ArticleNaunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology2026
The German Pharmacological Society during the Nazi regime (1933-1945) and its resurrection after World War II.
Article in Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A brief history of the German Society for Experimental and Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology-an overview of available sources.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study examines the German Pharmacological Society (DGP) during the Nazi Regime (1933-1945) and its resurrection after World War II. The analysis is based on DGPT documents stored in the archives of Hannover Medical School and published in Naunyn-Schmiedebergs Arch Pharmacol. The minutes of board meetings were a key source of information. Selected individuals who played an important role during this timeare briefly presented biographically and scientifically, and their positions are explained. These individuals are Behrend Behrens, Otto Riesser, Hellmut Weese, Wolfgang Heubner, Ferdinand Flury, Otto Loewi, and Otto Krayer. The study focuses on the DGP's treatment of its Jewish members-both during and after World War II. It examines the extent to which the professional association in post-war Germany took a position on its actions or inaction at that time. In 1931/32, 18% of the DGP members were Jewish. We identified 23 additional DGP members persecuted by the Nazis not yet known through previous studies. They will be analyzed and honored in detail in a future study. In order to classify the behavior of the DGP, a brief comparison with other professional associations (pediatrics and gynecology) is also made. Our study shows that the DGP has not come to terms with its past behavior during the Nazi era until recently. Although Jewish members were not explicitly excluded from the professional association, which distinguishes the DGP from other professional associations, there are indications of vehement representatives of Nazi ideology (e.g., Ferdinand Flury) within the professional association. The DGP board never officially contradicted these openly professed supporters of Nazism after the Nazis came to power. There are also indications of a certain political calculation to quickly establish ties with the scientific community, which ultimately succeeded. This context explains that Otto Riesser, persecuted during the Nazi era, was elected as the first DGP chairman after the war. Although Prof. Dr. Ursula Gundert-Remy issued an official apology in 2014 for the behavior of the DGP toward Jewish members, it remains unclear why this acknowledgment came so late.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.