X-Message-Number: 7714
Date: 20 Feb 97 22:13:50 EST
From: Mike Darwin <>
Subject: Ethics and Science

Thomas Donaldson writes:

> Maybe Mike has a newspaper article or something which describes her conduct
toward her
>subjects, and I just haven't read it. 

I have participated in the design of several clinical trials for use in South
Africa (SA) and nearly did clinical (human) trials on a drug for multi-system
organ failure there myself.  I thus have a number of contacts in SA including

some in Pretoria where Visser works.  I thus had access to information about her

"clinical trials" which is back-channel.  I would point out that Mrs. Visser own
statements on this forum are perhaps the best indication of what she was up to:
she stated that (sic)  "toxicological studies in humans were underway to test
her cryoprotectant."  No mention was made of AIDS.  Knowing what this agent is,
and knowing that it has a well established toxicological profile in humans and
animals, I think Mrs. Visser is in a difficult position.  In particular, one
does not attempt to treat HIV with a compound like dimethyl formamide without
some compelling _animal_  or epidemiological human data (such as people exposed
to DMF at work who have HIV do not progress to AIDS, etc.) to support such a
course of action.

>HOWEVER I would not demand that something be science, in the sense of
>being carefully done, with everything specified so as to make replication
>easy, and so on, for it to be worth attention. IF her experiments had
>worked, even just one of them, then she would not have been doing any
>more science than before, but she would have done something to which
>we should pay attention. 

Here I agree completely.  Marconi was up in the nigh with his theory of how
transcontinental radio should work; he had little or no understanding of
Maxwell's equations or physics in general and intercontinental radio should
_not_ have worked.  But, alas, there is an ionosphere and radio waves can be
bounced around the globe all neatly done within the laws of physics. 

I do not think that the criticism of Mrs. Visser is just that she did bad
science or had poor technique.  Rather, it is that she did lousy science _and_
it didn't work!  No one can say that Mrs. Visser did not get my attention.  She
got an enormous amount of my attention.  In fact, she got more of my attention
that anybody gets who does not pay me goodly sums of money (or is not a good
friend)!  If someone gets your attention and consumes your time under false
pretenses, or is simply mistaken and costs you time, irritation is a normal

response.  If indeed fraud or crass stupidity are reason, then anger is often an
understandable response.  If, further, in addition to being wrong/incompetent
they have called you a moron and an unethical cur, then expecting people who's
time you've taken and who's reputation you've besmirched to be good natured in
the face of your failure is expecting a lot.  For myself, I have no anger at

Visser.  (So far) she has not attacked me and while she did use up a fair bit of
my time, on balance I think it was a worthwhile experience even from a
scientific standpoint.

>But no, SHE DID NOT. Fundamentally I don't care how much her husband sent
>negative messages about lots of us on Cryonet, nor what other things she's
>been doing. The crucial point here is that the hearts, when we knew they 
>were kept at LN temperatures for the required time, DID NOT REVIVE WHEN 
>SHE TRIED TO REVIVE THEM. All else is irrelevancy.

Yes, all else is irrelevancy unless you happen to have been ther person who was
cost time, money, or emotional hurt by claims that were not sound.  This seems
to be a point that Thomas and some others may be missing.

Finally Thomas writes:

>If Mr. Mengele had found what may be a successful cryoprotectant, it would not
become
>less successful because of his immorality. Sure, I'd want to see that
>immorality dealt with, but not by refusing to attend to what he had done.
>(Think seriously: now which country was it that really got rocketry going?).

Here I agree with Thomas without reservation.  Herr Dr. Mengele mostly did bad
(and meaningless) science and in the process killed and mutilated many, many
people.  I have read first-hand accounts of his experiments by some of his
surviving "twins."  However, data is data and, as Thomas would say "There you
have it.".  It is also true that Mengele immersed emaciated concentration camp
victims in ice water and monitored their core temperatures till death.  This
data still exists.  It was meaningless in the context in which it was generated

(to determine the time course to lethal hypothermia in German aviators downed in
cold water).  However, it turns out Mangle's data was rather useful in cryonics
and his numbers for surface cooling in the well perfused cachectic human match
our own data almost exactly, and served as a large statistical base from which
conclusions regarding the maximum rate of surface cooling achieve able in human

cryopatients of different masses and with different amounts of fat covering have
been drawn.  I might also add that Mengele was the first to determine the
fibrillation temperature of the human heart which, as it happens, is about the
same in both well nourished and severely malnourished people.

Thomas' observation about rocketry is, of course, quite true.  While most
Mengele's work was garbage, this was not true of the work of Dornberger, Von
Braun and others at Peenemunde.  What is generally not appreciated is that
Peenemunde had among the highest mortality and morbidity of any work-camp
operation in Nazi Germany, its laborers being supplied from the Dora-Mittelwerk
Concentration Camp.  In his later years Von Braun candidly admitted that he did
what he did at Peenemunde not because he thought it would help Germany (he knew

rocketry was a waste of the Reich's money and time in support of the war effort)
but because he wanted to develop spaceflight and do rocketry.  Von Braun was a
war criminal on a par with Mengele but was brought into the US via Operation
Paperclip, managed the science and engineering of the US space program through
the development  of the Saturn V, and died quietly of natural causes.  Mengele
also died an old man of a heart attack or stroke while enjoying himself
swimming.

Yes, "facts is facts" as they say.  But I am deeply troubled by this injustice
and I am sorry that the majesty of the implementation of spaceflight will be
forever tainted by such unspeakable ugliness.  If you doubt me, I can suggest
the following books which are highly recommended for all those who are
"unconcerned" with "ethically challenged" research:

The Rocket and the Reich by Michael J. Neufeld  ISBN: 0-02-922895-6
V1-V2: Hitler's Vengeance on London by David Johnson ISBN: 0-8128-8527-9

Other worthwhile reading is the Farm Hill Transcripts which documents the
secretly taped conversations between Werner Heisenberg and other German nuclear
scientists during their internment in England after the fall of Germany.

Cryonics has already had its share of ethical ugliness.  It will have a great
deal more unless there is concern for the ethics of the science we do.

Mike Darwin


Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=7714