Medical Science in the Light of a Flawed Study of the Holocaust: A Comment on Eva Hedfors' Paper on Ludwik Fleck/Medical Science in the Light of the Holocaust: Reply to a Biased Reading

• Published in: Social studies of science 2008-12, Vol.38 (6), p.937
• Main Authors: Amsterdamska, Olga, Bonah, Christian, Borck, Cornelius, Fehr, Johannes, Hagner, Michael, Klingberg, Marcus, Löwy, Ilana, Schlünder, Martina, Schmaltz, Florian, Schnelle, Thomas, Tammen, Antke, Weindling, Paul, Zittel, Claus, Hedfors, Eva
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Experiments; Fleck, Ludwik (1896-1961); Hedfors, Eva; Literary criticism; Medicine; Nazi era; Science
• ISSN: 0306-3127; 1460-3659

Amsterdamska et al comment on Eva Hedfors' paper, Medical Science in the Light of Holocaust: Departing from a Post-war Paper by Ludwik Fleck. Hedfors's criticism of Fleck's research before the war amounts to a rather harmless pursuit, but her description of Fleck's activity in Buchenwald assumes a different standing. They argue that Hedfors has no valid proof of her allegations concerning Fleck's behavior in Buchenwald. Her paper is grounded mainly in a selective reading of secondary sources, and it fails to take into account the available historical evidence. Furthermore, Hedfors subscribes to the thesis that Nazi medical experiments should be considered as "pseudoscience" without clearly defining her understanding of this analytical and historical-interpretative designation. She thus corroborates without critical reflection a post-war characterization that has been widely questioned by historians of Nazi science and medicine in the last 15 years.