The women radium dial painters as experimental subjects (1920–1990) or what counts as human experimentation

  • Maria Rentetzi


The case of women radium dial painters — women who tipped their brushes while painting the dials of watches and instruments with radioactive paint — has been extensively discussed in the medical and historical literature. Their painful and abhorrent deaths have occupied the interest of physicians, lawyers, politicians, military agencies, and the public. Hardly any discussion has concerned, however, the use of those women as experimental subjects in a number of epidemiological studies that took place from 1920 to 1990. This article addresses the neglected issue of human experimentation in relation to the radium dial painters. Although women’s medical examinations have been classified as simple, routine measurements of radiation burden on the body and presented as a great offer to humanity, for more than fifty years those women had been repeatedly used as experimental subjects without proper consent. I argue that through this case it becomes obvious that the issue of defining what counts as human experimentation shifts from an epistemological to a serious ethical and political question, concerning the making of scientific knowledge while issues of gender related to this process are also discussed.


Experimental Subject Argonne National Laboratory Political Question Radium Case Nuremberg Code 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments: Final Report. US GPO: Washington D.C. 1995, ch. 18.Google Scholar
  2. Annas, George; Glantz, Leonard; Katz, Barbara: Informed Consent to Human Experimentation: The Subject’s Dilemma. Ballinger: Cambridge 1977.Google Scholar
  3. Annas, George; Grodin, Michael: The Nazi Doctors and the Nuremberg Code: Human Rights in Human Experimentation. Oxford University Press: New York 1992.Google Scholar
  4. [Anonymous]: $500,000 Radium is Exhibited Here. The New York Times, November 14, 1921, 9: 2.Google Scholar
  5. [Anonymous]: “Radium for Dials at $ 120,000”. The New York Times, November 27, 1921, II, 1: 5.Google Scholar
  6. Blum, Theodore: “Osteomyelitis of the Mandible and Maxilla”. Journal of the American Dental Association (1924) September 11, pp. 802–805.Google Scholar
  7. Brues, A. M.: “The Long-Term Follow-Up of Radium Dial Painters and Thorium Workers”. The Medical Basis for Radiation Accident Preparedness, edited by K.F. Hubner and S.A. Fry. Fry. Elsevier North Holland: New York 1980, pp. 441–450.Google Scholar
  8. Childress, James: “Nuremberg’s Legacy: Some Ethical Reflections”. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine (2000) 43 (3), pp. 347–361.Google Scholar
  9. Clark, Claudia: Radium Girls: Women and Industrial Health Reform, 1910–1935. The University of North Carolina Press: North Carolina 1997.Google Scholar
  10. Evans, Robley: “Radium Poisoning: A Review of Present Knowledge”. American Journal of Public Health (1933) 23, pp. 1017–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Evans, Robley: “Apparatus for the Determination of Minute Quantities of Radium”. Review of Scientific Instruments (1935) 6, pp. 99–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Faden, Ruth: Beauchamp, Tom: History and Theory of Informed Consent. Oxford University Press: New York 1986.Google Scholar
  13. Faden, Ruth; Lederer, Susan; Moreno, Jonathan: “US Medical Researchers, the Nuremberger Doctors Trial, and the Nuremberger Code”. Journal of American Medical Association (1996) 276 (20), pp. 1667–1671.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Galison, Peter: Image and Logic. Chicago University Press: Chicago 1997.Google Scholar
  15. Hoffman, Frederick: “Radium (mesothorium) Necrosis”. Journal of American Medical Association 85 (1925), 961–965.Google Scholar
  16. Katz, Jay: “The Nuremberg Code and the Nuremberg Trial: A Reappraisal”. Journal of American Medical Association (1996) 20, pp. 1662–1666.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kevles, Daniel: In the Name of Eugenics. Alfred Knopf: New York 1985.Google Scholar
  18. Kuhn, Thomas: “Mathematical versus Experimental Traditions in the Development of Physical Sciences.” The Essential Tension: Selected Studies in Scientific Tradition and Change, edited by Kuhn, Thomas. Chicago University Press: Chicago 1977, pp. 31–65.Google Scholar
  19. Lacassagne, Antoine: “Un Nouvel Accident Professionel des Manipulateurs de Corps Radioactifs: Le Nécrose des Maxillaires”. Paris Medical (1926) 16, pp. 132–135.Google Scholar
  20. Lang, Daniel: “A Reporter at Large: A Most Valuable Accident”. New Yorker 1959, May 2, pp. 49–72.Google Scholar
  21. Lederer, Susan: Subjected to Science: Human Experimentation in America Before the Second World War. John Hopkins University Press: Baltimore 1995.Google Scholar
  22. Moreno, Jonathan; Lederer, Susan: “Revising the History of Cold War Research Ethics”. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal (1996) 3 (3), pp. 223–237.Google Scholar
  23. Mullner, Ross: Deadly Glow: The Radium Dial Worker Tragedy. American Public Health Association: Washington 1999.Google Scholar
  24. Nugent, Angela: “Fit for Work: The Introduction of Physical Examinations in Industry”. Bulletin of the History of Medicine (1983) 57, pp. 578–595.Google Scholar
  25. Rothman, David: “Serving Clio and Client: The Historian as Expert Witness”. Bulletin of the History of Medicine (2003) 77, pp. 25–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Schaub, Katherine: “Radium”. Survey Graphic (1932) 68, 138–141.Google Scholar
  27. Shapin, Steven: “The House of Experiment in Seventeenth Century England”. Isis (1988) 79, pp. 373–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sharpe, William: “The New Jersey Radium Dial Painters: A Classic in Occupational Carcinogenesis”. Bulletin of the History of Medicine (1978) 52, pp. 560–570.Google Scholar
  29. US Bureau of Labor Statistics: “Radium Poisoning”. Monthly Labor Review 28 (1929), pp. 1200–1275.Google Scholar
  30. US Department of Defense (DOD): Report on Search for Human Radiation Experiments Records, 1944–1994, vol. 1. Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for Nuclear and Chemical and Biological Defense Programs: Washington D.C. 1997.Google Scholar
  31. US Department of Energy (DOE): Human Radiation Experiments Associated with DOE and its Predecessors (DOE Roadmap). US Department of Energy, Assistant Secretary for Environment, Safety, and Health: Washington D.C. 1995.Google Scholar
  32. US Department of Energy (DOE): Human Radiation Studies: Remembering the Early Years, Oral History of Biophysicist Robert Edmund Rowland (DOE/EH-0461). United States Department of Energy, Office of Human Radiation Experiments: Washington D.C. 1995.Google Scholar
  33. US Department of Energy (DOE): Human Radiation Studies: Remembering the Early Years, Oral History of Health Physicist Constantine J. Maletskos (DOE/EH-0473). United States Department of Energy, Office of Human Radiation Experiments: Washington D.C. 1995.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Birkhäuser Verlag 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Maria Rentetzi
    • 1
  1. 1.Max Planck Institute for the History of ScienceBerlin

Personalised recommendations