RUNNING HEADER: HUMAN HOODWINKING

Human Hoodwinking: A Dissection of Medical Ethics in Human Experimentation

J. Hunter Anderson
First Colonial High School
Legal Studies Academy

HUMAN HOODWINKING

2
Abstract

This research paper is a scholarly assessment of the current state of legislation involving human
rights in human experimentation. The author first discusses the worldwide history of human
experimentation pinpointing the Nuremburg Trials of Nazi doctors. Subsequently, the author
transitions into narrowing the historical human experiments to only the United States, including
the Tuskegee Syphilis Study and the CIA operation MKULTRA. The third main talking point
breaks down the issue of informed consent including multiple court cases in which the topic is
discusses. The next area of dialogue involves the informed consent of children including the
Glasko-Smith-Kline trials on orphans in Argentina and the AIDS drug experiments on foster
children in New York. The final talking point talks over the informed consent in international
policy, specifically when developing countries are involved and when countries adopt a
communal consent policy instead of allowing individual consent to experimentation.

HUMAN HOODWINKING

Human Hoodwinking: A Dissection of Medical Ethics in Human Experimentation

Probing the human body and mind, the darkest side of science. The term darkness being
used to illuminate the fact that much of what is considered to be common knowledge regarding
this science is non-existent. Taking a closer look at human experimentation shows the blatant
misuse of human trust and weakness. Human experimentation has been a part of society since the
dawn of man. Humanity uses the experiments to learn the enigmas of our own being. Dating
back to Ancient Greek civilization (approximately 500 B.C.), the formation of testing and
analysis on humans has been driven by the pursuit of knowledge. This is also the period where
some of the first medical ethical codes started to be established. Hippocrates, the father of
medicine and medical ethics, preached the first law of all medical professional, Primum non
nocere. The translation means First do no harm. This long standing law of medical codes,
now called the Hippocratic Oath, has been the cornerstone for the standards of human safety in
medical situations (International Wellness Directory, 2004).
Now within the last century, breaches of these codes have mutated into a question of
informed consent. Dating back to the early 19th century, people have given their consent to the
testing to find vaccines and treatments for various diseases (smallpox, tuberculosis, yellow fever,
etc.). For the sake of progress, the people volunteered to undergo testing knowing the dangers.
Informed consent has become an issue as of late, due largely in part to massive human
experimentation in World War II and the Cold War, where the normal medical codes were
forgone to promote a different agenda of personal gain for the countries involved. This includes
children who are too young to make a decision for themselves. Within the medical community,
the continuous exploitation of fellow human beings has become a point of mass scrutiny. The
new issue facing many within the medical community is defining and documenting informed

HUMAN HOODWINKING

consent, not only within the country that is sponsoring the research, but also within the country
where the test subjects are being supplied. For many moons, in the name of progress, science has
been given the benefit of the public being blind to their nefarious deeds. The new age is dawning
and the blind are starting to see. The exposures of the continuous exploitations of fellow human
beings has become a point of mass scrutiny within the medical community (International
Wellness Directory, 2004). The future of experimentation involving humans themselves is fast
approaching the day of reckoning and now tread carefully. Human experiments must define and
document the informed consent from every party involved, meeting the requirements in each.
Failure to document informed consent puts every faction involved at risk.
A History of Human Experimentation
Humans have been testing the limitations of the human body and mind for centuries.
With the advancement of civilization, some testing has become immoral, abusive, and even
barbaric. From research for creating the perfect human to eradicating diseases, the use of humans
in research has become a point of scrutiny. A quick look at the recent past of such
experimentation will articulate just why new safeguards are being put in place to save the
morality of the human race.
International Human Experimentation
One of the most prolific and horrific example of human experimentation in the entire
world comes from the World War II era in Nazi controlled Germany. The experimentation took
place in predominantly the death camps set up by the Axis powers. These experiments conducted
on mostly people who were considered inferior by the Aryan standards. However, one of the
most renowned test subjects used by the Nazis were the studies they conducted on twins. Nazi

HUMAN HOODWINKING

scientists were able to learn massive amounts of information by performing lobotomies and other
cruel experiments like injecting blue dye into the eyes of subjects trying to create artificial blue
eyes. To make matters worse, the subjects were disposed of after their usefulness had expired,
mostly in mass graves or in the human incinerators (Katz, 1993). Once the war ended, these
atrocities did not go unnoticed. The world came together and conducted the Nuremburg trials,
which put many high ranking Nazi on trial for war crimes. The trials produced seven principles.
Principle Six, Subsection C, has a particular importance because it discusses crimes against
humanity. It states:
Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation and other inhumane acts done against
any civilian population, or persecutions on political, racial, or religious grounds, when
such acts are done or such persecutions are carried on in execution of or in connection
with any crime against peace or any war crime (Nuremburg Academy, n.d.).
Principle Seven follows stating that the crimes against humanity are crimes in
international law. These landmark principles established that human experimentation with a
disregard for its impact on human life, is a crime of humanity, and therefore, by association it is
punishable by international laws. The Nuremburg Codes most powerful statement comes at the
beginning stating, The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential"
(International Wellness Directory, 2004).
History of State-side Human Experimentation
The United States has had a fair amount of human experimentation that occurred over the
years that has been nothing short of controversial. From discrimination of races, age, mental

HUMAN HOODWINKING

capacity, and imprisonment, the United States tends to experiment on those that they view as
subpar in comparison with the rest the general public.
Tuskegee Syphilis Study
One such incident is the infamous Tuskegee Syphilis Study that started in 1932. This
study was conducted to study the effects of syphilis on the human body until death. Originally
meant to last around six months, this forty yearlong study had researchers tell over 600 men that
they were being treated for bad blood. In reality, they were not receiving proper treatment even
after penicillin, a drug that can effectively combat syphilis was introduced in the medical world,
the scientists did not offer the drug or even allowed the subjects a chance to quit the study. In the
end, there was little knowledge gained and the US Government took a $10 million settlement hit
from the living patients in 1974 (CDC, 2013).
CIAs MKULTRA Experiments
In 1953 the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) commenced Project MKULTRA, an
eleven year research program designed to produce and test drugs and biological agents that
would be used for mind control and behavior modification (International Wellness Directory,
2004). In the eighty establishments that participated in the study, six of the subprojects they
focused on testing the mind altering agents on unknowing individuals. Recently declassified CIA
documents elucidate the ability to create multiple personalities in multiple test subjects, who
could be put in a hypnotic trance as a response to a specific stimulus and were able to transfer the
hypnotic control of the test subject from one person to another without affecting the hypnotic
state. They concluded that that the test subjects can be unknowingly used as a messenger to

HUMAN HOODWINKING

deliver information to the operatives while under the hypnotic trance they can create
(International Wellness Directory, 2004) .
MKULTRA was thrust into the spotlight as a result of a woman who was a victim of the
mind control experiments she underwent. Linda MacDonalds treatment regimen included,
involved intensive application of these brainwashing techniques; drug disinhibition, prolonged
sleep treatment, and prolonged isolation, combined with ECT [Electro Convulsive Therapy]
treatments (International Wellness Directory, 2004). To make matters worse, the ECT that Dr.
Ewen Cameron oversaw presented approximately 76.5 times the maximum amount that was
recommended. MacDonald suffered brain damage that gave her irreversible amnesia that caused
her to forget everything from her birth to her current state. She lost complete control and
essentially ended up with the same mental understanding as that of a newborn. Eight plaintiffs
collected $750,000 from reaching a settlement out of court for the experiments conducted by Dr.
Cameron. (International Wellness Directory, 2004)
Informed Consent
Informed consent is a major bone of contention when it comes to ethical human
experimentation codes in the modern society. Many of the initial problems of studies come from
the subjects being unwillingly put into potentially harmful situations that can have lasting effects
on their health and longevity. Informed consent is an issue that cannot be a one size fits all kindof problem. This multi-pronged problem deals with the issues of distinguishing therapy from
research and patients from subjects. The need to clarify what is considered medically appropriate
and scientifically appropriate must be distinguished while setting a hierarchy for what takes
precedent. One of the largest hurdles that the informed consent issue presents is the ability to
keep the integrity of the experiment itself while keeping predispositions that can alter research at

HUMAN HOODWINKING

a minimum for both the researcher and subjects. In short, the over used phrase, in pursuit of
progress must take a step back for the safety of those achieving said progress (Katz, 1993). The
United States courts have been making attempts at cutting through the haziness that can be easily
associated with law governing scientific experiments. In 1957 the court case, Salgo v. Leland
Stanford Jr. University Board of Trustees, the plaintiff was severely injured resulting from a
procedure intended to correct a circulatory problem, leaving his legs permanently paralyzed. The
result of the trial coined the term informed consent, stating that professional practice
standards should entail divulging the facts of the treatment and the risks versus rewards.
Natanson v. Kline (1960) marks the true beginning of the new common law doctrine discussing
informed consent. In this landmark case, Natanson was given no information of any of the
alternatives prior to the procedure, nor the consequences that could result from the procedure.
The court found that, a patient should be informed of the alternative possibilities and given a
chance to decide before the doctor proceeds with the operation (Natanson v. Kline, pg. 434)
and
a physician must, except in real and serious emergencies, acquaint the patient or, when
the circumstances require it, someone properly acting for him, of the diagnosis and the
treatment proposed, and obtain consent, thereto express or implied, and, consent obtained
must proceed in accordance with proper reasonable medical standards and in the exercise
of due care ... (Natanson v. Kline, pg. 679).
Canterbury v. Spence (1972) is the most recent and most comprehensive dissection of the
informed consent discussion. In this decision, the patient must be informed of the risks of the
procedure by the person providing the procedure, or risk liability for showing a noncompliance
with the professional custom to enlighten. This does not mean insignificant effects, but rather

HUMAN HOODWINKING

significant risks or multiple risks that could result in the opting out of the procedure. In the event
of a serious emergency, a doctor does not have to disclose information about a procedure if it
will result in making the patient ill or emotionally unstable. The license to withhold information
does not include being silent to prevent the patient from backing out of a procedure that a doctor
thinks the patient actually needs. The US Code 45 Code of Federal Regulations 46.117 has a
comprehensive code of how to document informed consent that is constantly updated to stay
constant with modern social demands.
Informed Consent of Children
Children are just as much a part of our society and experimentation as an adult. The
problem starts to arise when the acknowledgement of the inability for children to ascertain the
degree of gravity in certain information and the ability to make comprehensive judgements.
Questions arise discussing the ability for parents to provide informed consent for their children,
even if this could mean irreversible damage. In Nantanson v. Kline, the decision explains that,
when the circumstances require it, someone properly acting for him, of the diagnosis and the
treatment proposed, and obtain consent, thereto express or implied, and, consent obtained must
proceed in accordance with proper reasonable medical standards and in the exercise of due
care ... (Nantanson v. Kline, pg. 679). This explains that if there is a person who must act in
place of someone else as the person themselves that the cost and benefits must be explained to
them as if they are to undergo the procedure and then that person must be the one to give the
consent to continue the procedure. This being said, the parent is the caretaker of the child. Should
the child be incapable of making a coherent decision that they themselves are able to completely
understand, the parent will be the one presented with the decision and will be the one to continue
with the procedure or stonewall it. This then transfers into another issue with children revolving

HUMAN HOODWINKING

10

around the treatment of children with no parents available. Within the United States an
experiment was conducted on an orphaned baby named, Baby Albert. This experiment which
tested the ability to condition the child into being scared of rats when the rat was associated with
a loud unidentifiable sound. The experiment worked just as hypothesized where after many
repetitions of banging a gong behind the child when he was introduced to a rat caused the child
to become fearful of the rat when he saw one even without a loud noise being played. A further
probing showed that the infant had, through the psychological process of generalization,
associated all animals of relatively the same size, such as a bunny, created the same fear in the
child as the rat (Watson & Rayner, 1920). This experiment is considered one of the cruelest
experiments in psychological experimentation history. The problem, however, to hone in on is
the fact that the child was an orphan, and therefore, had no parent to provide informed consent or
in this case deny it. The gross misuse of the child effectively ended the head researchers career
in psychological experimentation. That being said, there was no legislation set up to counteract
this for happening again.
GSK Child Experiments in Argentina
Glasko-Smith and Kline, a massive corporation bought children from adoption centers in
Argentina and performed experiments on them. Instead of conducting harmless experiments,
these children were infected with AIDS, a life threatening and untreatable disease, to test new
drugs they were developing to combat AIDS. When the government of Argentina was made
aware of what was occurring, GSK was forced to pay stiff fines and laws to prevent corporations
from buying children have been put into effect (Child Health Safety, 2013). These international
companies wrongdoings should prompt revisions of the principals written during the Nuremburg

HUMAN HOODWINKING

11

trials to further explicate the punishment for crimes against humanity in terms of corporations
that have no allegiance except to themselves and their profits.
AIDS Drug Experimentation on Foster-care Children and Infants
This kind of human experimentation has continued much into the twenty-first century
unbeknownst to the majority of the modern society. For almost twenty year spanning from the
late nineteen-eighties until the early two-thousands, Some 50 foster kids were used as "guinea
pigs" in 13 experiments with high doses of AIDS medications at Manhattans Incarnation
Childrens Center (ICC) (Montero, 2004). The ICCs experiments were funded by federal grants
and pharmaceuticals companies to document the changes of a childs body when the medicine
the take is altered. Some of these tests involved a mixture of up to six different AIDS drugs being
given to children, some of which were only three months old. Further studies done by the ICC,
tested the "safety," "tolerance" and "toxicity" of AIDS drugs (Montero, 2004). These
experiments were not warmly embraced by the scientific community. The President of Health
Education AIDS Liaison, Michael Ellner, described these experiments as nothing short of
murder. Dr. David Rasnick, a biochemist at the University of California at Berkley with
considerable expertise in AIDS medication, commented with fury pointing out that the drugs
even by themselves can lead to acute toxicity which could be fatal. The children involved
suffered from side effects that include severe liver damage, cancer, intense anemia, loss of
muscle mass, multiple life threatening rashes, and buffalo hump (the accumulation of fatty
tissues behind the neck). As of 2000, no experiments have been approved due to the fact that the
risks outweighed the benefits (Montero, 2004). Even after the approvals ceased for future
experimentation, the experimentation that was already being conducted was not terminated until
2002. Vera Sharav, a member of Alliance for Human Research and Protection, stated "the most

HUMAN HOODWINKING

12

vulnerable, disadvantaged children are being exploited by powerful entities and used as guinea
pigs as if they were not human beings" (Montero, 2004). What some consider even more
frightening is that the policy that allowed these experiments to take place explain that due to the
lack of parental consent has a major loophole. For consent to be given for foster children, the
policy states that ACSs [Administration for Childrens Services] medical and legal divisions,
and its commissioner, must all approve (Montero, 2004). Young children and infants were given
death sentences because a governmental body, who cannot possibly manifest the love and
compassion that develop from parents and their young, decided to make a decision that benefited
the economic aspirations for the government.
Consistently throughout history, humans have let faceless corporations and governments
run relatively unchecked in their use of children, especially when these children have no one else
to turn to. For the sake of humanity, human life must take precedence over all else. In doing so,
each persons life cannot be considered more or less significant than another. Human life is
finite, and the shameless waste of the less fortunate by the social and political elites is just the
modern spin on the caste system. The elites must create a way to develop true relationships and
bonds with these overlooked citizens, those of which have never had a chance to have an
innocence. These children are taken from homes that would be toxic to their health and
wellbeing only to be used and abused by the supposed caretakers in these foster homes. Much
like Dr. Albert Kligman, a dermatologist from the University of Pennsylvania who conducted
skin experiments on prisoners at the Holmesburg Prison, who coldly stated, All I saw before
me," he has said about his first visit to the prison, "were acres of skin." (International Wellness
Directory, 2004). Society is at an impasse weighing flesh and blood against paper and coins. It is
imperative that society chooses to have a wealth of morality instead of a wealth of currency.

HUMAN HOODWINKING

13
Informed Consent in International Policy

Countries are becoming further and further separated in terms of wealth, education, and
status within this shrinking world. This creates a new issue of the developing countries being
used and abused by way of their illiteracy and the complexity of issues that do not necessarily
face their own communities.
Communal Informed Consent
To further complicate international policies of informed consent, some countries have
versions of consent that are considered to be a community consent rather than a case of
individual consent. Throughout human existence there has always been a leader and the leaders
subordinates. The masses submit to this leader and are subject to the rules that the leader feels
are important for their society. The figure head that is the face of the community to outsiders has
traditionally been the decision-maker, and expects the people that defer to him to follow his
wishes. In these societies, relief is found in burdening the leader with all of the situations that
must be taken with gravity. In theory the community leader makes the decision that best reflect
the peoples wishes by explaining the complexities of the subject matter and promoting
discussion of these issues. The reality is that in the developing countries of the world, where the
ability to comprehend such intense subject matter is lacking, the ability for the community to
grasp such (Bhutta, 2004).
Constraints of Access to a Shrinking World
As the world becomes smaller from an access (transportation) standpoint, the
experimental society wants to become larger collecting vast amounts of human genetics to create
massive gene pools to be able to have access (at their fingertips) to. Not all countries are

HUMAN HOODWINKING

14

considered first world countries and the education they receive does not allow for them to
comprehend the multifarious scientific pursuits. The want of access to such a diverse amounts of
information has caused a multitude of reactions in countries. In the more democratic society in
Iceland for example, used the process in which they decided to allow total access to their gene
pool included many public discussions and considerations in which the individuals were given
the choice to opt out of sharing their genetic make-up. Iceland is one of the countries in which
the entire genetic database has been made accessible for scientific research. Tonga, on the other
hand, gave its citizens no choice and gave consent on behalf of its people for unlimited access to
their genetic information. This, however, has changed as a result of public outcry in which the
citizens are now given the choice to grant access to harvesting DNA with their genetic
characteristics (Bhutta, 2004). With no international law protecting citizens who submit to their
government from being given to be sampled to increase gene pool collection, coalitions like the
United Nations are being tasked with putting together legislation that will appeal to personal
human sovereignty and to the global society.
Pfizer Drug Trials in Nigeria
In the international arena of experimentation, large companies use those within society
who have no real comprehension or ability to fend for themselves as the guinea pigs for
experimental drug trials. Pfizer Incorporated, a global pharmaceutical company, started testing of
a new age antibiotic drug named, Trovan, on a couple Nigerian children in 1996 during a
country-wide bacterial meningitis epidemic. Five years later, children and their caretakers used
the Alien Tort Claims Act (ACTA) to sue Pfizer in the US Federal Court for disregarding the
standards set by international law in Abdullahi v. Pfizer. The main claim focused on the lack of
informed consent from both the children and their caregivers ultimately resulting in the deaths of

HUMAN HOODWINKING

15

some of the children. One year later another lawsuit, Adamu v. Pfizer, was filed claiming similar
injuries under the ATCA. Initially both claims were dismissed on the grounds that there was a
lack of substantiated evidence of any international laws prohibiting non-consensual medical
treatments. It was not until January of 2009, almost eight years after the initial law suit was filed,
that the US court of Appeals reversed the previous ruling stating that gaining informed consent is
considered compulsory under international law. Pfizer petitioned the US Supreme Court in late
2009 to ask for their appeal to be heard. A little of a year after the petition was submitted the
parties came to settlement of undisclosed proportions. By the end 2014, Pfizer compensated the
victims of the Trovan drug trials in accordance to the 2009 settlement agreement (Business &
Human Rights Resource Centre, 2011). This mark the point at which the United States has
started to finally take a firm stance in the necessity of informed consent on a global scale.
Conclusion
Humans are enigmas, more mystifying that any other conceivable objects. It is in
research that we are able to further our knowledge. However, when our own life can be the cost
of progress in the name of science there is a substantial amount of hesitation. There is some
primal instinct that tells us to be wary of the unknown. History has taught us that people
segregate themselves and some groups become the dominant factions, much like a predator over
its prey in the wild. Just like a predator, the ones who have the power and status have taken the
initiative to pursue the knowledge of the human limits and boundaries by using the lesser
humans (prey) as the test subjects. Invaluable information has be gathered for hundreds of years
from these experiments, but for humans with short term memories of the countless
experimentations, the expenses that were paid to gain such knowledge must be evaluated. As the
United States continues to be one of the superpowers of the world, a strengthening of ethical

HUMAN HOODWINKING

16

codes that protect the value of each and every human no matter their skin color, economic status,
and personal beliefs. The legislature cannot just stop at the national level. The world took steps at
the Nuremburg Trials, but in this contemporary society protection of the developing countries is
paramount to their ability to become a developed country. Corporations and governments cannot
be allowed to pull the wool over the eyes of the public and the public must not lose the initiative
to create clear guidelines for experimentation that discuss the benefits and possible effects of the
experiments in question. Society must protect those who are incapable of protecting themselves
and afford them the same liberties that every other person in the civilization receives. By
informing each individual of what outcomes experiments or treatments can lead to both positive
and negative, as well as alternatives allows the subject to clearly understand the risk and rewards.
Human history has been marked by the constant abuse of fellow humans for personal gain. To
circumvent the possibility of having future issues with human abuse and misuse, the United
Nations in conjunction with the leading psychological associations of the World must explicitly
define the guidelines for human experiments. Clarity will be the light of progress in the darkest
side of science.

HUMAN HOODWINKING

17
References

Ackerman, S. (2015, June 15). CIA torture appears to have broken spy agency rule on human
experimentation. The Guardian. Retrieved November 12, 2015, from
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jun/15/cia-torture-human-experimentationdoctors
Alliance for Human Research Protection. (1995). Human experiments - nonconsensual medical
experiments on human beings. Retrieved December 2, 2015, from
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/esp_sociopol_depopu28.htm
Best Psychology Degrees. (2015). The 30 Most Disturbing Human Experiments in History.
Retrieved December 2, 2015, from http://www.bestpsychologydegrees.com/30-mostdisturbing-human-experiments-in-history/
Bhutta, Z. A. (2004). Beyond informed consent. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 82,
771-778. Retrieved November 12, 2015, from
http://www.who.int/bulletin/volumes/82/10/en/771.pdf
Bliss, J. P. (2015, November 18). Human experimentation interview [E-mail interview].
Business & Human Rights Resource Centre. (2011). Pfizer lawsuit. Retrieved January 4, 2016,
from http://business-humanrights.org/en/pfizer-lawsuit-re-nigeria#c9346
Case Summaries: Informed Consent. (2002). Retrieved November 12, 2015, from
http://www.lawandbioethics.com/demo/Main/LegalResources/C5/background01.htm
CDC. (2013, September 24). The Tuskegee timeline. Retrieved December 10, 2015, from
http://www.cdc.gov/tuskegee/timeline.htm

HUMAN HOODWINKING

18

Child Health Safety. (2013, May 29). Argentina - GSK lab fined - 14 babies died in illegal
vaccine experiments during vaccine trials by GSK hired doctors. Retrieved December 10,
2015, from https://childhealthsafety.wordpress.com/2013/05/29/gsk-fined-14-babiesdied-in-illegal-vaccine-experiments/
Frater, J. (2008, March 14). Top 10 evil human experiments. Retrieved October 14, 2015, from
http://listverse.com/2008/03/14/top-10-evil-human-experiments/
Hajjar, L. (2014, December 16). The CIA didn't just torture, It experimented on human beings.
Retrieved December 18, 2015, from http://www.thenation.com/article/cia-didnt-justtorture-it-experimented-human-beings/
Health News Network. (2003, March 25). A history Of US secret human experimentation.
Retrieved November 22, 2015, from http://www.rense.com/general36/history.htm
International Wellness Directory. (2004). A biref history of human experiments. Retrieved
December 10, 2015, from http://www.mnwelldir.org/docs/history/experiments.htm
Katz, J. (1993). Human experimentation and human rights. Saint Louis University Law Journal
7, 38(7), 7-54. Retrieved November 12, 2015, from
http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?
article=3917&context=fss_papers
Montero, D. (2004, February 29). AIDS tots used as guinea pigs. Retrieved December 16,
2015, from http://www.survivreausida.net/article5922.html
Nuremburg Academy. (n.d.). The Nuremberg Principles. Retrieved November 23, 2015, from
http://www.nurembergacademy.org/the-nuremberg-legacy/the-nuremberg-principles/

HUMAN HOODWINKING

19

Office, U. S. (1994). Human experimentation an overview on cold war era programs. T-NSIAD94-266 Human Experimentation: An Overview on Cold War Era Programs. Retrieved
November 18, 2015, from http://www.gao.gov/assets/110/105708.pdf
Reyes, M. (2012, June 05). 25 Mind Blowing Psychology Experiments...You Won't Believe
What's Inside Your Head. Retrieved November 12, 2015, from http://list25.com/25intriguing-psychology-experiments/4/
Stobbe, M. (2011, February 27). Ugly past of U.S. human experiments uncovered. Retrieved
October 22, 2015, from http://www.nbcnews.com/id/41811750/ns/healthhealth_care/t/ugly-past-us-human-experiments-uncovered/
United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. (2015, August 18). Nazi Medical Experiments.
Retrieved October 29, 2015, from http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?
ModuleId=10005168
U.S. Government Publishing Office. (2015, November 09). ECFR Code of Federal
Regulations. Retrieved November 12, 2015, from http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?
SID=358e99adc8e39778079f9bbffac9b13b&mc=true&tpl=%2Fecfrbrowse
%2FTitle45%2F45cfr46_main_02.tpl
Wabash, R. (2012, August 08). The 13 most evil US government human experiments. Retrieved
December 18, 2015, from http://wariscrime.com/new/the-13-most-evil-us-governmenthuman-experiments/
Walter, M. (2008, February 8). Human experiments: First, do harm. Retrieved November 22,
2015, from http://www.nature.com/news/human-experiments-first-do-harm-1.9980

HUMAN HOODWINKING

20

Watson, J. B., & Rayner, R. (1920). Conditioned emotional reactions. Journal of Experimental
Psychology, 3(1), 1-14. Retrieved December 10, 2015, from
http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Watson/emotion.htm
Whattoknow.info. (n.d.). Government, military, & business use humans as guinea pigs. Retrieved
December 17, 2015, from http://www.wanttoknow.info/humanguineapigs
Whattoknow.info. (n.d.). Mind control cover-up the secrets of mind control. Retrieved December
16, 2015, from http://www.wanttoknow.info/mindcontrol#_ednref11