|
Engaged in Medical Experiments on Americans
The following article is a book review of The Plutonium Files,
by Eileen Welsome (Dial Press, 580 pp.). It goes into detail
about the exploitation of U.S. citizens in medical experiments,
without their consent. If ever there was evidence that the Federal
republic is a police state operated according to proto-fascist
methods, it's in this article. Horrified Americans recoil when
told about the atrocities engaged in by the Nazi doctor Mengele,
but the horrors committed under the aegis of the Federal republic
of the United States by its white-coated doctors are equally as
unacceptable. The fact that these atrocities have been committed
in the name of the American people permanently dishonors them,
making it impossible for a nation with as large a heart as America,
to accept a form of government that is, at its root, heartless.
THE PLUTONIUM FILES
America's Secret Medical Experiments in the Cold War
By Eileen Welsome.
Of all the lies uttered by mendacious public servants during a
century notorious for official deceit, perhaps none registers
colder or more deliberate than the claim by Gen. Leslie Groves
in a Senate hearing in November 1945 that radioactive poisoning
can bring death "rather soon, and as I understand it from
the doctors, without undue suffering. In fact, they say it is
a very pleasant way to die." Which doctors, exactly, could
have delivered this cheering news to the general who ran the Manhattan
Project, created the atomic bomb and ended the war with Japan
by destroying two cities and killing plus or minus 150,000 Japanese,
mostly civilians?
Not Dr. Stafford Warren and Dr. Shields Warren (unrelated), who
both went to Japan at Groves' behest to study the effects of radiation
and recorded in Hiroshima and Nagasaki a devil's textbook of horrors
- burns, bloody diarrhea, an inability of the bone marrow to continue
making blood cells, a stripping of the epithelial layer of the
gastrointestinal tract leading to dehydration and runaway internal
infection and other equally ghastly conditions. Nor could the
general have concluded that radiation afforded a "pleasant"
death had he listened to the doctors who attended Harry Daghlian,
a Los Alamos technician who stopped a runaway chain reaction with
his hand during a nuclear experiment a week after the Japanese
surrender. Soon afterward, he felt a "tingling sensation"
in his hand, "tingling" being an oddly benign word to
describe the terrible chain reaction set off within his body.
Mercifully he lapsed into a coma, and within three weeks he died.
(Oddly enough, at the height of the controversy over the development
of nuclear power, proponents of nuclear power were going across
the country swearing that no one had ever died from radiation!
WFI Editor) A government check for $10,000 was
given to Daghlian's family in exchange for release forms signed
on the day he died that absolved the government of any responsibility
for his death.
Clearly it was disingenuous for anyone connected to the Manhattan
Project to pretend that radiation was not dangerous. Even before
the atomic bomb was developed, scientists had considered using
radiation as a weapon of war. J. Robert Oppenheimer told his
friend and colleague Enrico Fermi in May 1943 that he didn't think
it worth pursuing radiological warfare "unless we can poison
food sufficient to kill half a million men." Radiological
weapons, as it turned out, were hard to deliver while bombs were
easy and just as lethal. Most of the deaths at Hiroshima and
Nagasaki were from the blast and its heat, but thousands more
died of radiation poisoning - a fact fully anticipated by bomb
makers at Los Alamos.
So why did the general lie when he testified before the Special
Senate Committee on Atomic Energy? The general lied because he
feared that an impressionable public would oppose the creation
of nuclear bombs once it grasped the horrors of the bomb's destructive
effects and realized that we had crossed from the permissible
to the impermissible in war. Groves did not want Americans to
feel guilty about the manner of the victory over Japan, and he
did not want them to reject in disgust a weapon of unprecedented
power and utility. At the same time it is only fair to say that
neither Groves nor Stafford Warren, who presided seriatim as chief
doctor for the Manhattan Project, and Shields Warren, who served
on the Atomic Energy Commission, really knew how dangerous various
forms of radiation could be. Furthermore, they did not know how
much radiation constituted a danger - the so-called "tolerance
dose." To credit them, however, they did set out before
the end of the war to learn all they could about the effects of
radiation on the human body, through the usual methods of scientific
inquiry: conducting experiments.
The dark history of the long research effort that followed is
one of the two great secrets tightly held by the powers that be
in the American bomb-making community; the other is how to ignite
hydrogen in a hydrogen bomb. Fifty years after the experiments
began, our knowledge of their fact and their extent has been greatly
expanded by Eileen Welsome, a reporter at the Albuquerque Tribune
in New Mexico. In 1987, Welsome discovered a reference in an
Air Force report on the disposal of radioactive animal carcasses.
A public information officer at Kirtland Air Force Base near
Albuquerque gave her a stack of documents and, on one, Welsome's
"eye fell on a footnote describing a human plutonium experiment."
But it took her a decade to expand this footnote into "The
Plutonium Files," Welsome's effort to explain how these experiments
were conceived, justified, conducted, financed and concealed.
When scientists started studying the lethal effects of radiation,
they focused their attention on the element plutonium. Glen Seaborg,
who discovered plutonium, said, "It is fiendishly toxic,
even in small amounts." What initially surprised scientists
at Los Alamos who were using plutonium in the construction of
the atomic bomb was how quickly, despite discreet handling of
the material, it showed up in the laboratory's waste water. In
addition, early tests of lab workers' feces and urine revealed
plutonium contamination in levels that were "just frightfully
high." Obviously, it was pernicious stuff. Laboratory experiments
proved their worse suspicions: Plutonium injected into rats migrated
to their bones; breathed in as an aerosol it lodged in the alveoli
of the rats' lungs. But how did plutonium behave in humans?
What was the "tolerance dose" and how could it be reliably
measured?
To answer these questions, 18 human subjects - all of them under
medical care but none of them informed of what was being done
to them - were injected with plutonium. (Americans injected with
plutonium, by Americans. WFI Editor) These experiments
were conducted between April 1945, a month before the end of the
war in Europe, and July 1947 - at a time when no one believed
that plutonium promised medical benefit. In the files about these
experiments obtained by Welsome under the Freedom of Information
Act, all reference to the identity of subjects and doctors had
been deleted in order to protect the privacy of the participants.
(Deleting the identities of the principals served more to obscure
the Federal government's role in the experiments, rather than
protect any of the participants; the day when the government should
have protected the individuals, having long since passed, since
the day when they allowed those Americans to be used like lab
rats. WFI Editor) Someone failed, however, to
delete a reference to Italy, Texas, the hometown of a subject
known as CAL-3. When Welsome called the City Hall, the woman
who answered the phone recognized CAL-3 from the bare facts.
"You're looking for Elmer Allen," she said. "But
he died a year ago. Do you want his wife's number?"
Eventually, by patient detective work, Welsome identified all
but one of the 18 patients in the plutonium experiments and uncovered
numerous other efforts to study the effects of radiation on human
subjects. The research began just as the world was learning about
experiments conducted by Nazi doctors during World War II, and
although the so-called Nuremburg code prohibited such abuses,
it only made American authorities more cautious and secretive.
The phrase "informed consent" was coined in 1947 by
Carroll Wilson, general manager of the Atomic Energy Commission,
but no effort was made to put the concept into practice. A 1953
set of guidelines for conducting human experiments, prepared for
the secretary of defense was never circulated among officials
below the level of the secretaries of the Army, Navy and Air Force.
Among the subjects whom Welsome cites, none of them informed in
any meaningful sense: 829 expectant mothers given "cocktails"
of radioactive isotopes of iron between 1945 and 1947 by a prenatal
clinic at the Vanderbilt University Hospital. 74 boys at the
Fernald State School near Boston, a kind of cross between a reformatory
and a hospital for disabled youths, who were fed radioactive iron
and calcium mixed into milk and oatmeal between 1946 and 1953.
"You had to drink the milk. That was the thing," one
of them remembered. 131 men in the Oregon and Washington state
prison systems whose testicles were exposed to as much as 600
rads of ionizing radiation between 1963 and 1971. At the conclusion
of the experiments, each man was paid $100 to undergo a vasectomy.
90 cancer patients, most of them black, who were exposed in the
Cincinnati General Hospital to levels of total body irradiation
so high that the exposure alone may have killed 19 of them. Thousands
of U.S. soldiers, sailors and airmen exposed to radiation during
above-ground atomic testing to assure Congress, the public and
the Pentagon that the bomb could "safely" be used in
war.
This long but incomplete list gives a sense of the magnitude of
the official effort but barely hints at the torment and injury
suffered by the victims, presented in rich human detail by Welsome
in a compelling narrative of what happens when science and morality
are "wrapped in the flag." (It's a cop-out to blame
the flag, an inanimate object, for the faults of men, especially
men caught up in a political system that was designed by slavemasters
to preserve the status quo. The republic is a feelingless, mechanical
corporate machine. WFI Editor) Welsome's portrait
of leading officials are vivid and subtle, wonderfully capturing
the deep moral ambivalence of men like Shields Warren, who put
the kibosh on plans to expose prisoners serving life sentences
to total body irradiation but in other cases found ways to say
yes or look the other way. There are few heroes in this book;
one who deserves special mention is Audrey Holliday, a Washington
state official who learned of the experiments on prisoners in
July 1969 and vigorously protested the exploitation of "captive
populations" as if "they are already destroyed as human
beings."
Far more common were researchers who told Welsome or official
investigators that they had lost their files, couldn't remember
who gave the orders, were out of the room when injections were
given, didn't know if consent had been obtained, believed subjects
were "hopelessly" or "terminally" ill and
insisted that all those "premature deaths" would have
happened anyway. "I was appalled and shocked," said
President Clinton's first Energy secretary, Hazel O'Leary, when
she learned of the experiments in 1993. "It gave me an ache
in my gut and heart." But the advisory committee appointed
by Clinton to investigate eventually suffered a failure of nerve,
in Welsome's view. Its findings, which were released in 1995,
she believes were watered down, explained away, filled with excuses,
muffled by evidentiary doubts and uncertainties. (The same thing
happened in post-Nazi Germany. After World War II you could travel
all through Germany, and never find anyone who admitted to having
been in the Nazi Party. WFI Editor) No official
was willing to call "premature death" a euphemism for
homicide. There were no prosecutions, nobody was fired, lawsuits
were mostly settled out of court, many questions were answered
ambiguously.
Did the doctors learn anything remotely worth the suffering inflicted?
Apparently not, because the doctors, apparently burdened by their
consciences, were reluctant to follow up their experiments or
publish their findings. The two main things the doctors most
wanted to learn - the "tolerance dose" for radiation
and how to measure the level of human exposure - remain mysteries.
Most troubling, perhaps more than the experiments, is the arrogance
of officials and scientists willing to lie about important matters
of public safety for reasons of official convenience. In 1948,
engineers at the Hanford reactor in Washington State refused to
reveal dangerous levels of radiation discovered in fish and ground
water "until reasonable solutions to these problems are available."
Keeping the reactors going was the highest priority in this case,
not the safety of the public.
A few years later, the Atomic Energy Commission, hoping to move
atomic testing from the Pacific back to the American Southwest
for reasons of convenience, admitted "how shockingly little"
it knew about the dangers of fallout. In the end, Shields Warren
decided to issue no warnings to the downwind public - to stay
indoors, for example - because any recommendations at all would
have made plain the one thing the commission was at greatest pains
to conceal: that nuclear tests were dangerous. If the government of the republic lied about the danger of nuclear testing, can we trust it to tell us the truth about acid rain, global warming or the safety of deep storage for nuclear waste? The answer, unmistakably suggested by Welsome's book, is no. We must answer such questions on our own. SOURCE: Excerpted from the 2 January, 2000, issue of the Los Angeles Times, Orange County Edition, Book Review section, from an article entitled, "Die Hard." Thomas Powers most recently authored "Heisenberg's War: The Secret History of the German Bomb." Reprinted in the public service of the national interest of the American people.(WFI EDITOR: The republic has always been cannibalistic, having had its origins in violent social conflict. When a republic is born, it is upon the ashes of a traditional community; people are set against each other, even though they are members of the same national community. It is the devaluation of human life that leads to revolution, when those with independent minds are regarded as the enemy, whose lives suddenly lose the quality of being human, and therefore protected by the sanctions that protect human life. Revolutions are essentially violent homicidal purges of those who do not adhere to the revolutionary creed. That is why reigns of terror are historically associated with revolutions; and the reign of terror that was visited upon American monarchists at the time of the American Revolution, was no exception.At the very time that the world was discovering the horror of Nazi Germany, American scientists were conducting medical experiments that constituted crimes against humanity. Americans fought a World War to end fascism, without realizing that fascism was virtually invented in America by the Founding Fathers. The Founders were all slaveowners, and the one protection they built right into the Constitution of 1787, the charter of the republic, was that the Federal Government would be responsible for returning fugitive slaves, seeking freedom, back to their bondage. This quintessential police function defines the republic the Founders invented, which we are saddled with, which must be abandoned if we are to guarantee to future generations the freedom our ancient heritage entitles us to. Until that time, we shall continue to hear the tales of dissolution: of police abuse, of social devolution, of corruption, of the abuse of power by presidents, congressmen and senators, who believe that their power is absolute, because it is held by the iron grip of a police state.) |
|