Social History of Medicine Vol. 24, No. 3 pp.

686 699

Speed in the Third Reich: Metamphetamine (Pervitin) Use and a Drug History From Below
Stephen Snelders* and Toine Pieters
Downloaded from http://shm.oxfordjournals.org/ at Virginia Commonwealth Universtiy on September 14, 2013
Summary. This article is an analysis of the use of Pervitin (metamphetamine) in National Socialist Germany after the introduction of the drug in 1938. Whereas earlier studies have focused on the supply of the drug, this study focuses on demand. Both an iatrogenic and a Nazigenic interpretation of the history of metamphetamine use are reviewed. It is concluded that the use of Pervitin in the Third Reich was not only pushed on the population by the Nazi political and military authorities, but also became endemic in German society as it addressed the needs and problems of various users including employees, housewives, and soldiers. The drug was a cultural ambiguity of life in Nazi Germany, integrated in everyday life, notwithstanding its regulation by drug laws. Keywords: psychotropic drugs; amphetamine; Pervitin; National Socialist Germany; psychiatry

All societies have unique patterns of psychoactive substance use and consumption, which are essential elements of everyday life. People use substances for various purposes: for health care, improved work performance, recreation, as a form of rebellion in countercultural movements, or if only to get through the day. Novel use of an existing drug only replaces or adds to the current drug use pattern in peoples everyday life. The sensational drug epidemics of the 1960s did not occur in a vacuum. Throughout history, the widespread use of amphetamines and barbiturates (uppers and downers) in all levels of society in countries such as the United States, Sweden and Japan have been documented. Historians have even spoken of an amphetamine epidemic, and Charles O. Jackson has described the United States in the 1950s as the Amphetamine Democracy.1 It would be accurate to say that the use of amphetamines was endemic in these societies during the 1950s. Concerns over the use of amphetamines certainly existed at the time, but never reached the moral panic that characterised public debate and policies around psychotropic drug use since the 1960s. We suggest that one reason was the very endemic nature of amphetamine use. Apart from socially undesirable side-effects, such as addiction and use by motorcycle gangs and youth culture, amphetamines did not threaten general social order. One can even argue that amphetamine use, in most cases, actually
*Rustenburgerstraat 14111, Amsterdam 1073 EX, The Netherlands. E-mail: stephsnel@gmail.com VU-University Medical CenterMetamedica, PO Box 7057, Amsterdam 1007 MB, The Netherlands. E-mail: a.pieters@vumc.nl Stephen Snelders, independent historian and researcher based in Amsterdam, and Toine Pieters, VU-University Medical Center, Department of Metamedica/Medical Humanities, Amsterdam, and Utrecht University, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences (UIPS), Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Clinical Pharmacology, have a research programme into the production, promotion and consumption of psychoactive drugs in medical and public spheres. They have published articles and books for the scientific and the general public.
1

Jackson 1976; Courtwright 2002, pp. 7884; Davenport-Hines 2004, pp. 2419; Rasmussen 2008a, 2008b; Nouvel 2009.

The Author 2011. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for the Social History of Medicine. All rights reserved. doi:10.1093/shm/hkq101 Advance Access published 19 February 2011

Metamphetamine Use in the Third Reich

687

supported the fabric of social life. In this respect, the 1940s and 1950s were the Sixties in reverse, because in the 1960s drug use seemed to threaten the social structure. This was not only the case in democratic countries such as the USA and Sweden. With some overstatement, an analogy to the title Amphetamine Democracy can be made to describe National Socialist Germany from 1938 forward as a Metamphetamine Dictatorship. German pharmaceutical companies produced their own and stronger versions of amphetamines as compared to the USA. Foremost was the drug Pervitin and despite legal regulation, this German metamphetamine maintained its place in everyday life, as a part of everyday life, including health care and the war effort. Historians have documented the use of Pervitin in the Third Reich as part of the Nazi effort to regiment, control and direct the German population. However, it is paradoxical that at the same time they have noted that the Nazi regime claimed to have a tough anti-drug policy in general.2 Analogous to descriptions of the American amphetamine epidemic as iatrogenic, we can say that historians have seen the German metamphetamine epidemic as Nazigenic. We will question this view and present evidence for the role of the demand side (as opposed to the supply side) in the dynamics of metamphetamine consumption, similar to the present tendency to transcend simple dichotomies between perpetrators and victims in the historiography of Nazi Germany. People everywhere use drugs and adopt drug use for their own ends, not just because they are pushed to do so by dope dealers, pharmaceutical companies, doctors, or military and political authorities. To understand drug use and modification we have to understand this pull-side. To analyse the flow of drugs through a particular society as a top-down process is to ignore the reasons for demand. To quote a recent history of the prescription drug meprobamate (Miltown) in the 1950s: to view the diffusion of [these drugs] as a top-down process turns patients into pawns and occludes instances of patient influence and negotiation it would be misleading to ignore patients involvement for, from the very beginning, they were the drugs greatest enthusiasts.3 In this article, we argue that even in a so-called totalitarian society such as Nazi Germany, the demand side played a role of its own. To draw attention to bottom-up processes as opposed to top-down processes, we present Pervitin use in the Third Reich as a case study of the appropriation of a new drug for various purposes. In the bottom-up process, the boundaries between medical use and public use became flexible and blurred. In our view, it is exactly this redirection of a drug for a variety of social purposes that accounts for the endemic character of psychoactive drug use. At this level of analysis the differences between drug policies under democracy and dictatorship also tend to blur.

Downloaded from http://shm.oxfordjournals.org/ at Virginia Commonwealth Universtiy on September 14, 2013

The Introduction of Pervitin

The successful introduction of amphetamine (Benzedrin) into the US market in 1933 stimulated German pharmaceutical companies, including Bayer and Merck, to develop their own stimulants or Weckaminen (the generic name for ephedrine-derived drugs). The commercial production of home-grown drugs would make Germany independent
2

Roth in Kudlien (ed.) 1985; Mach 2002; Pieper (ed.) n.d.; Steinkamp in Eckart (ed.) 2007.

Tone in Tone and Watkins (eds) 2007, pp. 1635.

688

Stephen Snelders and Toine Pieters

from foreign imports, while at the same time producing medicaments for the war machine.4 It has been suggested that German companies, doctors and physiologists were specifically interested in Weckaminen for reasons that went beyond medical purposes, such as the treatment of depression, apathy and psychopathic syndromes. They were interested in drugs that could be used as stimulants at work, in factories and offices. One author has even linked the development of Pervitin with the decrease of work discipline and productivity in 1937 and 1938.5 Whether this connection can be made is uncertain, but German researchers investigated the effects of Pervitin on productivity in manufacturing and the military beginning in 1938 when the Temmler company in Berlin introduced 1-Phenyl-2-methylamino-propan in tablet form under the name Pervitin. Pervitin, or metamphetamine, was chemically related (but not identical) to amphetamine. On 26 November 1938 the Klinische Wochenschrift listed the drug under the heading New Specialities and stated that its use was an oral stimulant for circulation and the mind (Oral als Kreislauf- und psychischer Stimulans).6 Earlier in the year, the journal had published the first research reports on Pervitin. As usual, these reports heralded a phase of high expectations and enthusiasm for the introduction of a new drug.7 Again, as usual, the research had been done by human self-experimentation and by animal and psychiatric patient drug administration. The chemist Friedrich Hauschild, head of the Temmler research department, took 5 milligrams himself and experienced a sense of stimulation that was similar to, but milder than that provoked by Benzedrin; the effect was also longer lasting.8 Leipzig psychiatrist, Fritz Flgel, tested the drug in the university psychiatric clinic and his results were promising. Using dosages of 34 milligrams, five of ten apathetic patients clearly showed improvement; they rose from their beds and started to talk. Flgel therefore concluded that Pervitin could be helpful for patient care. Of five depressed patients, three improved; however, one became more anxious. The drug was less effective for patients with a mild form of depression than those with severe depression.9 On the basis of these research reports, Temmler recommended a maximum daily dosage of 36 milligrams (12 tablets), and marketed the drug as a physiological and psychological stimulant. Temmler had every reason to be happy with the results of the research, because as a stimulant the drug was of interest for clinical medicine as well as in everyday life. Flgel had made a significant observationthe effect of the drug varied according to the characteristics and psychological states of the people who took the medication. This observation was specifically noted in the Leipzig research. August Bostroem, who moved to the chair of psychiatry in Leipzig in 1939, came to the conclusion that the objective effect of Pervitin was difficult to establish since it varied depending on the person taking the drug, as well as the circumstances.10 This insight into the variability of drug-effects according to an individuals constitution was integral to German medicine and pharmacology.11 Louis Lewin, the doyen of German pharmacology, had called this
4 5

Downloaded from http://shm.oxfordjournals.org/ at Virginia Commonwealth Universtiy on September 14, 2013

Evans 2006, p. 439. Roth in Kudlien (ed.) 1985, pp. 1689. 6 Anon. 1938. 7 Cf. Snelders et al. 2006. 8 Hauschild 1938; Steinkamp in Eckart (ed.) 2007, p. 61.

10 11

Flgel 1938. Bostroem 1941. This was decades before the formulation of the drug, set and setting model that outlines the importance of the psychological state of the user and the social and

Metamphetamine Use in the Third Reich

689

the toxic equation (toxische Gleichung). Each person has a unique biological make-up and psychological complex; therefore, each person reacts to a drug differently, and to a large extent unpredictably.12 The impact of the toxic equation is clearly manifested in the multitude of articles that German medical journals devoted to Pervitin between 1938 and 1943. Research results on the use of Pervitin with psychiatric patients, as well as normal people who wanted to increase their achievement, were never simple to interpret.13 German drug researchers attempted to establish which populations were appropriate for the use of Pervitin and this process of investigation occurred on several levels. Historians have focused on the view of Pervitin use from above, to strengthen the Nazi regime and the war effort, thereby sacrificing the individual view: certainly an important aspect, although in the institutional chaos of Nazi Germany, the exact meaning of the words from above is questionable. At this level, we have to understand the paradox of stimulating drug use and regulating it as characteristic of National Socialist policies. But, we argue that foremost, individual doctors, in civil and military life mediated the use of Pervitin and they were not simply following orders from above. Nor were these doctors only interested in the benefits of Pervitin for the community as a wholethe Volksgemeinschaftdisregarding the consequences for individual users. Following the levels of political authorities and medical doctors, we address the level of individual users, who used the drug for their own purposes; this level is the least documented and hardest to explore. We discuss material culled from available printed sources to suggest the perspective that users are self-motivated actors and not only victims of drug pushers, such as dealers, doctors or governments.

Downloaded from http://shm.oxfordjournals.org/ at Virginia Commonwealth Universtiy on September 14, 2013

Pervitin Pushed from Above?

We contend that doctors in Nazi Germany did not have to be told from above to look for substances that would strengthen individual members of the national Volksgemeinschaft. The Pervitin story is an example of the way doctors worked towards the Fhrer, and thus medicine was an integral part of the structure of the Third Reich.14 For instance, both Flgel and Bostroem were members of the Nazi party, the NSDAP. We do not know to what extent their Nazism was conviction or careerism (both were so-called March violets and had only become members in 1937) or a mixture of both. (We do know that Bostroem, to give him his due, would later try to oppose the Nazis euthanasia programme.)15 In the cultural and political climate of the Third Reich, it appears that doctors must have considered the benefits of a new drug, not only for individuals but for society as well. Here we have a regime and ideology, which exhorted all individuals to maximise their efforts. In a climate of threatening war with other European powers, Pervitin was introduced, as hope for a lasting peace was shattered by Hitlers expansion into Czechoslovakia. And here we have a drug that, compared to caffeine, was a stimulant that appeared to have less negative effects on physical function.16
cultural setting to determine the effects of a drug, which is now central in modern drug research. Cf. Snelders and Kaplan 2002, p. 222. 12 Lewin 1927, pp. 1820. 13 Wunderle 1941.
14

For a recent synthesis of research in this area, see Evans 2006, pp. 4446. Berger 1998, pp. 257, 267. 16 Szakall 1939.
15

690

Stephen Snelders and Toine Pieters

In the optimistic first phase of Pervitins career, it was claimed that with a normal daily intake of 612 milligrams the drug caused no specific damage to humans and its use was not addictive.17 Thus it would have been unusual for doctors not to consider the broader use of Pervitin; for example, improving the function of the German community through chemistry. Doctors played a pivotal role in taking the drug from the medical to the public sphere, not because they were ordered from above, but because they believed this was their role, as expressed by Erich Neumann. In 1939, in collaboration with Temmler, Neumann experimented with Pervitin on his patients in the hospital of Zossen. He noted that Pervitin gave his patients more optimism and joy in life; it strengthened their will and belief (Willen und Glauben). This was of the utmost importance for Nazi Germany, since these were times that demanded maximum energy and achievement from everyone and doctors could use Pervitin to reach this goal for the community.18 The question was not whether the drug was geeignet (suitable) for achieving the goal of maximising achievement. The question was rather which Volksgenossen were suitable for using the drug. Physicians at the University of Konigsberg marketed their research on the effects of Pervitin and Benzedrin using this argument. They considered that in these eventful times of conflict and expansion it was the physicians responsibility to maintain and stimulate individual achievements of a productive German.19 Although research demonstrated that an individuals concentration was sometimes impaired and not always strengthened by the use of Pervitin and that a dosage of two tablets led to excessive nervousness and excitement, the general conclusion was that Pervitin was useful to stimulate a sense of wellbeing, to suppress fatigue and to accelerate the productivity of workers. At first, Pervitin found its way into clinical practice in the treatment of psychological inhibition, endogenous depression (though anxious depression was a contra-indication) and in general to strengthen the will to become healthy (Wille zur Gesundung) in psychiatric patients and those recovering from surgery.20 As usual with psychiatric medication at the time there are no data to demonstrate how extensive the use of the new drug was. However, in 1944, the Leipzig psychiatrist, H. W. Janz, suggested that the use and research of Pervitin was more widespread in German psychiatry than was indicated by the published literature.21 From the clinic, Pervitin moved to general practice and was prescribed for employees, labourers and housewives. It is, however, difficult to see this market expansion as drug pushing from above. True, labour physiologists performed their own experiments on Pervitin. The Kaiser-Wilhelm-Institut fr Arbeitsphysiologie (Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Occupational Physiology) in Dortmund-Mnster showed that people were able to work longer with less fatigue, both mental and physical, and were less inhibited in their work habits, though their concentration did not always improve.22 There is no evidence of large-scale attempts to provide the drug to labourers or employees in key industries, whatever the prescription practices of individual GPs or psychiatrists might have been.
17 18 19

Downloaded from http://shm.oxfordjournals.org/ at Virginia Commonwealth Universtiy on September 14, 2013

Forst 1939. Neumann 1939, p. 1266. Lemmel and Hartwig 1940, p. 626. 20 Warstedt 1938; Speckmann 1939; Flrcken 1939; Seifert 1939. For general reviews of the period

literature on Pervitin, see Janz 1944, pp. 914; Bonhoff and Laurenz 1954. Janz 1944, p. 9. 22 Lehmann et al. 1939; Graf 1939.
21

Metamphetamine Use in the Third Reich

691

Blitzkrieg Speed?
Can we speak of a drug pushing from above when it comes to Pervitin use in the German Wehrmacht? A recent historian of amphetamines writes: The German Blitzkrieg was powered by amphetamines as much as it was powered by machine.23 This statement seems exaggerated and sensationalist. It is true that military experiments on the effects of Pervitin on soldiers and officers had already started in 1938. A key figure was Otto Ranke, an SA-member (Sturmabteilung), Berlin professor and Leiter of the Institut fr Allgemeine und Wehrphysiologie of the Militrrztliche Akademie (the Academy for Military Medicine) in Berlin.24 In his publications, Ranke stressed the importance of Pervitin to stimulate soldiers who were mentally exhausted (die Wichtigkeit zum Hochreissen eines vorwiegend geistig ermdenden Truppe).25 But despite the German military commands continuing interest in experiments with Pervitin and other stimulants, pleas by Ranke and other military physicians for a systematic experiment to provide the drug to combat units on a large scale went unheeded.26 It is also true that between April and July 1940, the Wehrmacht and Luftwaffe bought 35 million tablets of Pervitin and Isophan (a metamphetamine produced by Temmlers competitor Knoll in Ingelheim). But in fact, the army health inspectors gave specific instructions to medical officers not to administer the drugs too often.27 The same was true for the 29 million tablets delivered to the Wehrmacht between April and December 1941, after the invasion of the Soviet Union involving a German invasion force of three million soldiers.28 The actual practice of administration and use is likely to have depended on factors other than orders from above, such as the willingness of medical officers to prescribe the drug analogous to the willingness of general practitioners to do so in civilian life. We must add here that it was precisely the medical officers who were prone to taking Pervitin in the Blitzkrieg against France because of their easy access to the drug as was documented in one army group, the Heeresgruppe von Kleist (Army Group von Kleist). Another determining factor was the availability of metamphetamines in illegal markets to which soldiers had access, since Pervitin had become a prescription drug in November 1939. The high military command was reluctant to support widespread use of Pervitin due to their sensitivity to the toxic equation. Not every soldier functioned better on Pervitin, and a tank division commander who had a heart attack after taking one tablet was not a furtherance of the war effort.29 In short, both in the military as well as in civil life the extent of the use of Pervitin does not appear to have been decreed from above. In the Wehrmacht, consumers and prescribers had an agenda of their own. Drugging soldiers and officers with Pervitin may not have been a concerted campaign from above, but in emergencies medical officers resorted to this action. Steinkamp, who performed extensive research in German military archives, quoted the report of a medical officer from January 1942. In a group of 500 soldiers at the Eastern Front, encircled by Russian troops, those near exhaustion and barely able to fight were given two tablets
23 24

Downloaded from http://shm.oxfordjournals.org/ at Virginia Commonwealth Universtiy on September 14, 2013

Rasmussen 2008b, p. 54. For Ranke, see Klee 2007, p. 479. 25 Szakall 1939, p. 1345. 26 Steinkamp in Eckart (ed.) 2007, p. 65. For experiments with Pervitin during the war, see Kemper in Pieper (ed.) n.d.; Nldeke in Pieper (ed.) n.d.

27 28

Steinkamp in Eckart (ed.) 2007, p. 65. Stephens 2007, p. 18. 29 Steinkamp in Eckart (ed.) 2007, p. 66.

692

Stephen Snelders and Toine Pieters

of Pervitin and were able to participate in combat again. The troops broke out of the encirclement. Many of them even became euphoric during the fighting (Bei manchen zeigte sich eine leicht euphorische Stimmung).30 Pervitin demonstrated its value not only in combat situations. After the German capitulation at Stalingrad, a severely wounded German soldier, who was marched to a prisoner camp at minus 38 degrees with little to eat, managed to survive with the help of his Pervitin: Ultimately I walked as if in trance, my wounded legs moved automatically, I didnt feel the cold anymore, nor hunger and thirst.31 Soldiers also requested Pervitin in less extreme situations. Panzer Captain Hans von Luck, transferring from Russia to the Africa Corps in January 1942, told his driver: Well drive without stopping until were out of Russia. Well relieve each other every 100 kilometres, swallow Pervitin and stop only for fuel.32 Here Germans had their own agenda and reasons for taking Pervitin. Therefore, it is rather one-sided to state, as one historian has done, that nearly every single user in the army had to pay for Temmlers greed of profit and the medical officers struggle to aid the war effort by means of medication.33

Downloaded from http://shm.oxfordjournals.org/ at Virginia Commonwealth Universtiy on September 14, 2013

Regulation
In the early phase of German research it had become clear that Pervitin was not suitable for everyone. The drug then entered a new phase of disappointment and concern about social and individual side-effects (this phase generally overlaps the initial phase of enthusiasm).34 It is hardly surprising that not everybody in German health care was happy with the introduction of Praline chocolate containing 14 milligrams of Pervitinmore than double the advised daily dosage. In November 1939, Pervitin and Benzedrin became prescription drugs.35 Pervitin slowly entered the phase of mounting concern and disillusionment about side-effects and dangers of addiction. Historians have identified a speech by Leonardo Conti, the Reichsgesundheitsfhrer (Reich Health Leader) of the NSDAP, in March 1940, as a key factor in this process. Conti warned against the liberal administration of Pervitin for fatigue.36 However, it is hard to see why this position should have led to Pervitin being made an illicit substance under the drug law, which was decreed by the Reich Minister of the Interior on 12 June 1941 and came into effect on 1 July.37 Was this a health measure, the result of heightening concerns about the addictive potential of metamphetamine, as has been argued by historians?38 Pivotal in their argument is an article by Ernst Speer published at that time in the Deutsches Aerzteblatt (German Aerzteblatt), in which he outlined the serious dangers of Pervitin use and argued for its elimination from psychiatry. But Speer was not a person of high standing in the German medical community; he held no academic position, but was a psychotherapist with a private practice (as well as a member of the NSDAP and a nephew of Albert

30

Quoted in Steinkamp in Eckart (ed.) 2007, p. 69. Translation: Many showed a lightly euphoric mood. 31 Quoted in Bonhoff and Laurenz 1954, p. 125. 32 Von Luck 1991, p. 84. 33 Steinkamp in Eckart (ed.) 2007, p. 71.

34 35 36

Cf. Snelders et al. 2006. Roth in Kudlien (ed.) 1985, pp. 1701. Quoted in Roth in Kudlien (ed.) 1985, p. 171. 37 Bonhoff and Laurenz 1954, p. 62. 38 See, for example, Roth in Kudlien (ed.) 1985.

Metamphetamine Use in the Third Reich

693

Speer).39 His article was not based on published literature or on his own experience.40 Other doctors remained sceptical about the Pervitin problem and Pervitin addiction in particular. It was noted that only a few cases of addiction were reported before Pervitin was placed under the drug law.41 Doctors discussed whether the growing number of cases, reported only after July 1941, had more to do with the psychopathic personality characteristics of the users than with the drug itself.42 After all, it was generally accepted that users could not become addicted unless they had certain hereditary traits or a psychological imbalance due to life events.43 Should Pervitin not be kept far away from psychopaths and its administration limited to overburdened individuals who did not do their duty (nicht pflichtbewusste berlasteten Menschen) and needed incentive to get through their working life?44 As late as 1944, Janz was not convinced by Speers arguments against Pervitin. He claimed that Pervitin abuse did not lead to the sort of personality changes that occurred with alcohol, cocaine, opium or hashish abuse.45 It seems more likely that Pervitin was placed under the drug law, not because of health policy reasons, but because of a perceived threat to the public order, and that the addiction problem was a convenient argument. Steinkamp has uncovered evidence that in the spring of 1941, Berlin police discovered a wholesaler drugstore dealer who was illegally buying large amounts of Pervitin, which he then sold to drug stores, private consumers and a brothel (Pervitin was helpful for frigidity).46 Based on the idea that Pervitin is useful for some people, but not to others and that control should be maintained by doctors, placing Pervitin under the drug laws was a logical step and not a rejection of the drug an sich by the Germans. After all, according to the testimonies of the Fhrers SS guards even his personal physician dosed him heavily with injections of Vitamultin, a compound including Pervitin and caffeine.47 However, as Hitlers biographer, Ian Kershaw, writes, it cannot be proven that he was dependent on the injections nor that they affected his behaviour.48

Downloaded from http://shm.oxfordjournals.org/ at Virginia Commonwealth Universtiy on September 14, 2013

Pervitin Users
Whether controlled by doctors or not, whether obtained by prescription or not, the use of Pervitin was an unquantifiable but undeniable part of everyday life in Nazi Germany. It is probable that production figures remained fairly constant from 1941 to 1944, although these figures are not reliable.49 As we argue, we doubt whether the users were only victims of an iatrogenic or Nazigenic epidemic. Clearly users had their own reasons for taking Pervitinreasons that have left few written accounts apart from psychiatric and medical records. Future researchers may discover and investigate these records in the archives of clinics and hospitals, but even from printed sources we can glimpse Pervitins use in German everyday life.
39 40

Klee 2007, p. 590. Bonhoff and Laurenz 1954, p. 63. 41 Dittmar 1942. 42 See, for example, Kalus et al. 1942. 43 Staehelin 1941. 44 Bostroem 1941. 45 Janz 1944, pp. 9, 12. On the discussions, also compare Fernandes 1950. 46 Steinkamp in Eckart (ed.) 2007, p. 68.

47 48 49

Eberle and Uhl (eds) 2005, p. 488. Kershaw 2001, p. 728. T. Holzer mentions figures of 7.5 million tablets in 1941, 9 million in 1942 and 1943, and 8 million in 1944, half of which were for military purposes. Cf. Lewy 2008, p. 149. But these figures contrast with the far higher figures for military production mentioned by Steinkamp in Eckart (ed.) 2007, p. 65.

694

Stephen Snelders and Toine Pieters

Soon after the introduction of Pervitin we notice a spill-over from medical experiments to unauthorised appropriation of the drug by lay people for their own ends (the first reports are from 1939). Neumann reported that Pervitin had become a favourite drug of 12 people he knew outside of the hospital where he did his experiments; most were academics. One lady used the drug at social events, another one on busy working days.50 The lady who used the drug to get through her social life reminds us of Sigmund Freud taking cocaine in Paris to be more at ease during social gatherings held by his teacher, CharcotA little cocaine to untie my tongue.51 We also notice that Neumanns acquaintances took rather high doses of 1218 milligrams per day. The possibilities of Pervitin were not lost on the students of Otto Ranke at the Militrrtzliche Akademie (Military Medical Academy) in Berlin, who had volunteered to take part in his experiments with Pervitin, Benzedrin and caffeine from April to May 1939. The medical officer trainees realised that metamphetamine was very useful for them when preparing for and taking exams. Ranke reported that a considerable number of cadets took Pervitin either from doctors samples or purchased in pharmacies.52 In 1942, the price of 30 tablets of Pervitin was 1,74 Reichsmarks (RM), and for 200 tablets 7,03 RM, so the drug was affordable.53 Doctors were especially prone to Pervitin use and abuse, not only because of their easy access to the drug, but because they could and would use the drug in work situations; they could work through the night without getting sleepy, reported one experimenter.54 Doctors and doctor trainees did not have supply problems that arose when Pervitin became a prescription drug. Pervitin use among medical students also generated some problems. Both Ranke and Friedrich Plattner, the Vienna professor of physiology and SS Colonel (SS-Standartenfhrer), observed that some students failed their exams because of their heavy intake of Pervitin.55 This was only the tip of the iceberg. People reported Pervitin use when things went wrong, students failed their exams, tank division commanders got heart attacks or patients required help from psychiatrists. When things worked out with the help of the drug there was no need to generate a report. Only a tiny number of users came to the attention of the criminal justice system after July 1941. The Institut fr gerichtliche Medizin und Krimininalistik (Institute for Judicial Medicine and Criminology) in Berlin counted 16 patients who were addicted to Pervitin among the total of 66 drug addicts present in its clinic. In 1942, the statistics of the Reichszentrale zur Bekmpfung von Rauschvergiften (Central Drugs Agency) of the Reichskriminalpolizei or Kripo (Criminal Investigation Department) registered 84 Pervitin addictsa small number compared to the 2,384 morphine addicts registered since 1933. The number of reported cases can only have been a small fraction of the extensive use of Pervitin in German society. Millions of tablets were available; doctors continued to prescribe the drug both in civil and in military life, and we are aware of an illegal market. By the time Pervitin was placed under the drug law in July 1941, Germany occupied the greater part of Europe, and metamphetamine was produced under various brand names in other countries to which the German

Downloaded from http://shm.oxfordjournals.org/ at Virginia Commonwealth Universtiy on September 14, 2013

50 51

Neumann 1939, p. 1267. Freud 1974, p. 161. 52 Cited in Steinkamp in Eckart (ed.) 2007, p. 62. 53 Pieper (ed.) n.d., vol. 1, p. 125.

54

Mller-Bonn 1939, p. 1317; quoted in Kemper in Pieper (ed.) n.d, p. 125. 55 Steinkamp in Eckart (ed.) 2007, pp. 623. For Plattner, see Klee 2007, p. 464.

Metamphetamine Use in the Third Reich

695

military, and therefore smugglers and dealers, had access. For instance, in the Netherlands, Pervitin was produced and sold under the brand name Neo-Pharmedrine, and only became a prescription drug on 1 September 1942 and was not placed under the Dutch opium law.56 In December 1942, an article in the Dutch Journal of Medicine reported that Pervitin abuse was more general in the Netherlands than often assumed. How seductive the advertisement that accompanies these substances is, becomes clear from the fact that a young pharmacologist told me that he uses Pervitin when he is tired, one doctor wrote.57 Whether taken by prescription or obtained illegally, many people had knowledge of and access to Pervitin and used it for their own ends: to increase their self-confidence (as Selbstbewusstseinsdroge) or to become stimulated and wide awake (as Aufverpulferungsmittel).58 Germans used it to overcome inhibitions and fatigue and to reach a state of hyperalertness (Ueberwachheit), as Berlin psychiatrist J. Zutt described the effect of the drug. As in any drug ecstasy, Pervitin reduced users sense of passing time by increasing their interest in events around them and their own activities. Thus, an individuals wellbeing was integrated with increasing achievementsmediating individual interests and duties demanded by society. However, there were also psychological dangers from Pervitin use. According to psychiatrist Zutt, while taking Pervitin a bright light (helles Licht) shone upon the users environment; but when the intensity of the light and the scope of the experience (Intensitt, der Helle, der Weite der Erlebnisse) became unbearable, fear and anxiety threatened.59 Psychiatric reports document people such as housewives and mothers, employees and labourers, doctors and academics who could no longer tolerate Pervitin. These reports indicate that Pervitin use was not limited to one social class or sub-culture, but must have been endemic in German society as a whole as the following cases demonstrate. On her own initiative, a 28-year-old woman started taking two tablets a day to manage the fatigue of her profession.60 We meet a 27-year-old, successful male employee at a foreign chemical institute, who for one year conquered his feelings of general misery by taking 69 tablets daily.61 The labourer Th. St., 25 years old, received Pervitin to speed up his work on the assembly line. The widow A.L., aged 42, took Pervitin, with initial success, to function as a housewife. The zest for life of a married housewife and mother A.K., aged 48, was restored with Pervitin, although her daughter warned her physician that she swallowed the pills as if they were chocolate.62 Herr Doktor M. was a 56 year-old physician with an extensive medical practice in addition to his scientific work and air-raid civil defence work. In the winter of 193940 he resorted to self-medication with Pervitin to relieve his stress and to stimulate his sexual appetite.63 And as a final example, Frulein K., 24 years old, had a leading role in the Bund Deutscher Mdel, the girls Nazi youth organisation, and used Pervitin to relieve the headaches, diminished appetite and insomnia that her work stress had caused; she became motivated and euphoric.64
56 57

Downloaded from http://shm.oxfordjournals.org/ at Virginia Commonwealth Universtiy on September 14, 2013

Anon. 1941. Knoppers 1942, p. 3227. 58 Staehelin 1941, p. 598. 59 Zutt 1943. 60 Stieda 1939.

61 62 63

Greving 1941. Kramer 1941. Daube 1941, p. 23. 64 Daube 1941, p. 21.

696

Stephen Snelders and Toine Pieters

We also note that Pervitin was used not only for survival in civil life or war, but also for fun in Germany at the time. Some users experienced sexual stimulation and other used the drug to party longer and with more joy.65 Again, we know this from reported cases when things went wrong. For example, take two young people at a dance party in 1939, one of whom took 60 milligrams, the other 200 milligrams of Pervitin together with alcohol. The 200-milligram consumer suffered after-effects of excitement for 55 hours, despite taking a downer (Veronal).66 Another example is an officer who died of a heart attack in 1941 after consuming Pervitin at a party (Herrenabend).67 These cases illustrate only a small portrait of partying on Pervitin in Nazi Germany. Finally, intellectual forerunners of the 1960s counter-culture discussed the value of Pervitin to create a more evolved human being. In 1942, the writer and physician Gottfried Benn wrote of a Religionsphysiologie (religious physiology). A superior brain was not created with milk or water, but with alkaloids, therefore Pervitin should not be given to bomber pilots or bunker builders, but given to students in higher education. Many people would reject this idea, Benn wrote, but it was natural progress for humanity.68 Given his ideas, Benn was far-out and most of his contemporaries found him hard to understand, excluding a few intellectuals who enjoyed experimenting with drugs, such as the writer, Ernst Jnger.69

Downloaded from http://shm.oxfordjournals.org/ at Virginia Commonwealth Universtiy on September 14, 2013

Conclusion
We will not follow Pervitins career after 1945, only noting that it remained part of German drug consumption until the 1960s.70 Here we have modified a top-down view on the uses of metamphetamine in the Third Reich by adding a bottom-up approachderiving a users perspective from available sources. Our material suggests that Pervitin was not a drug pushed on the German people in the Third Reich by a totalitarian regime. Nor was Pervitin use solely a question of sacrificing the individual to the demands of the Nazi Volksgemeinschafta position which negates the role of the demand side in determining drug use in society. It is true that the history of Pervitin shows the central role of medicine in introducing and mediating drug use in public spheres. But in our view this is not sufficient reason to speak of an iatrogenic epidemic. Pervitin use became endemic because of the various and malleable functions of the drug in peoples everyday lives: whether housewives, labourers or employees getting through the day, soldiers bent on survival, or teenagers and brothel visitors looking for recreation. People were not passive recipients of drugs, but had their own reasons and agendas that created demand. To many German users in civil and military life, the drug was of help in getting them through everyday life or through crisis situations. Pervitin made life more interesting to them, without disturbing the social fabric. Metamphetamines were one of the multiple ambiguities of Nazi Germany as reactions to Pervitin use were never clear-cut.71 Excessive use, especially for purposes of recreation
65 66

Cf. Bonhoff and Laurenz 1954. Issekutz in Pieper (ed.) n.d. 67 Steinkamp in Eckart (ed.) 2007, p. 66. 68 Benn 1957, p. 145. 69 Cf. Jnger 1978, p. 47.

70

Cf. Fernandes 1950; Von Keyserlingk 1951; Bonhoff and Laurenz 1954; Dobroschke 1955; Briesen 2007, p. 161. 71 Cf. Peukert 1987.

Metamphetamine Use in the Third Reich

697

or when leading to addiction, was frowned upon and led to regulation. But there was little moral panic and outrage over the pervasive use of Pervitin in society, apart from some concern about addiction. In Nazi Germany, researchers were sensitive to the role of the toxic equation in determining drug effects, and keen to establish where the drug could be applied constructively. In addition, Germans had more important things than the side effects of Pervitin to worry about during the war. True, authorities took legal measures to control the distribution of Pervitin, but these had to do with Pervitin appearing in illegal markets and outside of the control of the state or medical profession. Therefore, we can identify ambiguities on two levels. First, that of the state or the state administrations, including medical administrations, who on the one hand promoted a beneficial use of the drug, and on the other hand, regulated undesirable use. Second, ambiguities on the level of individual users, who increased their sense of well-being with the drug, while at the same time increasing their level of achievement in a society which threatened their well-being in the first place. Despite these ambiguities, it seems clear that Pervitin use was prevalent throughout German society, as far as we can judge, from the Fhrer to the captives at Stalingrad. But endemic as it may have been, this drug use never threatened the political or social structures of the Third Reich. Metamphetamine use in Nazi Germany was not simply Nazigenic or iatrogenic. Using a comparative perspective, we suggest that the amphetamine use in other countries deserves a broader analytical framework than the one-sided iatrogenic concept. What we need is a bottom-up approach to adequately study the demand side together with the supply side of a specific political economy of drugs. National Socialist Germany provides us with an example of how Western societies, before the 1960s, were not drug-free, but rather societies where psychotropic drugs were highly integrated in everyday life, although still culturally ambiguous. In this sense, the story of the development and diffusion of amphetamines and metamphetamines is a reversal of the story of the 1960s and 1970swhen uppers and downers were perceived as threats to the political and moral order and received almost universal public condemnation.

Downloaded from http://shm.oxfordjournals.org/ at Virginia Commonwealth Universtiy on September 14, 2013

Bibliography
Primary sources
Anon. 1938, Neue Spezialitten, Klinische Wochenschrift, 17, 1711. Anon. 1941, Berichten, Pharmaceutisch Weekblad, 78, 10578. Benn G. 1957, Provoziertes Leben, in Benn G., Provoziertes Leben. Eine Auswahl aus den Prosaschriften, West-Berlin: Ullstein, 13848. Bonhoff G. and Laurenz H. 1954, Ueber Weckamine (Pervitin und Benzedrin), Berlin: Springer Verlag. Bostroem A. 1941, Zur Frage der Pervitin-Verordnung, Mnchener Medizinische Wochenschrift, 88, 4901. Daube H. 1941, Pervitinpsychosen, Der Nervenarzt, 14, 205. Dittmar F. 1942, Pervitinsucht und acute Pervitinsintoxikation, Deutsche Medizinische Wochenschrift, 68, 2668. Dobroschke C. 1955, Das Suchtproblem der Nachkriegszeit. Eine klinische Statistik, Deutsche Medizinische Wochenschrift, 80, 11845. Eberle H. and Uhl M. (eds) 2005, Das Buch Hitler, Bergisch Gladbach: Bastei. Fernandes A. 1950, Das Pervitin unter dem Opiumgesetz, unpublished MD thesis, University of Halle. Flrcken H. 1939, Zeitschriftenbersicht, Mnchener Medizinische Wochenschrift, 86, 1763.

698

Stephen Snelders and Toine Pieters

Flgel F. E. 1938, Medikamentse Beeinflussung psychischer Hemmungszustnde, Klinische Wochenschrift, 17, 12868. Forst A. W. 1939, Frage-Kasten, Mnchener Medizinische Wochenschrift, 86, 1440. Graf O. 1939, Ueber den Einfluss von Pervitin auf einige psychische und psychomotorische Funktionen, Arbeitsphysiologie, 10, 692705. Greving H. 1941, Psychopathologische und krperliche Vorgnge bei jahrelangem Pervitinmissbrauch, Der Nervenarzt, 14, 395405. Hauschild F. 1938, Tierexperimentelles ber eine peroral wirksame zentralanalytische Substanz mit peripherer Kreislaufwirkung, Klinische Wochenschrift, 17, 12578. Issekutz B. n.d., Vergiftung durch Pervitin, in Pieper W. (ed.), Nazis on Speed. Drogen im 3. Reich, 2 vols, Alte Schmiede: Werner Pieper and Die Grne Kraft, vol. 2, 4324. Janz H. W. 1944, Fortschritte der Pharmakotherapie in der Neurologie und Psychiatrie, Fortschritte der Neurologie, 17, 114, 3980. Jnger E. 1978, Annherungen. Drogen und Rausch, Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta. Kalus F., Kucher I. and Zutt J. 1942, Ueber Psychosen bei chronischem Pervitinmissbrauch, Der Nervenartz, 15, 31324. Knoppers A. T. 1942, Over de wekamines (amphetamine, Pervitine en dergelijke), Nederlandsch Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunde, 86, 32238. Kramer E. 1941, Die Pervitingefahr, Mnchener Medizinische Wochenschrift, 88, 41921. Lehmann G., Straub H. and Szkall A. 1939, Pervitin als leistungssteigernder Mittel, Arbeitsphysiologie, 10, 68091. Lemmel G. and Hartwig J. 1940, Untersuchungen ber die Wirkung von Pervitin und Benzedrin auf psychischem Gebiet, Deutsches Archiv fr Klinische Medizin, 185, 62639. Lewin L. 1927, Phantastica. Die betubenden und erregenden Genussmittel, Berlin: Georg Stilke. Mller-Bonn H. 1939, Pervitin, ein neues Analepticum, Die Medizinische Welt, 13, 131517. Neumann E. 1939, Bemerkungen ber Pervitin, Mnchener Medizinische Wochenschrift, 86, 12667. Seifert W. 1939, Wirkungen des 1-Phenyl-2-methylamino-propan (Pervitin) am Menschen, Deutsche Medizinische Wochenschrift, 65, 6823. Speckmann K. 1939, Ueber therapeutische Versuche mit Pervitin (Temmler), einem neuen Krper aus der Reihe der biogenen Amine, Nervenarzt, 12, 3507. Staehelin J. E. 1941, Pervitin-Psychose, Zeitschrift fr die gesamte Neurologie und Psychiatrie, 173, 598620. Stieda H. 1939, Untersttzung therapeutischer und phsyikomechanischer Massnahmen, Deutsche Medizinische Wochenschrift, 65, 6823. Szakall A. 1939, Die Leistungsgrenze der Muskelarbeit unter der Einwerkung von Ephedrinderivaten (Pervitin), Mnchener Medizinische Wochenschrift, 86, 13446. Von Keyserlingk H. 1951, Ueber eine pervitinschtigen, stimmungsabnormalen Schwindler, Deutsche Zeitschrift fr gerichtliche Medizin, 40, 47284. Von Luck H. 1991, Panzer Commander: The Memoires of Colonel Hans von Luck, New York: Dell. Warstedt M. 1938, Ueber therapeutische Versuche mit einem zentral wirksamen Analepticum bei psychischen Erkrankungen (Pervitin), Wiener Medizinische Wochenschrift, 88, 122730. Wunderle F. 1941, Experimental-psychologische Untersuchungen ber die Wirkung des Pervitin auf geistige Leistungen, Archiv fr Psychiatrie und Nervenkrankheiten, 3, Heft, 50449. Zutt J. 1943, Ueber die polare Struktur des Bewusstseins. Durch psychiatrische Erfahrungen mit Pervitin angeregtes Gedanken, Der Nervenarzt, 16, 14562.

Downloaded from http://shm.oxfordjournals.org/ at Virginia Commonwealth Universtiy on September 14, 2013

Secondary sources
Berger G. 1998, Die Beratenden Psychiater des deutschen Heeres 1939 bis 1945, Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. Briesen D. 2007, Drogenkonsum und Drogenpolitik in Deutschland und den USA. Ein historischer Vergleich, Frankfurt: Campus.

Metamphetamine Use in the Third Reich

699

Courtwright D. T. 2002, Forces of Habit: Drugs and the Making of the Modern World, Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Davenport-Hines R. 2004, The Pursuit of Oblivion: A Social History of Drugs, London: Phoenix. Evans R. J. 2006, The Third Reich in Power 19331939, London: Penguin. Freud S. 1974, Cocaine Papers, New York: New American Library. Jackson C. O. 1976, Before the Drug Culture: Barbiturate/Amphetamine Abuse in American Society, Clio Medica, 11, 4758. Kemper W. R. n.d., PervitinDie Endsieg-Droge?, in Pieper W. (ed.), Nazis on Speed. Drogen im 3. Reich, 2 vols, Alte Schmiede: Werner Pieper and Die Grne Kraft, vol. 1, 12233. Kershaw I. 2001, Hitler 193645: Nemesis, London: Penguin. Klee E. 2007, Das Personenlexikon zum Dritten Reich. Wer war was vor und nach 1945, Frankfurt am Main: Fischer Taschenbuch Verlag. Lewy J. 2008, The Drug Policy of the Third Reich, The Social History of Alcohol and Drugs, 22, 14467. Mach H. 2002, Exclusion and Extinction: The Fight against Narcotics in the Third Reich, Journal of Drug Issues, 32, 37994. Nldeke H. n.d., Einsatz von leistungssteigernden Medikamenten, in Pieper W. (ed.), Nazis on Speed. Drogen im 3. Reich, 2 vols, Alte Schmiede: Werner Pieper and Die Grne Kraft, vol. 1, 13442. Nouvel P. 2009, Histoire des amphtamines, Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. Peukert D. J. K. 1987, Inside Nazi Germany: Conformity, Opposition, and Racism in Everyday Life, New Haven: Yale University Press. Pieper W. (ed.) n.d., Nazis on Speed. Drogen im 3. Reich, 2 vols, Alte Schmiede: Werner Pieper and Die Grne Kraft. Rasmussen N. 2008a, Americas First Amphetamine Epidemic 19291971: A Quantitative and Qualitative Retrospective with Implications for the Present, American Journal of Public Health, 98, 97485. Rasmussen N. 2008b, On Speed: The Many Lives of Amphetamine, New York: New York University Press. Roth K. H. 1985, Leistungsmedizin: Das Beispiel Pervitin, in Kudlien F. (ed.), Aerzte im Nationalsozialismus, Kln: Kiepenheuer and Witsch, 16774. Snelders S. and Kaplan C. 2002, LSD Therapy in Dutch Psychiatry: Changing Socio-Political Settings and Medical Sets, Medical History, 46, 22140. Snelders S., Kaplan C. and Pieters T. 2006, On Cannabis, Chloral Hydrate, and Career Cycles of Psychotropic Drugs in Medicine, Bulletin of the History of Medicine, 80, 95114. Steinkamp P. 2007, Pervitin (Metamphetamine) Tests, Use and Misuse in the German Wehrmacht, in Eckart W. U. (ed.), Man, Medicine, and the State: The Human Body as an Object of Government Sponsored Medical Research in the Twentieth Century, Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag, 6171. Stephens R. P. 2007, Germans on Drugs: The Complications of Modernization in Hamburg, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Tone A. 2007, Tranquilizers on Trial, in Tone A. and Watkins E. S. (eds), Medicating Modern America: Prescription Drugs in History, New York: New York University Press.

Downloaded from http://shm.oxfordjournals.org/ at Virginia Commonwealth Universtiy on September 14, 2013