Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T18:47:33.891Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Experimental Wounds: Science and Violence in Mid-Century America

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2021

Susan Lindee
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Taken from a published report on wound ballistics research during World War II, Figure 1 depicts the abdomen of a cat that has been shaved, anesthetized, marked with a grid, and shot. The individual squares are frames, the caption says, “(2880 per second) from a high speed motion picture of a cat’s abdomen, showing the volume changes and movements caused by a 6/32nd inch steel sphere.” We can recognize in this image the conventions of scientific inscription. The technologies are sophisticated, quantitative, impressive. The image speaks for itself. Or does it? What exactly is happening when an anesthetized cat with a shaved abdomen painted with a grid gets shot, in a laboratory, and when that event is hyper-documented in high speed photographs, and deployed in a range of texts as evidence? And what do these human creations — these highly quantified experimental wounds — tell us about the culture and practice of twentieth-century science?

Type
Symposium
Information
Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics , Volume 39 , Issue 1 , Spring 2011 , pp. 8 - 20
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of Law, Medicine and Ethics 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Kuhn, T. S., The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Max Weber made this argument in his lecture “Politics as a Vocation,” in 1918. The lecture was published in German immediately, and then subsequently in translations in 1919. It is readily available in complete form on the web, available at <http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/guorui/files/2007/ll/weber.pdf> (last visited December 16, 2010).+(last+visited+December+16,+2010).>Google Scholar
I use the term “collateral damage” advisedly, and am sympathetic to the critiques of Elaine Scarry and others that the term is automatically suspect. See Scarry, E., The Body in Pain: The Making and Unmaking of the World (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1985).Google Scholar
My own study of the Atomic Bomb Casualty Commission is Lindee, S., Suffering Made Real: American Science and the Survivors at Hiroshima (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
See also Larry Owens' evocative discussion of this research in Owens, L., “The Cat and the Bullet: A Ballistic Fable for the Modern World,” The Massachusetts Review 45, no. 1 (2004): 178–190. Also see Eric Prokosch's fascinating and often over-looked study of the development of anti-personnel weapons, Prokosch, E., The Technology of Killing (London: Zed Books, 1995).Google Scholar
Newton, H. E., McMillen, J. H., Butler, E. G., and Puckett, W. O., “Mechanism of Wounding” Wound Ballistics, Boyd Coates, J. Jr., Beyer, J. C., and Heaton, L. D., eds. (Washington, D.C.: Office of the Surgeon General, Department of the Army): 143–235, at 147.Google Scholar
Id, at 143.Google Scholar
Newton Harvery, E., “Studies on Wound Ballistics” Advances in Military Medicine, volume 1, Andrus, E.C., Bronk, D. W., Carden, G. A. Jr., Keefer, C. S., Lockwood, J. S. and Wearn, J. T., eds. (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1948): 191–205, at 197.Google Scholar
See Blass, T., The Man who Shocked the World: The Life and Legacy of Stanley Milgram (New York: Basic Books. 2004).Google Scholar
See Graham, C. H., Riggs, L. A., Barlett, N. R., Berry, R. N., Verplanck, W. S., Solomon, R. L., and Mueller, C. G., Project 44, Division 7, National Defense Research Council, “Research on the Selection of Service Personnel with Special Reference to Emotional Factors,” A Report of Research on Selection Tests at the U.S. Submarine Base, New London, Contract No. OEMer-570 of the Office of Scientific Research and Development, OSRD Report No. 1770, Copy No. 25 of 150, Restricted. Declassified in 1946. There is a microfilm copy of this report at the University of Pennsylvania. Penn's microfilm copy was made from a copy at Brown University, but the Brown library no longer lists it.Google Scholar
In the protocol, the subject looked into a darkened interior of a portable box where he would see two spots of green light, one to stimulate the left eye and one the right. He was asked to purposively “fuse the two spots to a single spot as rapidly as possible after the two-spot stimuli flash.” In the “apprehension” trials, the threat of shock was presented, but subjects were not in fact shocked. They had, however, been shocked in advance when the “intensity of the shock” to be used with each individual was calibrated – it had to be enough to produce a vigorous contraction of leg muscles. When this intensity of stimulation had been determined, the subject was reseated at his place in front of the apparatus and the electrodes were replaced. The subject was told, basically, that the shock could come at any time, either before the lights appeared or after, in random sequence. “The warning interval employed is four seconds….” Id., at A7.Google Scholar
Id., at A8.Google Scholar
The historian of medicine Sarah W. Tracy, Director of the Medical Humanities Program in the Honors College at the University of Oklahoma, has been developing a scholarly examination of Ancel Keys, his starvation studies, his role in developing the K Ration, and his larger story, of a 70-year career in the evolving context of the human and biomedical sciences. Tracy's work is not yet published but it promises to be an important scholarly account of these studies. See also Tucker, T., The Great Starvation Experiment: Ancel Keys and the Men Who Starved for Science (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2008).Google Scholar
Landis, E. M., “The Effects of Acceleration and Their Amelioration,” Advances in Military Medicine, volume 1, Andrus, E. C., Bronk, D. W., Carden, G. A. Jr., Keefer, C. S., Lockwood, J. S., and Wearn, J. T., eds. (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1948): At 232–262.Google Scholar
See supra note 13.Google Scholar
The 32 heat-acclimatized men were transported by air from MacDill Air Force base in Florida to Camp Shilo, Manitoba, Canada, in January 1948. The goal was to understand the effects of severe cold on metabolism, dietary requirements, and the adrenal system. The men were exposed to severe cold and limited caloric intake for 12 days in minus 35 degree weather. “The bivouac region was chosen to assure isolation, desolation and open exposure to the wind.” Their urine and blood were monitored. They stayed in tents, had standard cold weather soldiers gear, and were divided into four groups of 8, with each group on a different ration. “As a psychologic strategy to insure the continuity and reliability of the last days’ observation, the subjects and staff were led to believe that they would be ‘rescued’ on the fourteenth day at the earliest.” They were suddenly rescued on the evening of the twelfth day, when they were quickly transported to a warm building in Camp Shilo. All from Bly, C. et al., “Survival in the Cold,” United States Armed Forces Medical Journal (1950): 615–628. (please provide issue number.)Google Scholar
Id., at 620.Google Scholar
Considering his important role in twentieth-century American medicine, it is odd that Beecher has been the focus of relatively little historical, scholarly research. Jonathan Moreno discusses some of Beecher's work in his 2000 book Moreno, J., Undue Risk: Secret State Experiments on Humans (New York: Routledge, 2000). See also Kopp, V., “Henry K. Beecher, M.D.: Contrarian (1904–1976),” American Society of Anesthesiologists Newsletter 63, no. 9 (1999), available at <http://www.asahq.org/Newsletters/l999/09_99/beecher0999.html>, which at least raises some key issues. Kopp proposes that “Henry Knowles Beecher, M.D., is one of the most influential personalities in the history of anesthesiology and medicine. The list of his achievements, honors and publications is as impressive as the role of medical leaders he mentored. Yet Beecher remains a hidden presence behind the visible facade of modern medicine. To those who knew him, he was gregarious, imposing and energetically committed to controversy. To those who opposed him, he was a genteel but persistent adversary. It is impossible to conceive of modern medicine without his contributions, all of which derive from his contrarian views on a wide range of important issues. His legacy is the influence that his views and work have had on medical science, academic anesthesiology, medical ethics and society's standards regarding patients' rights and the definition of death.” The historian of medicine Lara Freidenfelds won the 2001 Shryock Medal from the American Association for the History of Medicine, for a paper about Beecher's campaign, entitled “Recruiting Allies for Reform: Henry Knowles Beecher's ‘Ethics and Clinical Research’” but I cannot find a record of the publication of this paper as of July 2010.Google Scholar
Letter, Beecher, H. to Richards, A. N., October 16, 1942, in Folder 10, Papers of Walter B. Cannon, Countway Medical Library, Boston, MA.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Patients were selected who were clear mentally and who were not in shock when they were questioned. Selection also involved some judgment about which wounds were primary: Beecher noted “Men wounded in battle usually have multiple wounds. The categories listed [used to choose subjects] refer to the chief wound.” Beecher, H., “The Control of Pain in Men Wounded in Battle,” Surgery in World War II, General Surgery, vol. II, Coates, J. B., ed., (Washington, D.C.: Medical Department of the United States Army, 1955): 41–52.Google Scholar
Beecher, , id., at, 43.Google Scholar
Howard, J. M., ed., Battle Casualties in Korea: Studies of the Surgical Research Team (Washington, D.C.: Army Medical Service Graduate School, Walter Reed Army Medical Center, 1955).Google Scholar
W. Stone foreword in Howard, , id., at iii.Google Scholar
Boyd Coates, J., ed., Wound Ballistics (Washington, D.C.: Office of the Surgeon General, Department of the Army, 1962). See particularly 734-737 and Appendix H, 843–853.Google Scholar
From November 1950 until May of 1951, Carl M. Herget, an Army PhD who had been working for several years on body armor, Captain George Coe, a member of the chemical corps, and physician Major James Beyer of the Medical Corps worked together in Korea. They were the Wound Ballistics Survey of the Medical Research and Development Board of the Surgeon General's Office of the Department of Army. Their survey included studies of wound events produced on the battle-field, and of body armor and its protective qualities. A very detailed history of their work is available digitally, available at <http://history.amedd.army.mil/booksdocs/wwii/wound-blstcs/chapterl2.2.htm> (last visited December 16, 2010). (last visited December 16, 2010).' href=https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=From+November+1950+until+May+of+1951,+Carl+M.+Herget,+an+Army+PhD+who+had+been+working+for+several+years+on+body+armor,+Captain+George+Coe,+a+member+of+the+chemical+corps,+and+physician+Major+James+Beyer+of+the+Medical+Corps+worked+together+in+Korea.+They+were+the+Wound+Ballistics+Survey+of+the+Medical+Research+and+Development+Board+of+the+Surgeon+General's+Office+of+the+Department+of+Army.+Their+survey+included+studies+of+wound+events+produced+on+the+battle-field,+and+of+body+armor+and+its+protective+qualities.+A+very+detailed+history+of+their+work+is+available+digitally,+available+at++(last+visited+December+16,+2010).>Google Scholar
The collected papers of the Association of Pasadena Scientists are held at the University of Chicago archives and the phrase “welfare of mankind” appears quoted in the guide to the collections: “The Association of Pasadena Scientists was founded late in 1945 as a response to the growing controversy over the use of atomic energy. Membership in the organization was open to scientists, graduate students, and technicians in the Pasadena area. The main purpose of the group was “to meet the increasingly apparent responsibility of scientists in promoting the welfare of mankind and the achievement of a stable world peace.” The records of the Association of Pasadena Scientists cover the period 1945 to 1946 and include press releases, statements and correspondence of members of the Association. Available at <http://ead.lib.uchicago.edu> (last visited December 16, 2010).+(last+visited+December+16,+2010).>Google Scholar
Cassell, G. H., Miller, L. A., and Rest, R., “Biological Warfare: Role of Scientific Societies,” in Zilinskas, R. A., ed., The Microbiologist and Biological Defense Research: Ethics, Politics and National Security, in the Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, vol. 666 (New York: New York Academy of Sciences, 1992): 230–238.Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Grow, 1887–1960, was the first Surgeon General of the U.S. Air Force, and the author of an autobiographical account of his time at the Russian front in World War I, Surgeon Grow: An American in the Russian Fighting (New York: Frederick A. Stokes, 1918). He was deeply involved in interwar biomedical research relating to aviation and in 1941 published European Parliament Armstrong, H. G. and Grow, , Fit to Fly; A Medical Handbook for Fliers (New York: D. Appleton-Century, 1941).Google Scholar
There is a fascinating discussion of this in Eden, L., Whole World on Fire: Organizations, Knowledge and Nuclear Weapons devastation (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2004). See also, for a somewhat different use of economic knowledge as an aid to government policy, Perkins, J., Confessions of an Economic Hit Man (San Francisco: Berrett Koehler Publishers, 2004).Google Scholar
On psychological warfare, see Gilmore, A. B., You Can’t Fight Tanks with Bayonets: Psychological Warfare Against the Japanese Army in the Southwest Pacific (Lincoln and London: University of Nebraska Press. 1998).Google Scholar
Fleck's work is now widely used, but the first English translation of his most influential book, published originally in German in 1935, appeared from the University of Chicago Press in 1979, edited by Trenn, T. J. and Merton, Robert, and with a forward by Kuhn, Thomas as Fleck, X., The Genesis and Development of a Scientific Fact (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979). Virtually ignored during his own lifetime, it is now a staple in history of science programs.Google Scholar
Fulton, J. F. to Harvey, E. N., September 29, 1943. Papers of E.N. Harvey, American Philosophical Society, Philadelphia, PA.Google Scholar