, as it was throughout the world, until the establishment of various governmental and professional regulations and codes of ethics. Notable – and in some cases, notorious – human subject experiments performed in the US include the Tuskegee syphilis experiment, human radiation experiments, the Milgram obedience experiment and Stanford prison experiments and Project MKULTRA. With growing public awareness of such experimentation, and the evolution of professional ethical standards, such research became regulated by various legislation, most notably, those that introduced and then empowered the institutional review boards.

Travel outside the Earth's protective atmosphere, magnetosphere, and in free fall can harm human health, and understanding such harm is essential for successful crewed spaceflight. Potential effects on the central nervous system (CNS) are particularly important. A vigorous ground-based cellular and animal model research program will help quantify the risk to the CNS from space radiation exposure on future long distance space missions and promote the development of optimized countermeasures.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">The Svedberg Laboratory</span>

The The Svedberg Laboratory (TSL) is a university facility, based in Uppsala, Sweden. The activities at TSL are based around the particle accelerator Gustaf Werner cyclotron.

Unethical human experimentation is human experimentation that violates the principles of medical ethics. Such practices have included denying patients the right to informed consent, using pseudoscientific frameworks such as race science, and torturing people under the guise of research. Around World War II, Imperial Japan and Nazi Germany carried out brutal experiments on prisoners and civilians through groups like Unit 731 or individuals like Josef Mengele; the Nuremberg Code was developed after the war in response to the Nazi experiments. Countries have carried out brutal experiments on marginalized populations. Examples include American abuses during Project MKUltra and the Tuskegee syphilis experiments, and the mistreatment of indigenous populations in Canada and Australia. The Declaration of Helsinki, developed by the World Medical Association (WMA), is widely regarded as the cornerstone document on human research ethics.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Wright Haskell Langham</span>

Wright Haskell Langham was an internationally renowned expert in the fields of plutonium exposure, aerospace and aviation medicine, Eniwetok nuclear tests, the Palomares and Greenland nuclear accidents. Sometimes Langham was referred to as Mr. Plutonium.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Clarence Lushbaugh</span> American physician and pathologist

Clarence Chancelum Lushbaugh Jr. was an American physician and pathologist. He was considered an expert in radiological accidents and injuries, as well as a pioneer in radiation safety research, and he is known for his controversial research involving human subjects.

References

  1. ↑ United States. Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments (1996). The Human Radiation Experiments. USA: Oxford University Press. pp. 239–240. ISBN   9780195107920.
  2. ↑ Stephens, Martha (2002). The Treatment: The Story of Those Who Died in the Cincinnati Radiation Tests. Durham and London: Duke University Press. pp. 3–14.
  3. ↑ Stephens, Martha (2002). The Treatment: The Story of Those Who Died in the Cincinnati Radiation Tests. Durham and London: Duke University Press. p. 10.
  4. ↑ Schneider, Keith (1994-04-11). "Cold War Radiation Test on Humans To Undergo a Congressional Review". The New York Times. ISSN   0362-4331 . Retrieved 2017-04-30.
  5. 1 2 Dicke, William (11 October 2007). "Eugene Saenger, Controversial Doctor, Dies at 90". The New York Times. Retrieved 8 May 2024.
  6. ↑ Stephens, Martha (2002). The Treatment: The Story of Those Who Died in the Cincinnati Radiation Tests. Durham and London: Duke University Press. pp. 12, 309.
  7. ↑ Leopold, Ellen (2009). Under the Radar: Cancer and the Cold War. Rutgers University Press. p. 98. ISBN   9780813544045.
  8. ↑ Moreno, Jonathan D. (2001). Undue Risk: Secret State Experiments on Humans. Psychology Press. pp. 9–10. ISBN   9780415928359.
  9. 1 2 Stephens, Martha (2002). The Treatment: The Story of Those Who Died in the Cincinnati Radiation Tests. Durham and London: Duke University Press. pp. 15–16.
  10. 1 2 Kutcher, Gerald (2009). Contested Medicine: Cancer Research and the Military. University of Chicago Press. p. 4. ISBN   9780226465333.
  11. 1 2 3 4 5 Hawk, Morris L. (1995). The "Kingdom of Ends": In Re Cincinnati Radiation Litigation and the Right to Bodily Integrity. Cas. W. Res. L. Rev. 977.
  12. 1 2 Stephens, Martha (2002). The Treatment: The Story of Those Who Died in the Cincinnati Radiation Tests. Durham and London: Duke University Press. pp. xxi.
  13. 1 2 Department of the Army Office of the Surgeon General Research and Development Division Washington 25 D.C. "List of Attachments For Briefing Book Volume 2". Archived from the original on 2017-07-19. Retrieved 2017-04-29.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
  14. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Saenger, Eugene (2002). Hearing Testimony of Eugene Saenger. Durham and London: Duke University Press. pp. 296–305.{{cite book}}: |work= ignored (help)
  15. ↑ Kutcher, Gerald (2009). Contested Medicine: Cancer Research and the Military. University of Chicago Press. p. 104. ISBN   9780226465333.
  16. 1 2 3 4 5 Stephens, Martha (2002). The Treatment: The Story of Those Who Died in the Cincinnati Radiation Tests. Durham and London: Duke University Press. pp. 293–295.
  17. 1 2 "Chapter 8: Postwar TBI-Effects Experimentation: Continued Reliance on Sick Patients in Place of Healthy "Normals"". biotech.law.lsu.edu. Retrieved 2017-05-01.
  18. ↑ Egilman, David (1998). A Little Too Much of the Buchenwald Touch? Military Radiation Research at the University of Cincinnati, 1960-1972. India: Overseas Publishers Association. p. 69.
  19. ↑ Egilman, David (1998). A Little Too Much of the Buchenwald Touch? Military Radiation Research at the University of Cincinnati, 1960-1972. India: Overseas Publishers Association. p. 70.
  20. ↑ Saenger, Eugene L. (December 1972). Radiation Effects In Man: Manifestations And Therapeutic Efforts. University of Cincinnati College of Medicine.
  21. ↑ Egilman, David (1998). A Little Too Much of the Buchenwald Touch? Military Radiation Research at the University of Cincinnati, 1960-1972. India: Overseas Publishers Association. p. 72.
  22. ↑ Stephens, Martha (2002). The Treatment: The Story of Those Who Died in the Cincinnati Radiation Tests. Durham and London: Duke University Press. p. 21.
  23. ↑ Soper, Gordon K. "Gordon K. Soper, Principal Deputy Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for Atomic Energy Before the Subcommittee on Administrative Law and Government Relations Cincinnati, Ohio April 11, 1994". Archived from the original on July 19, 2017. Retrieved 2017-04-29.
  24. 1 2 Stephens, Martha (2002). The Treatment: The Story of Those Who Died in the Cincinnati Radiation Tests. Durham and London: Duke University Press. p. 180.
  25. ↑ Schneider, Keith (1994-04-11). "Cold War Radiation Test on Humans To Undergo a Congressional Review". The New York Times. ISSN   0362-4331 . Retrieved 2017-05-01.
  26. 1 2 3 4 5 United States. Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments (1996). The Human Radiation Experiments. Oxford University Press. p. 243.
  27. ↑ Stephens, Martha (2002). The Treatment: The Story of Those Who Died in the Cincinnati Radiation Tests. Durham and London: Duke University Press. p. 28.
  28. 1 2 Egilman, David (1998). A Little Too Much of the Buchenwald Touch? Military Radiation Research at the University of Cincinnati, 1960-1972. India: Overseas Publishers Association. p. 77.
  29. ↑ Egilman, David (1998). A Little Too Much of the Buchenwald Touch? Military Radiation Research at the University of Cincinnati, 1960-1972. India: Overseas Publishers Association. pp. 78–79.
  30. ↑ Stephens, Martha (2002). The Treatment: The Story of Those Who Died in the Cincinnati Radiation Tests. Durham and London: Duke University Press. p. 17.
  31. ↑ Schneider, Keith (1994-04-12). "Researchers Are Accused Of Forgeries". The New York Times. ISSN   0362-4331 . Retrieved 2017-05-01.
  32. ↑ Stephens, Martha (2002). The Treatment: The Story of Those Who Died in the Cincinnati Radiation Tests. Durham and London: Duke University Press. p. 308.
  33. 1 2 Egilman, David (1998). A Little Too Much of the Buchenwald Touch? Military Radiation Research at the University of Cincinnati, 1960-1972. India: Overseas Publishers Association. p. 73.
  34. ↑ Stephens, Martha (2002). The Treatment: The Story of Those Who Died in the Cincinnati Radiation Tests. Durham and London: Duke University Press. pp. 49, 308.
  35. ↑ Egilman, David (1998). A Little Too Much of the Buchenwald Touch? Military Radiation Research at the University of Cincinnati, 1960-1972. India: Overseas Publishers Association. p. 88.
  36. 1 2 3 4 Egilman, David (1998). A Little Too Much of the Buchenwald Touch? Military Radiation Research at the University of Cincinnati, 1960-1972. India: Overseas Publishers Association. p. 89.
  37. ↑ Egilman, David (1998). A Little Too Much of the Buchenwald Touch? Military Radiation Research at the University of Cincinnati, 1960-1972. India: Overseas Publishers Association. p. 90.
  38. ↑ Shields, George. Letter to Dr. Edward A. Gall. March 13, 1967. University of Cincinnati Interdepartmental Correspondence Sheet.
  39. ↑ Radford, Edward. Letter to Dr. Edward A. Gall. April 29, 1967. University of Cincinnati Interdepartmental Correspondence Sheet.
  40. ↑ Witt, R. L.. Letter to Dr. Edward A. Gall. May 9, 1967. University of Cincinnati Interdepartmental Correspondence Sheet.
  41. 1 2 3 Egilman, David (1998). A Little Too Much of the Buchenwald Touch? Military Radiation Research at the University of Cincinnati, 1960-1972. India: Overseas Publishers Association. p. 91.
  42. ↑ United States. Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments (1996). The Human Radiation Experiments. USA: Oxford University Press. pp. 243-244. ISBN   9780195107920
  43. 1 2 United States. Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments (1996). The Human Radiation Experiments. USA: Oxford University Press. pp. 244. ISBN   9780195107920
  44. 1 2 3 Stephens, Martha (2002). The Treatment: The Story of Those Who Died in the Cincinnati Radiation Tests. Durham and London: Duke University Press. p. 12.
  45. ↑ Stephens, Martha (2002). The Treatment: The Story of Those Who Died in the Cincinnati Radiation Tests. Durham and London: Duke University Press. p. 1, 5.
  46. ↑ Egilman, David (1998). A Little Too Much of the Buchenwald Touch? Military Radiation Research at the University of Cincinnati, 1960-1972. India: Overseas Publishers Association. p. 87.
  47. 1 2 "Chronology of radiation study". enquirer.com. Retrieved 2017-06-07.
  48. 1 2 United States. Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments (1996). The Human Radiation Experiments. USA: Oxford University Press. pp. 240. ISBN   9780195107920
  49. ↑ Stephens, Martha (2002). The Treatment: The Story of Those Who Died in the Cincinnati Radiation Tests. Durham and London: Duke University Press. p. 3-7.
  50. ↑ Stephens, Martha (2002). The Treatment: The Story of Those Who Died in the Cincinnati Radiation Tests. Durham and London: Duke University Press. p. 5.
  51. 1 2 Stephens, Martha (2002). The Treatment: The Story of Those Who Died in the Cincinnati Radiation Tests. Durham and London: Duke University Press. p. 11.
  52. ↑ Stephens, Martha (2002). The Treatment: The Story of Those Who Died in the Cincinnati Radiation Tests. Durham and London: Duke University Press. p. 14.
  53. ↑ Stephens, Martha (2002). The Treatment: The Story of Those Who Died in the Cincinnati Radiation Tests. Durham and London: Duke University Press. p. 16-19.
  54. ↑ Stephens, Martha (2002). The Treatment: The Story of Those Who Died in the Cincinnati Radiation Tests. Durham and London: Duke University Press. p. 20.
  55. ↑ Stephens, Martha (2002). The Treatment: The Story of Those Who Died in the Cincinnati Radiation Tests. Durham and London: Duke University Press. p. 19.
  56. 1 2 "Radiation experiments conducted by the University of Cincinnati Medical School with Department of Defense funding : hearing before the Subcommittee on Administrative Law and Governmental Relations of the Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives, One Hundred Third Congress, second session, April 11, 1994".
  57. ↑ Stephens, Martha (2002). The Treatment: The Story of Those Who Died in the Cincinnati Radiation Tests. Durham and London: Duke University Press. p. 111.
  58. 1 2 Stephens, Martha (2002). The Treatment: The Story of Those Who Died in the Cincinnati Radiation Tests. Durham and London: Duke University Press. p. 22.
  59. ↑ Stephens, Martha (2002). The Treatment: The Story of Those Who Died in the Cincinnati Radiation Tests. Durham and London: Duke University Press. p. 238.
  60. ↑ The Doctors’ Trial. The United States of America vs. Karl Brandt et al. US Military Tribunal Nuremberg, Judgement of 19 July 1947.
  61. ↑ Stephens, Martha (2002). The Treatment: The Story of Those Who Died in the Cincinnati Radiation Tests. Durham and London: Duke University Press. p. 289.
  62. ↑ "Radiation controversy outlasts lawsuit". enquirer.com. Retrieved 2017-06-07.
  63. ↑ "Part of hospital demolished". enquirer.com. Retrieved 2017-06-07.

Further reading

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.