The Pharmaceutical Industry Behind
The Medical Experiments In Nazi Concentration Camps

  1. The Applicants have used almost 70 pages trying to justify their Application by comparing our distribution of vitamins to the poor communities in South Africa with the criminal, inhumane experiments conducted in the WWII concentration camps more than six decades ago – on behalf of pharmaceutical multinationals.
  2. By repeatedly describing “Dr Rath” in their Application as a “German doctor” and accusing him of conducting “illegal experiments” on people, the Applicants directly or indirectly refer to the fact that the unethical experiments in Auschwitz and other concentration camps were conducted by German doctors as part of the Nazi machinery during WWII. By giving this line of argument more than 10% of the entire length of their complaint, the Applicants show that this allegation is an important part of their “collateral” strategy for this case.
  3. By building such an extensive line of “arguments” on this particular issue, the Applicants try to portray themselves as the guardians of international laws and the protectors of human rights. Here, as throughout this Application, the opposite is true.
  4. With this malicious comparison and these false allegations, the Applicants make a principle and detailed clarification necessary. The Nuremberg War Crime Tribunal records provide an excellent basis to clarify the historic facts. They are as follows:
    1. The unethical experiments in the concentration camps of WWII were not conducted with vitamins, but with patented pharmaceutical drugs.
    2. These experiments were conducted on behalf of, commissioned by and paid for by German pharmaceutical multinationals in particular “Bayer” (Leverkusen), “Hoechst” (Frankfurt), “Behringwerke” (Marburg) and other companies of the world’s largest chemical / pharmaceutical cartel at that time – the already described “IG Farben” (Annexures ‘The Crime And Punishement of I.G. Farben’, ‘The Theory and Practice of Hell’).
    3. The names of the doctors directly or indirectly involved in these unethical and criminal experiments on behalf of these pharmaceutical companies are documented in the Nuremberg War Crime Tribunal records as well:
      1. BAYER:
        1. Fritz Ter Meer - Senior Scientist on the supervisory Board of “Bayer”/”IGFarben;”
        2. Dr Anton Mertens - Head of the entire Pharmaceutical Division I-IV of “IG Farben;”
        3. Dr Karl Koenig - Head of the Pharmaceutical Research Division II, where most patented drugs used in these unethical experiments were developed;
      2. HOECHST
        1. Dr Julius Weber, Head of the Chemo-Pharmaceutical and Sero-Bacteriological Division of “Hoechst” corporation, also part of “IG Farben;”
        2. Dr Max Bockmuehl – Head of the “Chemotherapeutic” Laboratory of “Hoechst;”
        1. Albert Demnitz – Head of the Production Unit for pharmaceutical products at this member company of the “IG Farben” cartel.
    4. These are only the most important individuals within these drug companies responsible for the development and testing of the patented synthetic drugs used in the concentration camp experiments. The actual experiments in the concentration camps were conducted by doctors employed by these pharmaceutical companies while working for the SS and their peers.
    5. “Bayer”, “Hoechst” and “Behringwerke” supplied the pharmaceutical drugs to the concentration camps, paid the doctors and the SS for the conduct of these “studies,” regularly received the “results” of these criminal experiments and evaluated them in order to define the marketing strategies for these drugs and the overall corporate decision taking (Annexure ‘The Theory and Practice of Hell’).
    6. One of the “executing doctors” who actually carried out these criminal experiments in the concentration camps was Dr Hellmuth Vetter. Vetter was an employee of “Bayer” / “IG Farben” (Pharmaceutical Division II) and reported to Dr Koenig (see above). As a Bayer employee and in his simultaneous function as an SS-officer Vetter organized a comprehensive series of criminal experiments in different concentration camps by using “IG Farben’s” patented drugs. During the entire period of time of his activities in the concentration camps he acted on behalf of and was paid by “Bayer”/“IG Farben” (Annexure ‘Bayer Vetter’).
    7. In order to test newly developed “chemotherapy” drugs, Vetter and his colleagues – among others Dr Ding-Schuler (concentration camp Buchenwald), and Drs Entress and Wirth (Auschwitz) – infected thousands of concentration camp inmates deliberately with micro-organisms that cause typhoid fever and other infectious diseases. Many of them died immediately in tremendous pain.
    8. The Nuremberg War Crime Tribunal records against “IG Farben” document in great detail these criminal experiments on innocent victims. Many of these “therapeutic experiments” were conducted with the chemotherapeutic agents “Acridine” and “Rutenol.” In these “human experiments” innocent concentration camp inmates were deliberately infected with typhoid infected blood. Then some of them received “Acridine”, “Rutenol” or other patented chemicals as “chemotherapy” while other KZ inmates served as controls. Many of these victims died during these “experiments.” Despite the failure of many of these “chemotherapy” drugs, the experiments were continued, ultimately costing the lives of many thousands of victims. (Annexure ‘The Theory and Practice of Hell’).
    9. The fees for conducting these inhumane studies were transferred directly from the bank accounts of “Bayer”, “Hoechst” and other “IG Farben” companies to the bank accounts of the SS, who operated the concentration camps.
  5. The results of these criminal experiments with concentration camp victims were even published in established medical journals. A case in point was a study published by “SS-Obersturmbannfuehrer Dozent Dr Dr Mrugowsky” in the “Medizinische Klinik” Nr. 9, 1940, on 27 February 1942 , a medical journal published in Berlin , Vienna and Prague. In this publication categorized as “Original Work” and entitled “Typical and atypical development of typhus disease” Mrugowsky reports about the human experiments in the concentration camps in the following remarkable manner (Annexure ‘Mrugowsky Fleckfieber’):

    In the past months, we had the opportunity to see and to examine several hundred patients with typhus in different regions of Central Europe . These were Germans, Poles and Jews, man and women, mostly adults.”

    The concentration camp “Auschwitz ” was located in the middle of “Central Europe” and the primary prisoners of this camp were politically opposing “Germans”, conquered “Poles” and “Jews” as part of the Nazi extermination plan.
  6. In 1947 Dr Vetter, his colleague Mrugowsky and many other doctors involved in these crimes were sentenced to death by the US Military Tribunal and were subsequently hanged.
  7. Obviously, the doctors executed for conducting these criminal experiments were not the primary economic beneficiaries of these experiments. These beneficiaries were those, who owned the patents and therefore the commercial rights to chemotherapy drugs tested, including “Acridine” and “Rutenol” (a combination of “Acridine” with arsenic).
  8. Acridine was first patented by Werner Schulemann, Fritz Schoenhofer and August Wingler – all three scientists employed by “Bayer” / ”IG Farben.” The first patent on this substance in Germany was filed on December 20, 1926 , and in the US on December 16, 1927 . The US patent was issued on May 20, 1930 and carries the US patent number 1,760,781. The same group of scientists from the drug laboratories of “Bayer”/“IG Farben” filed a myriad of subsequent patents for pharmaceutical drugs obtained from modifying the original structure of the Acridine molecule (Annexure ‘Patent Acridine’).
  9. As part of their corporate strategy of “disguise and control” described in detail in the Nuremberg War Crime Tribunal records, “Bayer” assigned their US patents to the “Winthrop Chemical Company”, a New York corporation. Winthrop , in turn, was controlled by another “IG Farben” subsidiary in the US , “General Dyestuffs Inc.”.
  10. Thus, the historic records show unequivocally that the economic beneficiaries of this medical genocide in the concentration camps were the world’s largest pharmaceutical companies at that time.
  11. It is a remarkable fact that today, more than six decades after these “chemotherapy” drugs were responsible for the death of thousands of concentration camps victims, the very same substances, “Acridine” and its patented derivatives are being prepared for new “markets” today – the victims of viral diseases including HIV (Annexure ‘Antiviral Res’).
  12. In the same way, another class of “chemo” agents had its origin in the laboratories of Bayer and IG Farben. Already during World War One, mustard gas was being produced by Bayer and used on the battlefields of Europe killing tens of thousands of soldiers and disabling many more. During and after WWII, these agents of chemical warfare were modified by IG Farben to increase the chemical warfare arsenal. After WWII, derivatives of mustard gas were being developed into a new class of “chemotherapeutic agents” with the marketing promise to treat cancer.
  13. Over 4 decades these derivatives of chemical warfare agents called “nitrogen mustards” (e.g. Chlorambucil, Cyclophosphamide, Ifosfamide and others) were strategically developed into a multi-billion Rand global cancer market. These toxic substances have been promoted to millions of cancer patients as therapy – “chemo-therapy” – despite their known toxicity and their inability to cure cancer.
  14. This deceptive marketing strategy with “chemo-therapy” was particularly profitable for the pharmaceutical business because the drug companies earned twice: from selling high-priced “chemotherapy” and from selling even more drugs to cope with the severe side-effects caused by these toxic substances – including pain-killers, anti-inflammatory agents, anti-depressants etc.. After the Second World War, the business with cancer “chemotherapy” became an extremely lucrative market for the pharmaceutical industry in the US , Europe and many other parts of the world. Moreover, the same “marketing scheme” would soon be applied to boost the pharmaceutical markets with other diseases, including AIDS.
  15. In 2004 – half a century later – “Der Spiegel”, one of Europe ’s leading weekly magazines summarized decades of pharmaceutical “chemotherapy” of cancer in a lead article entitled: “Toxic procedure without benefits.” The articles revealed what neither pharmaceutical companies nor pharmaceutically-oriented medical professionals want to publicly admit: “chemotherapy” agents have failed as a cure for cancer and have caused more harm than benefit to millions of patients. (Annexure ‘Spiegel Chemo’).
  16. Of course, it did not take this article to make this conclusion. The fact that almost all forms of cancer continue to spread in epidemic proportions confirms that conventional cancer “chemotherapy” failed to treat this disease.
  17. These facts show that the genocide organized by the pharmaceutical interests was not only confined to the unethical experiments in the concentration camps of WWII. The promotion of highly toxic “chemotherapy” drugs to millions of cancer patients with the false promise of a “cancer cure” surpassed the death toll in the concentration camps by an order of magnitude.
  18. Thus, the concentration camps of World War II were the large-scale “testing grounds” for new generations of toxic “chemotherapy” drugs. These new drugs were either chemically or conceptually related to these first generation of “chemotherapy,” i.e by the same mechanism of drug action in the body – damaging all cells of the body though their toxicity.
  19. Thus pharmaceutical marketing strategies turned the cancer epidemic into a business opportunity that created billions of dollars in wealth for the drug companies – whilst, most importantly, without eliminating the cancer disease as the basis for the continued stream of revenues. After this economic success the pharmaceutical interests went on to apply the same principles to other diseases including AIDS. Again, to mask the inability of these toxic chemical substances to actually cure any viral diseases, they were given the deceptive marketing name “anti-retrovirals.” Over the decades the beneficiaries of this marketing strategy for toxic patented drugs have remained the same: the globally operating pharmaceutical investment business.