Health of Germans post nazism.

Sandwich

Does anyone know about or can the point me in the of information on the effect of the second world war on the subsequent health of Germans relative to countries untouched by Nazism and the war. ie.did the effects of war itself, mass murder of the ill and disabled, and poor nutition lead in any way to a stronger survival-of-the-fittest population over the last 60 years?

DeVore

They didnt murder the ill and disabled, they murdered people based on race and idiotic things like hair colour. There is no reason why they would have improved their own genetic pool and since they were highly unlikely to have reproduced with that group, they have not affected their genetic pool much and if they have, there is no reason to believe that they havent lost an opportunity to improve it.

For all they know they killed someone who was genetically immune to cancer.

DeV.

Nevyn

They did clear out the insane asylums and those who were mentally and phyically handicapped and killed them. That is where it started and moved on to race and creed and sexuality.

kizzyr

DeVore wrote: »

They didnt murder the ill and disabled, they murdered people based on race and idiotic things like hair colour. There is no reason why they would have improved their own genetic pool and since they were highly unlikely to have reproduced with that group, they have not affected their genetic pool much and if they have, there is no reason to believe that they havent lost an opportunity to improve it.

For all they know they killed someone who was genetically immune to cancer.

DeV.

^^ In fact that was where it all began, the old, infirm, weak, disabled, mentally ill etc were the first to fall victim in the mass killings. It was after this and seeing how they could most effectively kill and dispose of the bodies that the Nazi high command moved onto the camp system and murder of so many Jews, Christians, homosexuals, musicians etc.
Re: the original question, I don't know where you'd find such information and if you did how valid it would be. Bear in mind that the country was split into East and West, Communist and Capitalist which would have had a bearing on the long term public health. Also the health of the nation(s) post war would also be different to 30 years down the road. Maybe the World Health Organisation would have some facts and figures for you

Bottle_of_Smoke

The ill & disabled would be unlikely to reproduce, any genes they may have passed on previously would probably not have shown up in their children. Did the Nazi's get rid of them too?

Probably more suited to the biology forum

kizzyr

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

The ill & disabled would be unlikely to reproduce, any genes they may have passed on previously would probably not have shown up in their children. Did the Nazi's get rid of them too?

Probably more suited to the biology forum

Under the Nazi regime the understanding of what made someone ill and disabled was very different to that of other countries at the time. If someone had suffered from polio and so been left with disfigured legs why wouldn't they have been able to reproduce?

Bottle_of_Smoke

kizzyr wrote: »

Under the Nazi regime the understanding of what made someone ill and disabled was very different to that of other countries at the time. If someone had suffered from polio and so been left with disfigured legs why wouldn't they have been able to reproduce?

Less likely to attract a mate & provide for offspring. Still possible but certainly less likely.

spinandscribble

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

Less likely to attract a mate & provide for offspring. Still possible but certainly less likely.

hitler got this idea of cagogenics from the americans who used to sterlize the ill, 'feeble minded' and handicapped, he just took it a step further by killing them altogether.

healthcare is free in germany so its unfair to say if they are fitter as a result of their killings or better healthcare but my moneys on better care.

i actually stayed in a old germany asylum last month. freaky to say the least.

kizzyr

spinandscribble wrote: »

hitler got this idea of cagogenics from the americans who used to sterlize the ill, 'feeble minded' and handicapped, he just took it a step further by killing them altogether.

healthcare is free in germany so its unfair to say if they are fitter as a result of their killings or better healthcare but my moneys on better care.

i actually stayed in a old germany asylum last month. freaky to say the least.

Granted having a good, easily accessible, easily affordable (and with it being free it can't be much more affordable) health care is going to be reflected in the overall health of the population and in the case of Germany, will be reflected regardless of its history. It must also be remembered that the Nazi regime killed off many people who were detractors and not necessarily because they were physically imperfect (in their eyes). Many of the members of the hierarchy of the Nazi party were far from the physical ideal they put out but because they agreed with Hitler's views they survived. Reynard Heidrich was the perfect man in terms of their views, tall, blond, clever (apparently) etc and became the poster boy.................but his grandmother was Jewish. The Nazi high command knew this but because he agreed with all they said they overlooked this.

Sandwich

Thanks for the views.

I guessed it would be hard to seperate the effects of the war from postwar properity with good nutrition and healthcare. But was wondering if there was any research showing a reduction in hereditary diseases or increased resistance to infectious illnessess. I guess the effect of even 10 extreme years doesnt really have that much effect on hundreds of thousands of years of natural selection.

toiletduck

Tbh there's so many factors there, like the division of the country after the war, the millions of "fit" Germans who died on the battlefield and via civilian bombing make it a near impossible task to determine the OP's question.

kizzyr

toiletduck wrote: »

Tbh there's so many factors there, like the division of the country after the war, the millions of "fit" Germans who died on the battlefield and via civilian bombing make it a near impossible task to determine the OP's question.

You're right. I think the only real health information that came out of post war Germany was information about the effects of hypothermia on the human body and this information was gathered in the camps. There are a lot of ethical concerns about using medical information discovered by the Nazi doctors during their experiments on camp inmates as many people feel that it condones their actions to a certain extent.

Bottle_of_Smoke

kizzyr wrote: »

There are a lot of ethical concerns about using medical information discovered by the Nazi doctors during their experiments on camp inmates as many people feel that it condones their actions to a certain extent.

This is so ridiculous, not you, but the people who feel this way. Firstly I don't see how it condones it, but also, it's done. Why make that suffering completely pointless. It's not the same as saying to a vegetarian "you might as well eat the steak, it's already dead" as using this info won't support another holocaust.

kizzyr

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

This is so ridiculous, not you, but the people who feel this way. Firstly I don't see how it condones it, but also, it's done. Why make that suffering completely pointless. It's not the same as saying to a vegetarian "you might as well eat the steak, it's already dead" as using this info won't support another holocaust.

To be honest I also think that the information should be used. I certainly don't and never would condone the actions of the Nazi regime but I think it better that some good come from the endless suffering the camp inmates were put through than have it all for nothing. The ethical concerns come mainly from representatives of those who died in the camps (its worth remembering that while the movement was almost entirely based around anti Semitism, many millions of people who weren't Jews died here too) who feel that using this information is little more than another violation of their loved ones.