Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 82
Filtrar
1.
PLoS One ; 15(11): e0242498, 2020.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33227022

RESUMEN

Several physicians have been nominated for the Nobel Prize in literature, but so far none of them have received it. Because physicians as women and men of letters have been a major topic of feuilletons, seminars and books for many years, questions arise to what extent medicine was a topic in the proposals for the Nobel Prize and in the Nobel jury evaluations: how were the nominees enacted (or not) as physicians, and why were none of them awarded? Drawing on nomination letters and evaluations by the Nobel committee for literature collected in the archive of the Swedish Academy in Stockholm, this article offers a first overview of nominated physician-author candidates. The focus is on the Austrian historian of medicine Max Neuburger (1868-1955), the German novelist Hans Carossa (1878-1956), and the German poet Gottfried Benn (1886-1956), but it also briefly takes further physician-author nominees into account such as Sigmund Freud (1856-1939) and William Somerset Maugham (1874-1965). The article is part of an interdisciplinary medical humanities project that analyses nominations and committee reports for physicians and natural scientists nominated for the Nobel Prize from 1901 to 1970.

4.
Eur J Med Res ; 25(1): 32, 2020 Aug 12.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32787926

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The German government has made it mandatory to wear respiratory masks covering mouth and nose (MNC) as an effective strategy to fight SARS-CoV-2 infections. In many countries, this directive has been extended on shopping malls or public transportation. The aim of this paper is to critically analyze the statutory regulation to wear protective masks during the COVID-19 crisis from a medical standpoint. METHODS: We performed an extensive query of the most recent publications addressing the prevention of viral infections including the use of face masks in the community as a method to prevent the spread of the infection. We addressed the issues of practicability, professional use, and acceptability based on the community and the environment where the user resided. RESULTS: Upon our critical review of the available literature, we found only weak evidence for wearing a face mask as an efficient hygienic tool to prevent the spread of a viral infection. However, the use of MNC seems to be linked to relevant protection during close contact scenarios by limiting pathogen-containing aerosol and liquid droplet dissemination. Importantly, we found evidence for significant respiratory compromise in patients with severe obstructive pulmonary disease, secondary to the development of hypercapnia. This could also happen in patients with lung infections, with or without SARS-CoV-2. CONCLUSION: Epidemiologists currently emphasize that wearing MNC will effectively interrupt airborne infections in the community. The government and the politicians have followed these recommendations and used them to both advise and, in some cases, mandate the general population to wear MNC in public locations. Overall, the results seem to suggest that there are some clinically relevant scenarios where the use of MNC necessitates more defined recommendations. Our critical evaluation of the literature both highlights the protective effects of certain types of face masks in defined risk groups, and emphasizes their potential risks.


Asunto(s)
Infecciones por Coronavirus/prevención & control , Máscaras/estadística & datos numéricos , Pandemias/prevención & control , Neumonía Viral/prevención & control , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Profilaxis Pre-Exposición/métodos , Dispositivos de Protección Respiratoria/estadística & datos numéricos , Infecciones por Coronavirus/epidemiología , Infecciones por Coronavirus/transmisión , Utilización de Equipos y Suministros/legislación & jurisprudencia , Utilización de Equipos y Suministros/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Máscaras/efectos adversos , Neumonía Viral/epidemiología , Neumonía Viral/transmisión , Profilaxis Pre-Exposición/legislación & jurisprudencia , Dispositivos de Protección Respiratoria/efectos adversos
6.
Urol Int ; 104(7-8): 501-509, 2020.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32172253

RESUMEN

This paper reviews the files in the archive of the Nobel Prize Committee for Physiology or Medicine on the Austrian physiologist and pioneering researcher in the emerging fields of urology and sexual medicine: Eugen Steinach (1861-1944). It reconstructs and analyzes why and by whom Steinach was nominated for the Nobel Prize between 1920 and 1938 and discusses the reasons why he never received the award, although the Nobel Committee judged him as prizeworthy. Steinach's Nobel nominee career is extraordinary - not only because of his strong support by renowned international nominators from different scientific and medical disciplines, but also because of the controversial discussions within the Nobel Committee on his achievements, colored by the debates in the international scientific community. The Nobel Prize story adds a new perspective on how contemporary international scholars evaluated Steinach's research on reproduction, "male-making" females, "female-making" males, homosexuality, and the concept of rejuvenation.

7.
Lancet Psychiatry ; 7(10): 911-914, 2020 10.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32213327

RESUMEN

The naturalisation of mental disorders-ie, their translation into measurable and preferably molecular variables-has not progressed despite breath-taking discoveries in the neurosciences. We ask whether self-inflicted limits exist among psychiatrists that would prevent them from supporting an imaginary perfect blood test with diagnostic specificity, sensitivity, and validity, which was able to replace clinical diagnosis completely. Although relevant for many mental disorders, we use the clinical disease category schizophrenia here as an example to discuss factors that oppose the naturalisation of clinical disease categories. We defend the provocative position that a complete substitution of the clinical diagnosis by a blood test is generally not desired among clinicians because various factors perpetuate the current diagnostic culture. These are (1) methodological problems, such as a falsely presumed homogeneity of biological causes under the umbrella of one clinical diagnosis that prevents efficient subset identification, (2) professional fears, such as loss of importance of interview-diagnostic expert skills, and (3) conceptual problems, such as a dualistic mindset. We posit that doubts regarding the possibility of a blood test for diagnosing schizophrenia can subtly result in a negative self-fulfilling prophecy, discouraging serious scientific efforts to develop one. We give historical examples of how some of these problems have been solved in other medical disciplines. We predict that only blood tests that improve diagnostic accuracy but do not displace the primacy of clinical diagnosis will be successful. In the future, novel professional expertise for orchestrating various biological variables together with clinical criteria will be needed.


Asunto(s)
Pruebas Hematológicas , Esquizofrenia/diagnóstico , Biomarcadores/sangre , Humanos , Psiquiatría/tendencias , Esquizofrenia/sangre
8.
Nervenarzt ; 91(Suppl 1): 3-12, 2020 Feb.
Artículo en Alemán | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32067080

RESUMEN

The German Neurological Society (DGN) instigated an investigation into potential incrimination of some of the previous leading members regarding their Nazi involvement. The persons in question include former (honorary) presidents and honorary members of the DGN (or the predecessor organizations) and the name givers of prizes awarded by the DGN. This introduction to the following biographies explains the difficulties and the broad discretionary leeway needed to establish an involvement in Nazi activities going beyond justiciable crimes against humanity on the basis of formal criteria (e.g. membership in the NSDAP and/or other NS organizations, involvement in Nazi crimes) and/or substantive indications (e.g. statements advocating the NS ideology, personal contacts to Nazi functionaries, active support of the system). A longitudinal analysis from 1945 until the present day reveals time-related variations in assessing who and why someone was considered to be a Nazi. A current overview of historical projects initiated by medical societies in Germany demonstrates that the endeavor of the DGN to deal with its Nazi involvement will be an integral part of the interdisciplinary "culture to cope with the past" of medical associations. Finally, it should be borne in mind that the fabric of history consists of a different material than clinical medicine or its natural scientific foundations. Checklists or scores for measuring NS involvement thus cannot and will not exist. Instead, balanced historical interpretations are needed as attempted by the biographical reconstructions presented in this volume.


Asunto(s)
Medicina Clínica , Nacionalsocialismo , Alemania , Historia del Siglo XX , Neurólogos , Sociedades Médicas
9.
Nervenarzt ; 91(Suppl 1): 13-21, 2020 Feb.
Artículo en Alemán | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32067081

RESUMEN

Max Nonne, an internationally renowned German neurologist, acted from 1918 to 1924 as president of the (first) Society of German Neurologists (GDN). Appointed honorary president in 1925, he held this position in the (second) German Neurological Society (DGN) until his death. Since 1961, this association has honored 16 neurologists with a commemorative medal named after Nonne. His outstanding findings in various fields of neurology are uncontested and some of them live on as eponyms (Nonne-Apelt syndrome, Nonne-Froin syndrome, Nonne-Milroy-Meige syndrome); however, recent archival studies and an analysis of individual publications deeply darkened the image of the "grey eminence" of German neurology. Records kept at the Hamburg State Archive prove that in a memorandum from 1941/1942 following the example of Binding and Hoche, Nonne firmly approved the killing of "life absolutely unworthy of living". In a report addressed to the District Court of Hamburg he attested in 1946 that many physicians charged with manslaughter acted in accordance with the regulations governing "child euthanasia", resulting in the withdrawal of the accusation. In a further statement from 1949 he confirmed that the killing of children and the "euthanasia program" during the NS era were consistent with the state of medical science. An earlier book chapter authored by Nonne immediately after World War I suggested that his social-Darwinistically colored concept of mankind was developed clearly before the Nazi era. Notwithstanding the arrangement to which he came with the new powers after 1933 and his acceptance of tributes to him by them, he repeatedly stood up for his Jewish colleagues. He was never a Nazi, nevertheless, he engaged in activities that fostered NS "euthanasia" going far beyond a "mentality of approval".


Asunto(s)
Eutanasia , Neurología , Epónimos , Eutanasia/historia , Alemania , Historia del Siglo XX , Nacionalsocialismo , Neurólogos , Neurología/historia
10.
Nervenarzt ; 91(Suppl 1): 22-28, 2020 Feb.
Artículo en Alemán | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32067082

RESUMEN

When Adolf Hitler was appointed Chancellor of the Reich Otfrid Foerster was almost 60 years old and an internationally renowned neurologist, neurosurgeon and a pioneer of localization research. Since 1922 he held the chair of neurology in Breslau (Wroclaw) and from 1925 to 1932 he was president (later honorary president) of the first Society of German Neurologists. In 1934 "his" Neurological Research Institute in Breslau was inaugurated. Biographical studies have unanimously established that he has never been a member of the party, that he found himself promptly marginalized after 1933 within his own ranks, and that he never participated in eugenic measures or "euthanasia" activities. A re-reading and analysis of his relevant papers and publications on neurology reveal however reverences paid to the Nazi state, which are surprising in this clarity. A possible explanation for Foerster's overall ambivalent attitude, he was married to a non-Aryan woman (in Nazi jargon), is the threat posed to his relatives by Nazi racial hygiene laws. On the other hand, there are clear indications of his conservative German national patriotism encouraging and supporting a restrengthened state and the National Socialist vision of the German Reich as a "great power". Further investigations will have to show how the numerous influential factors that had a bearing on his biographical characteristics, political attitude, medical research interests and private motivation should be weighted.


Asunto(s)
Eutanasia , Neurología , Eugenesia , Eutanasia/historia , Alemania , Historia del Siglo XX , Nacionalsocialismo , Neurólogos
11.
Nervenarzt ; 91(Suppl 1): 29-34, 2020 Feb.
Artículo en Alemán | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32067083

RESUMEN

In 1924 Oswald Bumke was appointed as Emil Kraepelins successor to the Chair of Psychiatry at the University of Munich. After 1933 he was a promoting member of the SS and the National Socialist Teachers Federation but he was never a member of the National Socialist German Workers' Party (NSDAP). In 1933 he assumed the presidency of the Society of German Neurologists but only 2 years later he withdrew from the executive board because of scientific and personal differences with Ernst Rüdin, the new "strong man" of the merged Society of German Neurologists and Psychiatrists. After the end of WWII, Bumke affirmed that despite his exposed position as professor of psychiatry during the NS era, he had lacked any influence and that he had sabotaged the "Law for the Prevention of Genetically Diseased Offspring" (GzVeN). He declared that for scientific reasons he had been extremely critical of the GzVeN and even had expressed his views in various publications. Nevertheless, he supported forced sterilization in his treatise "The State and Mental Diseases" published in 1939. His statement that the clinic in Munich had manipulated diagnoses in order to protect patients from eugenic measures and "euthanasia" refers to a potential interference, but as documents are lacking this cannot be substantiated. After 1940 Bumke functioned as a consulting military psychiatrist in expert reports. Political assessments from this period presented him as politically reliable. His biography exemplarily shows that a meticulous juxtaposition of post-war documents with correspondent records stemming from the Nazi period is imperative in order to arrive at a source-critical well-founded and differentiated evaluation.


Asunto(s)
Eutanasia , Psiquiatría , Eugenesia , Alemania , Historia del Siglo XX , Nacionalsocialismo , Esterilización Involuntaria
12.
Nervenarzt ; 91(Suppl 1): 35-42, 2020 Feb.
Artículo en Alemán | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32067084

RESUMEN

For a long time, biographical sketches and obituaries have focused on Pette's instantly recognizable scientific contributions to German neurology and neurovirology; however, they often ignored or marginalized his role as vice-president of the Society of German Neurologists and Psychiatrists (GDNP) during the Nazi era. Recent investigations and reports based on newly discovered records question such one-sided assessments and paint a contradictory picture. Pette joined the National Socialist German Workers' Party (NSDAP) and the NS Medical Association in 1933 and in the same year signed the "vow of allegiance of the professors to Adolf Hitler and the National Socialistic State". In 1934 he succeeded Nonne as professor for neurology in Hamburg and from 1935 headed the neurological branch of the NS-controlled Society of German Neurologists and Psychiatrists (GDNP). As a result, Pette had a strong influence on all activities of this organization and had contact with party leadership and the government. In principle, he was not opposed to the "Law for the Prevention of Genetically Diseased Offspring" and produced various expert reports addressed to the Appellate Hereditary Health Court in Hamburg. Simultaneously, he advocated differentiated diagnostics and rejected hasty sterilizations. He seems to have been acquainted with the "euthanasia" program and concomitant research projects but was not involved in them. During and after a lengthy denazification trial he stylized himself into a nonpolitical scientist representing an "oppositional attitude". In 1950 he was co-founder of the German Neurological Society (DGN) and was president until 1952 and then honorary president. Since 1969 the DGN awards the Heinrich Pette Prize. The Foundation for Research in Spinal Poliomyelitis founded by him shortly after WWII was named after him after his death. Since 2011 it bears the name "Heinrich Pette Institute, Leibniz Institute for Experimental Virology". In future, a prudent dealing with this ambivalent legacy seems to be advisable.


Asunto(s)
Eutanasia , Neurología , Psiquiatría , Alemania , Alemania Occidental , Historia del Siglo XX , Nacionalsocialismo
13.
Nervenarzt ; 91(Suppl 1): 43-52, 2020 Feb.
Artículo en Alemán | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32067085

RESUMEN

In 1953 the prominent German neurologist Georg(es) Schaltenbrand became president of the German Neurological Society (DGN) and in 1967 honorary president. Less well known is the fact that from 1933 to 1936 he was member of the "Stahlhelm" and the Storm Troopers (SA). In 1937 he joined the National Socialist German Workers' Party (NSDAP) and other Nazi organizations. For the last three decades Schaltenbrand's name has primarily been associated with human experiments performed in 1940. His objective was to prove the viral etiology of multiple sclerosis (MS). To that end he injected cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) drawn from allegedly infected monkeys and MS patients into severely handicapped patients from the psychiatric asylum Werneck near Schweinfurt as well as into severely ill patients from the University Hospital of Würzburg without their consent. Weeks later he withdrew CSF samples from the recipients, sometimes repeatedly to control parameters of inflammation. Although not all details of his test series can be clarified, there is no doubt that he violated prevailing laws and ethical standards. According to the present state of knowledge, he was the only German professor of neurology during the Nazi era who performed such experiments on humans in terms of "research without moral boundaries". He later justified his actions by arguing that he had intended to exert a positive effect on the mentally ill. Judicial investigations ended in 1948 without an indictment. Long after his death, in 1994 the "Schaltenbrand experiments" became known to a wider public and three years later the Medical Faculty of Würzburg condemned the unethical research and distanced itself from its former member. Today, Schaltenbrand's study is assessed as an unacceptable form of research on particularly vulnerable patients for the benefit of third parties. As a result, ethical norms formulated in the 1930s were reinforced by international guidelines, e.g. the Declaration of Helsinki drafted by the World Medical Association.


Asunto(s)
Esclerosis Múltiple , Neurología , Alemania , Historia del Siglo XX , Humanos , Principios Morales , Nacionalsocialismo , Neurólogos
14.
Nervenarzt ; 91(Suppl 1): 53-60, 2020 Feb.
Artículo en Alemán | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32067086

RESUMEN

Paul Vogel belonged to a group of neurologists born around 1900 who felt particularly attracted by the promises of National Socialism. Shortly after having completed his Habilitation in 1934 he became head of the leading neurology department in Berlin located at the Hansaplatz. Doctors working there reported patients for sterilization according to the Law for the Prevention of Genetically Diseased Offspring. They also acted as experts for Hereditary Health Courts (Erbgesundheitsgerichte). In 1933, Vogel chose to join the NS Medical Association and in 1937 became member of the National Socialist German Workers' Party (NSDAP). Influential medical officials confirmed his "political reliability" and this status made him eligible to succeed Viktor von Weizsäcker, his teacher, at Heidelberg University in 1941. A denazification tribunal classified him in 1946 as a follower (Mitläufer) partly because he was said to have taken a stance against the NS film drama "I accuse" in front of medical students. After WWII Vogel developed the neurological wards in Heidelberg into a fully-fledged neurological department. In 1955 and 1956 he acted as president of the German Neurological Society. In 1978 he became an honorary member.


Asunto(s)
Nacionalsocialismo , Médicos , Berlin , Alemania , Historia del Siglo XX , Neurólogos , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados
15.
Nervenarzt ; 91(Suppl 1): 61-70, 2020 Feb.
Artículo en Alemán | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32067087

RESUMEN

Klaus Joachim Zülch's research on the pathology and biology of brain tumors made him one of the outstanding scholars and clinicians in the fields of neurology and neuropathology in the Federal Republic of Germany. The World Health Organization (WHO) drew on his results when laying down its classification. In the years 1961-1962 he was president of the German Neurological Society (DGN), in 1978 he became an honorary member and in 1984 honorary president. In addition to the Zülch Award of the Max Planck Society, the DGN organizes a Zülch lecture at its annual meetings. Archive documents revealed that he was an early adherent of the ideology of National Socialism. He was a member of paramilitary units, joined the SA storm troopers in 1933 and the National Socialist German Workers' Party (NSDAP) in 1937. After having studied under Otfrid Foerster in Breslau and Georg Schaltenbrand in Würzburg he served as a military physician and in army hospitals during and after WWII. Nevertheless, he continued his investigations at the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Brain Research with Wilhelm Tönnis. In July 1947 he was dismissed on account of his SA membership but entered an objection to this decision of the Allies. After a lengthy denazification trial he succeeded in being exonerated. This was also due to attestations written in his favor by various neuroscientists. Hence, he could pursue his career in Cologne and from 1959 onwards he acted as director of the newly established department of general neurology of the Max Planck Institute and simultaneously as head of the department for clinical neurology at Cologne-Merheim hospital. The juxtaposition of a CV written by Zülch himself around 1938 with another one composed after the war shows that he tried to conceal incriminating facts and partly reconstructed a new and ultimately successful biography.


Asunto(s)
Distinciones y Premios , Neoplasias Encefálicas , Neurología , Médicos , Alemania , Historia del Siglo XX , Humanos , Nacionalsocialismo
16.
Nervenarzt ; 91(Suppl 1): 80-88, 2020 Feb.
Artículo en Alemán | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32067089

RESUMEN

In 1954 Karl Kleist (1879-1960) became an honorary member of the German Neurological Society (DGN), an honor that was granted 2 years earlier to his colleague Viktor von Weizsäcker (1886-1957). The attempt to classify and assess their careers between 1933 and 1945 led to diametrically opposed results in historical research. This article summarizes the main lines of argumentation and draws a preliminary conclusion. After 1933 Kleist is said to have felt more and more accountable for his non-Aryan colleagues and that he treated his Jewish patients as long as he could. Publications and third party testimonies confirmed that he circumvented at least occasionally the Law for the Prevention of Genetically Diseased Offspring (GzVeN). Furthermore, he is said to have saved patients from "euthanasia" actions by prudently formulated diagnoses. Simultaneously, he worked as an expert at the Appelate Hereditary Health Court in Frankfurt am Main, in 1940 he joined the National Socialist German Workers' Party (NSDAP) and in 1942 the NS Medical Association. Von Weizsäcker used his scope of action in a similarly contradictory way. Certainly, he kept away from central Nazi organizations and was considered "politically unreliable" by those colleagues who had a penchant for the system. But as professor of neurology he formally headed from 1941 onwards exactly that Neuropathological Research Institute in Breslau (Wroclaw) where one of his colleagues examined the brains of minors who had been killed in the course of "child euthanasia", in what was called "concomitant research". To a certain extent von Weizsäcker was also an advocate of the GzVeN. In his lectures and publications between 1933 and 1935 he chose the pertinent NS terminology and he was the first to speak of a "theory of extermination". In either case, even meticulous research could not answer the question where to exactly assign both biographies in a spectrum between criticism and affirmation of National Socialism.


Asunto(s)
Eutanasia , Neurología , Academias e Institutos , Encéfalo , Alemania , Historia del Siglo XX , Nacionalsocialismo
17.
Nervenarzt ; 91(Suppl 1): 89-99, 2020 Feb.
Artículo en Alemán | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32067090

RESUMEN

The Kaiser Wilhelm Institute (KWI) for Brain Research in Berlin-Buch was one of the key institutions enmeshed in the euthanasia program between 1939 and 1945, generating scientific knowledge by dissecting the brains of murdered patients. As a consequence, this institution and its early years have attracted the attention of historians for years. The neuroanatomist Oskar Vogt (1870-1959), director of the KWI until 1937 and his wife Cécile (1875-1962) who were both appointed honorary members of the German Neurological Society (DGN) in 1952, concentrated on the microstructure and brain architecture of healthy and "elite" brains. Vogt's successor, Hugo Spatz (1888-1969), shifted research activities towards pathology of the central nervous system (CNS) and incorporated psychiatric and military institutions into the institute's network. Spatz had been a member of the National Socialist German Workers' Party (NSDAP) since 1938. As acting director of the KWI he was responsible for the dissections performed by Hallervorden on murdered patients. After the war Spatz tried to justify his actions. Years after the unveiling of these relationships the DGN decided in 1998 to rename the Hugo Spatz award. Wilhelm Tönnis (1898-1978), the German pioneer of neurosurgery had been a member of the National Socialist Air Corps since 1933 and a member of the NSDAP since 1937, finally joining the NS Medical Association in 1938. After the war he played down his affiliation to NS divisions. When his denazification trial had ended he pursued his career in the young Federal Republic of Germany. In 1976 he was elected honorary member of the DGN, 2 years before his death.


Asunto(s)
Encéfalo , Eutanasia , Nacionalsocialismo , Academias e Institutos , Alemania , Historia del Siglo XX
18.
Nervenarzt ; 91(Suppl 1): 100-108, 2020 Feb.
Artículo en Alemán | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32067091

RESUMEN

There were three Austrian neurologists with connections to neurology in National Socialism who have been honored by the German Neurological Society (DGN) or its predecessor organizations with honorary membership. From 1928 to 1934 Julius Wagner-Jauregg (1857-1940) was head of the Austrian Alliance for National Regeneration and the Study of Heredity; in at least two publications he advocated eugenic measures and racial hygienic positions as defined by Nazi ideology. As a former member of the Greater German People's Party (Großdeutsche Volkspartei), he applied for membership of the National Socialist German Workers' Party (NSDAP) a few months before his death. Walther Birkmayer (1910-1996) was an early member of the NSDAP, SA, SS and other Nazi organizations. As a staunch supporter of the "movement" he worked from 1938 in the Office of Racial Policy of the Gauleitung of Vienna. In lectures and publications he demanded or recommended forced sterilization for a number of neurological diseases. Due to the classification of his grandmother as "non-Aryan", he had to give up his party and university posts and served as a Wehrmacht physician. After some hard years immediately after the war, he was allowed to continue his career. As a co-discoverer of the effect of L­DOPA on parkinsonism, he was awarded numerous honorary doctorates and honorary memberships. Franz Seitelberger (1916-2007), a member of an SS unit during the Nazi era, benefited in his research work from the 1950s onwards from specimens obtained in the course of neuropathological "concomitant research" to Nazi "euthanasia". It is to be welcomed that the Austrian Society of Neurology (ÖGN) will soon start a historical project investigating open questions related to the Nazi era.


Asunto(s)
Nacionalsocialismo , Neurólogos , Austria , Eugenesia , Alemania , Historia del Siglo XX , Esterilización Involuntaria
19.
Nervenarzt ; 91(Suppl 1): 109-118, 2020 Feb.
Artículo en Alemán | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32067092

RESUMEN

This paper aims at reconstructing the biographies of six German neurologists during and after the "Third Reich". Between 1957 and 1976, five of them were presidents of the German Neurological Society (DGN), the sixth was appointed honorary president in 1981. They all joined the National Socialist German Workers' Party (NSDAP) or Storm Troopers (SA) as young doctors between the ages 20 and 35 years. According to the current state of research they thus have to be classified as formally incriminated, yet none of them developed significant (health) political activities, with the slight exception of Eberhard Bay (1908-1989), who once acted as expert witness in an Hereditary Health Court trial. Gustav Döhring (1909-1963), NSDAP member since 1937, Pette student and co-founder of the DGN, was secretary of the Society for many years and editor of a commemorative publication. Johannes Hirschmann (1910-1991), also a party comrade since 1937, served as an army and military hospital doctor from 1939 to 1945. Richard Jung (1911-1986) had joined the SA in 1934. This entailed his immediate dismissal after the war from the University of Freiburg but benefitting from the support by the dean he could pursue his career not long thereafter. Robert Charles Behrend (1919-1996) became a party member at the age of 20 years and with his time in office in 1975-1976 he was the last of the post-war presidents of the DGN connected to National Socialism in Germany. Older than these five was honorary chairman Gustav Bodechtel (1899-1983) a member of the SA, NSDAP and other Nazi organizations. He was dismissed in 1946 but reinstated just 1 week later due to the interventions by the Medical Academy Düsseldorf and the Mayor of the City. New findings on these personalities are exclusively based on archival research. This underlines the necessity of resorting to sources previously neglected when investigating biographies of twentieth century neurologists.


Asunto(s)
Nacionalsocialismo , Médicos , Adulto , Alemania , Historia del Siglo XX , Humanos , Neurólogos , Neurología , Política , Adulto Joven
20.
Nervenarzt ; 91(Suppl 1): 119-127, 2020 Feb.
Artículo en Alemán | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32067093

RESUMEN

From the mid-1950s to the early 1980s the German Neurological Society (DGN) appointed in addition to international physicians, numerous German physicians as honorary members. From a present day perspective, some of them are to be classified as "incriminated" with their commitment to the National Socialist "movement" and its health policy goals, which at times went far beyond a formal membership of the party and its organizations. Thus, there is no doubt about the völkisch views of the Würzburg psychiatrist Martin Reichardt (1874-1966), which he articulated in lectures and publications. The Erb student Siegfried Schönborn (1874-1966), also a member of the National Socialist German Workers' Party (NSDAP), was in contact with Karl Fahrenkamp, who advised Reichsführer-SS Heinrich Himmler on medical issues. Hamburg-based Hans-Robert Müller (1901-1981), one of the "founding fathers" of the DGN, joined the Hitler party in 1937. In contrast, neurosurgeon Hans Kuhlendahl (1910-1992) was in addition a member of the Storm Troopers (SA). Hans Jacob (1907-1997), SA-Rottenführer, party comrade and head of the Neuropathology Department at Hamburg University, profited by the "euthanasia" action: as part of the so-called concomitant research he examined ca. 40 brains of children who had been killed at the "special departments" in Langenhorn and Lüneburg. Unlike his peers, the renowned neurogeneticist Peter Emil Becker (1908-2000) is today judged as an opportunistic bystander. He was one of the few who faced up to his NS past later in life, but the response he met was ambivalent because he withheld mention of his party membership. With respect to the honorary members, it remains an open question why 40 years after the end of the "Third Reich" the DGN still honored neurologists who in some cases had been heavily involved in the biopolitics of that era.


Asunto(s)
Eutanasia , Médicos , Psiquiatría , Alemania , Historia del Siglo XX , Nacionalsocialismo , Neurología , Sociedades Médicas
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA