Pervitin

[Chris57]

I was watching a series on AHC on TV last night Nazi Secret Files, episode #1, High Hitler and his Nazi super soldiers. They portrayed just about the entire German military and civilian population as methamphetamine addicts. I know performance enhancing drugs were used on both sides of the conflict but never to the extent that was shown here. With the current meth plague here in the U.S. it's very apparent that users don't last very long and aren't organized or disciplined at all. Any thoughts on this subject?

[GlennAgain]

I believe that it's an exaggeration as Pervitin Containers are fairly hard to find in view of such supposed widespread use...I've spoken with dozens of Wehrmacht Vets and not one of them ever mentioned Pervitin...
-Glenn-

[Willmore]

Hi there.

It is a very interesting topic. Although the story below is not about a German, I thought I would add it because it is pretty insane.

Aimo Koivunen was a Finnish soldier, assigned to a ski patrol on 20 April 1944, along with several other Finnish soldiers. Three days into their mission, on 18 March, the group was attacked and surrounded by Soviet forces, from which they managed to escape. Koivunen became fatigued after skiing for a long distance, but could not stop. He was also the sole carrier of army-issued Pervitin, or methamphetamine, a stimulant used to remain awake while on duty. Koivunen had trouble pulling out a single pill, so he emptied the entire bottle of thirty capsules into his hand and took them all.

He had a short burst of energy, but then entered into a state of delirium, and lost consciousness. Koivunen remembered waking up the following morning, separated from his patrol and having no supplies. In the following days, he escaped Soviet forces once again, was injured by a land mine which also set fire to a nearby Russian camp, and laid in a ditch for a week waiting for help. Having skied more than 400 km (248.5 mi) he was found and admitted to a nearby hospital, where his heart rate was measured at 200 beats per minute, triple the average human heartbeat, and weighing only 43 kg (94.8 lbs). In the week Koivunen was gone, he subsisted only on pine buds and a single Siberian jay that he caught and ate raw. He ended up surviving and died peacefully at the age of 71.

Aimo Koivunen - Wikipedia

Kind regards,

Will.

[Svejk]

I saw the same "documentary" on AHC as mentioned by the OP ("Nazi Secret Files", Season One, Episode One, "High Hitler and His Nazi Super Soldiers") and noted the same misleading and inaccurate details throughout. I use the term "documentary" very loosely here because this episode - and a lot of what is passing for accurate historical documentaries - are far too often junk more reflective of the latest Hollywood & entertainment industry marketing trends than the real history they allegedly present.

Anybody truly hoping to learn anything by watching these sorts of programs will come away with a false sense of history (if they do not already know better). AHC has become markedly poor in my own opinion, due to consistently airing such low quality & inaccurate dreck these past few years. Complicating things is that some of the other programming shown is better and far more accurate than this particular episode was. But in my opinion, AHC generally lacks credibility as a result.

Somebody else left a review (titled "Based on sketchy 'evidence', exaggeration, and second-hand accounts the evidence is poor for this story.") that is spot-on at the following link:

"Nazi Secret Files" High Hitler and His Nazi Supersoldiers (TV Episode 2016) - IMDb

Laughable and ironic how one cannot count on historical accuracy on a history TV channel, eh?

[Watchdog]

I saw the same "documentary" on AHC as mentioned by the OP ("Nazi Secret Files", Season One, Episode One, "High Hitler and His Nazi Super Soldiers") and noted the same misleading and inaccurate details throughout. I use the term "documentary" very loosely here because this episode - and a lot of what is passing for accurate historical documentaries - are far too often junk more reflective of the latest Hollywood & entertainment industry marketing trends than the real history they allegedly present.

Anybody truly hoping to learn anything by watching these sorts of programs will come away with a false sense of history (if they do not already know better). AHC has become markedly poor in my own opinion, due to consistently airing such low quality & inaccurate dreck these past few years. Complicating things is that some of the other programming shown is better and far more accurate than this particular episode was. But in my opinion, AHC generally lacks credibility as a result.

Somebody else left a review (titled "Based on sketchy 'evidence', exaggeration, and second-hand accounts the evidence is poor for this story.") that is spot-on at the following link:

"Nazi Secret Files" High Hitler and His Nazi Supersoldiers (TV Episode 2016) - IMDb

Laughable and ironic how one cannot count on historical accuracy on a history TV channel, eh?

I think this is a widespread problem with "factual" TV documentary programming across all topic areas. Even the most highly regarded journalists need careful scrutiny rather than blind acceptance of their "research findings" (from research which they themselves have usually not undertaken even in part as they have "programme researchers" for that).
Often if the viewer has even rudimentary knowledge of the subject there will be obvious error upon error.
I often watch the WWI / WWII programmes as I like to see the period images however, I regularly find myself cursing at the TV when the narrator speaks of British troops in a particular action prior to 1942 but the images shown are of US troops or similar impossible scenarios. Another common error is showing weapons / equipment in date specific scenarios before such items even existed, EG MG42 used during the invasion of Poland!
The problem is that these programmes are made for mass consumption by a target audience whose knowledge of history comes almost exclusively from the tabloid newspapers.

Another EG is a TV Quiz-game contestant who I heard opine that WWII ended in 1975 at which point she herself was already in school!!!

So, as to the topic here I do not find it surprising that people who have never known a time when drug abuse was not prevalent are so prepared to accept without question that Hitlers' troops were all permanently "off their heads". Nobody even considers that a force that were all so 'drugged up' would not compete well with professional and sober opposition. We know that Pervitin (there are even contemporary references to "Marching Chocolate") was issued and used so it is the easiest thing to "hype" the situation purely for the sensational effect!

As said above, if it were so widespread the references and physical evidence of empty packaging etc would also be prolific.

However, one should not let the truth get in the way of a good story eh?

Regards

Mark

[Svejk]

Greetings Watchdog (or Mark if you prefer, sir):

I got a chuckle when I read your remark about yelling at the TV because I do the same thing sometimes! As my long-suffering wife slowly shakes her head over the fact that the TV nor anybody shown on it can see or hear what I have to rant about anything. Not that they would care if they could.

I agree with your observations. And I can add another one - documentaries that use WWII reenactors that do not look the part, are wearing poor quality and inaccurate repro uniforms and gear while toting the wrong weapons, using the wrong period small unit tactics (if any) and so much more. I do not expect perfection but if a historical documentary is being produced they ought to get it right. Because it is supposed to be accurate. Otherwise why not just call it fiction, and treat it as such?

On the other hand, all of these programs are produced (in the US at least) in order to turn a profit. Historical accuracy is not the end motive, money is. While some of the people involved in them seem to honor the historical aspects to varying degrees, in the end these programs are not made to be anything other than money-makers. They are looked at and treated as investments and absent a suitable enough profit projection they will not be made in the first place.

Sometimes profit motives and historical accuracy can co-exist when done right. Other times, not so much. Depends on whom and what is involved in the process. There also needs to be some entertainment value in such documentaries otherwise they would be so dry that it would cut into the audience numbers. So I think it is a balancing act. They can be entertaining in the methods used to present the story without altering historical facts that result in such shoddy, sensationalist and highly unprofessional work. Like High Hitler and his Nazi Super Soldiers. Ugh.

Yes indeed, never let the truth get in the way of a good story! Cheers!

[Watchdog]

And I can add another one - documentaries that use WWII reenactors that do not look the part, are wearing poor quality and inaccurate repro uniforms and gear while toting the wrong weapons, using the wrong period small unit tactics (if any)

100% and made all the worse because the practice is so cynical (assuming that the producers know what they are doing ) because the target audience largely have no clue as to the authenticy or otherwise. A personal bugbear of mine is the way they are shown wearing berets either sticking out like a sore thumb or even worse pulled to the wrong side!!!

If it's in a documentary it is certainly true isn't it?

Regards

Mark