Skip to main page content
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
, 2 (2), 72-6

The Nuremberg Code-A Critique

Affiliations

The Nuremberg Code-A Critique

Ravindra B Ghooi. Perspect Clin Res.

Abstract

The Nuremberg Code drafted at the end of the Doctor's trial in Nuremberg 1947 has been hailed as a landmark document in medical and research ethics. Close examination of this code reveals that it was based on the Guidelines for Human Experimentation of 1931. The resemblance between these documents is uncanny. It is unfortunate that the authors of the Nuremberg Code passed it off as their original work. There is evidence that the defendants at the trial did request that their actions be judged on the basis of the 1931 Guidelines, in force in Germany. The prosecutors, however, ignored the request and tried the defendants for crimes against humanity, and the judges included the Nuremberg Code as a part of the judgment. Six of ten principles in Nuremberg Code are derived from the 1931 Guidelines, and two of four newly inserted principles are open to misinterpretation. There is little doubt that the Code was prepared after studying the Guidelines, but no reference was made to the Guidelines, for reasons that are not known. Using the Guidelines as a base document without giving due credit is plagiarism; as per our understanding of ethics today, this would be considered unethical. The Nuremberg Code has fallen by the wayside; since unlike the Declaration of Helsinki, it is not regularly reviewed and updated. The regular updating of some ethics codes is evidence of the evolving nature of human ethics.

Keywords: Ethics; Nuremberg; guidelines; human subjects; research.

Similar articles

  • [The Origin of Informed Consent]
    V Mallardi. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital 25 (5), 312-27. PMID 16602332.
    The principle of informed consent, aimed at the lawfulness of health assistance, tends to reflect the concept of autonomy and of decisional autodetermination of the perso …
  • Ethics in Human Experimentation: The Two Military Physicians Who Helped Develop the Nuremberg Code
    LA Temme. Aviat Space Environ Med 74 (12), 1297-300. PMID 14692476.
    The Nuremberg Code is generally considered the beginning of modern ethics in human experimentation. The Code is a list of 10 principles that Judge Walter Beals included i …
  • [Research Ethics Committees: A Necessary Good]
    AV Riera. Invest Clin 54 (4), 343-5. PMID 24502176.
    The Nuremberg Code, issued as the result of the deliberations of the Nuremberg Trials, which judged the atrocities carried out during Nazi Germany (1933-1945), was the fi …
  • [Medical Research Ethics 50 Years After Nuremberg]
    KW Ruyter. Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen 117 (30), 4383-91. PMID 9456583. - Review
    50 years ago, in Nuremberg, 23 German doctors were accused of crimes against humanity. The anniversary is a solemn reminder of the dark origins of medical research ethics …
  • Running an Ethical Trial 60 Years After the Nuremberg Code
    JR Markman et al. Lancet Oncol 8 (12), 1139-1146. PMID 18054883. - Review
    The Nuremberg Code has served as a foundation for ethical clinical research since its publication 60 years ago. This landmark document, developed in response to the horro …
See all similar articles

Cited by 8 PubMed Central articles

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Speer A. Spandau- The secret diaries. USA: MacMillan; 1976.
    1. Transcripts of the Nuremberg Doctor–s Trials are archived by The University of Missouri, Kansas City at www.law.umkc.edu/.../ftrials/nuremberg/nurembergdoctortrial.html 2. and the Harvard Law School at: http://nuremberg.law.harvard.edu/php/docs_swi.php?DI=1&text=medical.
    1. Reich WT, editor. Appendix p. 2nd ed. Encyclopedia of Bioethics; pp. 2762–3.
    1. Vollmann J, Winau R. Informed consent in human experimentation before the Nuremberg code. BMJ. 1996;313:1445. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Sass HM. Ambiguities In Judging Cruel Human Experimentation: Arbitrary American Responses to German and Japanese Experiments. Eubios J Asian Int Bioeth. 2003:102–4.
Feedback