The Rock Island Argus and daily union. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1920-1923, 1921-12-29
Frederick Haskin's Letter
Especial Cores ndDose f ArsusL
Chemicals in Warfare.

Washington, D. c., Dec. 2s.-Tht
next war, il 1t comes, will in al
likelihood be fought to a large ex
tent with chemicals. The amaz
ing development of this form O
warfare in the late world struggle
coupled with the fact that peace
time commercial chemical plants
can be transformed Immediately
into formidable munition plants, is
SUFFICIENT to guarantee this.
/ Contrary to general popular
| opinion, fighting with gases is sai0
to be far more humane than other
/ forms OF warfare. The measure OF
| humanity in war is the number OF
| deaths and permanently injured in
relation to the total number in
Jured. The surgeon general of the
! army in his latest annual report,
published interesting figures to
/ prove that chemical warfare is
more humane than conflict with
bullets and high explosives.
The blame for every conceivable
sort OF illness has been laid at the
door OF war gases, including dis
eases Of the central nervous sys-
TEN, heart and blood vessels, the
respiratory tract and the digestive
system. This was because chem
ical warfare on a large scale was
new. and little was known of the
after effects. But a careful study
of the subject has been made by the
war department during the past
eight months, during which time
some $500 letters were sent out to
leading medical people throughout
the world to obtain their views
Also, 1900 claims for war risk
benefits were examined. !
The result of this thorough in
Vestlgatlon led to the unacceptable
conclusion that gas, on the whole,
causes no permanent disabilities
1t was found by investigation not
only here, but in Germany, Eng
land, France and Switzerland, that
there is no direct evidence that tub
erculosis is an after-effect affecting
gas victims
In addition to this phase of the i
investigation, letters were sent to |
manufacturers OF Chlorine, heavy |
chemicals, and othek materials that |
produce gases simiia to those used
In war. The answer 10 these let
tiers in every case was that they !
mad never observed permanent dis
abllltles resulting from exposure to |
these gases, and that as a matter of |
tact, during the many years these
had been manufactured.
the question had never come I'D be-
fore.
hA I
excluding the marine corps, show
that in the s.orld war 25S,336 men
were injured, OF this number, "a
Z4S died on the field of battle. There
were 1851 who died in hospitals.
Of this number, 70,552 were suffer
ng from gas alone, and only ,221
lied. BriSadier General Amos A
rT1es, chief of the chemical war
are service of the United States
army, estimates that less than 200
men actually died on the field OF
battle as a result Of gas attacks. !,
'ince concentration of gas sufficient
o kill within IL hours was seldom
obtained. Assuming that zoo dioQ
N the battlefield from chemical at
acks, General Fries pointed out.
he total deaths from gas would be
AL, less than per cent of the
0,752 gas cases.
OF the 1885 injured by bullets
md high explosives, 46,449 died, or ]
more than "a per cent. Ii is evil
lent from these figures that the
nan injured by gas alone had
more than Il times as good a F..
hance of recovery as the man in
ured by high explosive shells OF
ullets.
Other comparisons are quite as
The official records show
hat IS men were totally blinded
4 the war, "A were partially blind
d in both eyes, and 544 were blind t