Holmesburg Prison
[1] It was the site of controversial decades-long dermatological, pharmaceutical, and biochemical weapons research projects involving testing on inmates.
[6] The creation of the Nuremberg Code with the rule of informed consent was drafted based on this case as well as several others, like the Tuskegee experiments in Alabama.
It was an "idle collection of humanity that seemed ideal for dermatologic study,"[15] Dr. Albert Kligman famously recounted entering the Holmesburg Prison for the first time as: All I saw before me were acres of skin.
[1] One inmate described experiments involving exposure to microwave radiation, sulfuric, and carbonic acid—solutions which corroded and reduced forearm epidermis to a leather-like substance, and acids which blistered skin in the testicular areas.
[2]: 79, 150 In addition to exposure to harmful chemical agents, patients were asked to physically exert themselves and were immediately put under the knife to remove sweat glands for examination.
[18] The rise of testing harmful substances on human subjects first became popularized in the United States when, during World War I, President Woodrow Wilson founded the Chemical Warfare Service (CAWS) .
In the 1950s, an outbreak of athlete's foot plagued the inmates, and in trying to find a treatment for the widespread problem, the prison pharmacist discovered one of Kligman's articles.
At the time, Kligman was a University of Pennsylvania Medical School professor of dermatology and was designing an experiment researching fingernail fungal infections.
It was documented that the experimentation at Holmesburg prison "entailed hair transplants, implantation of foreign bodies, burns and radiation of the skin, exposure to dioxin, application and ingestion of toxic, near lethal doses of tretinoin, inoculation of Staphylococcus aureus, and the yanking out of fingernails.
The controlled conditions of the prison appealed to him, as having the inmates' diet and lifestyle standardized would minimize disruptions to his medical research.
[24] Perceptions of inmates and that they belong to the state reinforced the belief that practicing on people who potentially committed crimes was impartial.
(1965-1966)[26] The United States Army contracted Kligman to test the effects of certain mind-altering drugs, with these experiments conducted in trailers on the prison grounds.
[27] The drugs produced a variety of lasting effects, such as temporary paralysis, and sudden long-term violent behavior, with half of the subjects reporting to have experienced hallucinations for days.
One inmate named Al Zabala recalled: "I soon heard about the U of P [University of Pennsylvania] studies and the good pay they offered.
He reports having developed blisters, then "fine little red bumps all over my face, arms, legs, head" with some of them "white and filled with pus".
"[32] Roach also noted how he received inadequate care outside of his medical treatments, recounting how his cell had water leaking from the roof.
Following the development of symptoms, the prison failed "to provide adequate facilities to screen, monitor, and treat the plaintiff to avoid serious illness.
For the first batch of experiments, 19 male patients were chosen between the ages of 22 and 37 based on the results of the Minnesota Multiphase Personality Inventory (MMPI) test.
In a study titled "Threshold Doses in Humans and Evaluations of Drugs in Man", over 320 inmates were recruited to test "ditran, atropine, scopolamine, and various experimental glycolate agents," which affected the nervous activity and the function of smooth muscles.
[2] In addition to providing subjects for experimentation, the Holmesburg prison also served as the perfect facility for military testing of mind-altering substances because of the presence of pliable furniture and padding as a safety precaution for patients.
[2] Throughout the experiments, over ten patients had been given over 7,500 micrograms of the dioxin pesticide, which was an excessive amount, surprising even Dow Chemical's scientists.
[2] While Dow Chemical maintained that TCDD and 2, 3, 5-T caused no harm to humans, the EPA argued that these herbicides posted a threat to mankind.
[2] Many of the inmates who reached out to the EPA for legal advice were turned away under the claim that once they had signed their consent waivers they were unable to charge the Holmesburg prison.
"[37] Several patients disagreed with their treatment as "human guinea pigs" and took their grievances to court, given the lack of government support.
[40] The hearing was supposed to discuss the Tuskegee Syphilis Study and clarify the ethical and legal implications of human experimental research.
The Nuremberg Code states: "[T]he person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, overreaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision.
"[42] The Holmesburg prison trials were a prime example of profits and the promise of scientific advancements overshadowing the ethical issues associated with research.
As the public became more aware of the testing that occurred within Holmesburg Prison, ex-prisoners started realizing they had a right to sue those in charge of the experiments.
As a result of the questioning of these Kligman experiments, testing on prisoners was limited by the United States Department of Health, Education, and Welfare in 1976.
This was countered by reform organizations and groups that pointed to overcrowding, the lack of meaningful activities for prisoners, and the abuse by guards.
