Talk:Soap made from human corpses

The experiments in Danzig must have been stopped immediately
The quoted article doesn't support your claim. The production in Danzig took place in 1944, so after the Himmler's order.Xx236 13:08, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Interesting to see that this story was also around in WW1.159.105.80.63 12:28, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Citation number 3, re Polish analysis of soap ( two different samples ) never explicitly states if it was human or not ( it implies it but seems to be less than direct ). Is their study/studies available ( ie scientific analysis ) - not their press conference? The rest of the article ( following citation 3 ) seems to cast doubt on the whole citation 3 section. 159.105.80.63 13:11, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Is implication illegal here? Xx236 08:18, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Not illegal - just borderline dishonest. Maybe slightly more dishonest than borderline.159.105.80.141 12:00, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Human hair
the article claims that hair was taken from dead people and made to something, this is not true, any hair you will find in KZ would be that cut from arriving and living prisoners for hygiene purposes, ie combating lice and other parasites that is if any. But certainly not from "corpses", nor was the purpose to manufacture anything. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.248.159.240 (talk) 15:08, 29 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Than why were human hairs stored in Nazi concentration camps? They were stored because the Nazis considered them a "resource" which had a speccific value for the Nazi war effort. This fabric was made by the nazis from human hair. Mieciu K (talk) 01:20, 28 January 2008 (UTC)


 * As a rule, the hair was taken from prisoners while they were alive. This happened upon arrival in the camps or just before the prisoners were sent into the gas chambers.
 * One should read the amazing book of Max Weinrauch: Hitler's Professor's, published the first time during the Nuerenberg trials (1946) by YIVO and a second time by Yale University Press in 1999. The quote is about Auschwitz (Oswiecim):
 * "Before being sent to the gas chambers, the inmates were thoroughly shaved; sometimes they had to wait for that procedure many hours, standing naked inthe open air, regardless of season and weather, men and women, on a completely equal footing. he hair the was sorted, packed in bags of 20kg. (44 pounds) and shipped to Germany for the production of felt, blankets and matresses. On March 7, 1945, 293 bags of women's hair, which the Germans had not managed to ship home, were discovered in one of the warehouses. The bags weighed 7.000 kg. (15.400 pounds) and the experts of the Investigation Commission estimated that it had belonged to 14.000 women."


 * Other products from the dead bodies that were used: gold, bones (fertilizer) and ashes (fertilizer). Sometimes a parcel of ashes was sold to relatives, although no corpses were burned undividually.
 * Weinreich quotes one source about production of soap from human bodies but concludes that "Whether soap from human fats also was produced at Auschwitz is uncertain."
 * —Preceding unsigned comment added by Poldebol (talk • contribs) 14:11, 12 August 2008 (UTC)


 * 15 400 pounds of hair from 14 000 women? That's more than a pound of hair per woman, which is absolutely absurd. --Tsuka-norsk (talk) 03:38, 26 May 2010 (UTC)


 * mhair-per-head = n * mone-hair
 * n = 100000
 * mone-hair = V * ro
 * ro = 1.2 g/cm³
 * V = pi/4 * d² * l
 * d = 0.12 mm
 * let's assume l = 400 mm
 * V = 3.14/4 * (0.12 mm)² * 400 mm = 4.5216 mm³
 * mone-hair = 4.52 mm³ * 1.2 mg/mm³ = 5.424 mg
 * mhair-per-head = 100000 * 0.005424 g = 542.4 g
 * So as a very rough estimate there actually could be one and 1/5 pound of hair on every woman's head on average.
 * 15 400 pounds of hair from 14 000 women is anything but "absolutely absurd". Just assume 368 mm as the average length of all the hairs, or take 0.11 mm as the average thickness to get a result which is spot on. And keep in mind that the "14 000 women" is also an estimated figure, which was probably reached by a very similar calculation.
 * --BjKa (talk) 12:41, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

RIF
Quote: '' The claim resurfaced very early during World War II, so early that it almost certainly was not true. However, contemporary jokes, threats, rumors and insults show beyond a doubt that many people thought that it was at least believable. The main support for this belief was found in the abbreviation "RIF" which was imprinted on most pieces of soap available in Germany during WWII. It was interpreted as "Reines Jüdisches Fett" (pure Jewish fat) while, in fact, the abbreviation stood for "Reichsstelle für industrielle Fettversorgung" (National Center for Industrial Fat Provisioning). '' Unsourced and smacks of an urban myth. I have therefore removed it. Maikel (talk) 13:50, 17 August 2008 (UTC)


 * The IHR (not exactly a reliable source, but I doubt they would just pull exact citations out of thin air) quotes Wiesenthal talking about RIF soaps made of Jewish bodies. --Tgr (talk) 18:07, 13 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Another mention of the RIF soaps, from 1942. --Tgr (talk) 18:10, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Comment by Heinrich Himmler on the WW2 rumors
This (German) essay resp. speech held at the 28th conference of the German Studies Association contains a part of a November 20th, 1942 letter of Heinrich Himmler to the head of the Gestapo, Heinrich Müller, prompted by an exposé of rabbi Dr. Stephen Wise that was used by the New York Times:
 * "Sie haben mir dafür zu garantieren, dass an jeder Stelle die Leichname dieser verstorbenen Juden entweder verbrannt oder vergraben werden, und dass an keiner Stelle mit den Leichnamen etwas anderes geschehen kann."

My translation:
 * "You have guarantee me that at every site the corpses of these deceased Jews are either burned or buried, and that at no site anything else can happen with the corpses."

However, I find it odd that the quote has two instances of "dass", which replaced "daß" in the German orthography reform of 1996. -- 91.11.240.33 (talk) 22:06, 22 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Why odd, if it was printed in the NY Times? Even prior to 1996, you could use two S' instead of the German double-S, even in German. Just like 'ö' can be spelled 'oe'. --Tsuka-norsk (talk) 03:44, 26 May 2010 (UTC)


 * I should have phrased the sentence differently: What I find odd is that Neander does not note this briefly in the footnote, but I guess that this can be connived. His source for the quote appears to be the same as the one for the paragraph following it; a possible translation for the latter is:
 * "Müller was to have exhaustive inquires made if an "abuse" had occurred somewhere, and if so to report this to him, Himmler, "on SS oath". Himmler therefore did not exclude from the outset the possibility that soap had been made somewhere from the corpses of murdered Jews. While no proof – as "revisionists" would like it to be – Himmlers letter does represent circumstantial evidence that the Nazis did not manufacture the corpses of their victims into soap (glue, lube oil, fertilizer, lampshades etc.) – hardly due to humanitarian fits, but from the clear understanding that elsewise the concealment of the mass murder, difficult as it was, would be absolutely impossible." -- 91.11.203.31 (talk) 20:35, 28 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Oh, to clear out this obvious ambiguousness: I did not mean that either Neadler's essay or Himmler's quote were printed in the NYT. Instead, what I meant was that Wise's exposé was published in it, whose impact then apparently caused Himmler to write that letter. -- 91.11.215.189 (talk) 20:53, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Fight Club
In botth the book and the movie Fight Club Tyler Durden makes soap using fat from liposuction clinics. Is this worth a mention? // Liftarn (talk) 20:45, 25 July 2010 (UTC)


 * It's not from corpses, though, is it? Geoff B (talk) 21:49, 25 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Not explicitly anyway, but quite similar. // Liftarn (talk) 21:57, 26 July 2010 (UTC)


 * They don't do liposuction on corpses at liposuction clinics, do they? All soap is made from fat, so the only feature in common is that it is human fat. --Hugh7 (talk) 02:18, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

The Caine Mutiny
If I remember rightly, there is a poignant speech in the trial scene of The Caine Mutiny that treats the soap story as fact. This would have helped to give it more currency. --Hugh7 (talk) 02:18, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Most likely, not much soap was made
But don't forget the reason why: The NAZIs had carefully calibrated the design of the death-camp ovens to minimize the amount of coke (coal) needed to burn the victims corpses. By using the a hot enough oven, the fat from the corpses burned strongly and helped incinerate the bodies faster. NAZI efficiency - fiendish indeed. 98.118.62.140 (talk) 05:09, 12 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Re: "fat burns": Thats an interesting point you're making.
 * Re: "don't forget ... fiendish NAZI efficiency": It's that kind of emotionalizing that inhibits a scientific discourse on these matters. Regarding their enemies as non-human was exactly what the Nazis did, and regarding Nazis as demons is just as misguided. Almost anything the Nazis (not: "NAZI"s) did, had been done before by someone else. For millennia there have been many attempts at genocide by many cultures, and the history of concentration camps before the German ones is also quite long. But I'm convinced that it was the legendary German efficiency and thoroughness which led to the perfection of atrocities, once their alleged necessity had been accepted by the perpetrators. It had to be the Germans who did these horrible things on such a large scale and in optimized details for the first time. --BjKa (talk) 12:41, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

The Black Book
I've rewritten the paragraph referencing The Black Book. It is incorrect to attribute the quote to Ilya Ehrenburg since he did not write those words. Rather, the Black Book is a collection of different people's first hand accounts. In this case, the quote is part of a report from I Herts and Naftali Nakht which was prepared for publication by R. Fraerman and R. Kovnator (see page 86). Hers and Nakht also specifically state that they learned it from someone else, namely Artur [Izrailevich] Rozenshtraukh, a bank clerk from Lvov. GabrielF (talk) 00:47, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Deborah Lipstadt's letter to the editor
I've removed a bunch of material recently added to the article that essentially contradicted every other source on this page. Yes, 30 years ago Deborah Lipstadt wrote a letter to the editor of the Los Angeles Times, saying that the Nazis never made soap from human corpses. Her view is already included in the article, cited to that source. However, more recent investigation indicates that the Nazis likely experimented with doing this, though never on an industrial scale. Jayjg (talk) 01:02, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

you have again added this material to the article, and (apparently based on it), claimed the opposite of what historians believe. To repeat, more recent investigation indicates that the Nazis likely experimented with creating soap from human corpses, though never on an industrial scale. That's what historians currently believe. Could you please respond here? Jayjg (talk) 20:51, 1 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Yad Vashem, Israel's own official Holocaust memorial archive, has specifically dismissed the "Nazi soap from humans" as a hoax. Are you saying that both Yad Vashem and Professor Deborah Lipstadt are liars? In fact, this entire article needs to be rewritten to bring it into line with the facts. Outrageous exaggerations such as these only discredit the Holocaust and give grist to the deniers.TheFallenCrowd (talk) 19:46, 12 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Your "source" for the human soap story is, incredibly, an article about a comedy (?) play built around the soap allegations which features a person burying bars of soap in the belief that it it is his parents. How on earth can you claim fiction such as this as a source?TheFallenCrowd (talk) 19:49, 12 July 2011 (UTC)


 * The Lipstadt source is a letter to the editor, not a scholarly source, and she made her statement 30 years ago, before more recent discoveries. It is not scholarly, nor is it relevant any more. I've already pointed this out before, so don't waste our time by bringing it up again. The actual source in the article is not a play, but include Robert Melvin Spector, who concurs with Konnilyn Feig that the Nazis "did indeed use human fat for the making of soap at Stutthof", and this 2006 study of soap by the Gdańsk Branch of the Commission for the Investigation of Crimes against the Polish Nation which you'll find in English here, on the Auschwitz Memorial and Museum website. Historians all agree soap was not made on an industrial scale, but do not rule it out on an experimental or small scale. All of this is in the article already, so it's unclear why you talk about "plays". Now, please read the article, respect WP:NPOV, and discuss. Jayjg (talk) 22:38, 12 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Your news source isn't more scholarly then the Lipstadt letter. The alleged analysis wasn't made open to review. If you read between the lines this was supposedly soap use to clean rooms for autopsies. And btw. skeletal preparations do leave have a soap-like byproduct. Using that one could prove any facilities doing anatomical research manufacturing human soap. https://archive.org/details/WykorzystywanieZwlokWiezniowDoBadanWInstytutachAnatomicznychWIiiRzeszy --41.146.35.111 (talk) 13:18, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

"Polish and" Jewish corpses
keeps adding the phrase "Polish and" to the sentence "The Yad Vashem Memorial has stated that the Nazis did not produce soap from Polish and Jewish corpses on an industrial scale..." However, the source's don't say this; they refer only to Jewish corpses, and as far as I can tell, it was never alleged that the Nazis made soap from Polish corpses. Could Brassco please explain why he/she is doing this? Jayjg (talk) 23:08, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

"Reines jüdisches Fett" relinks to this article
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reines_J%C3%BCdisches_Fett translated to english this actually means "pure jewish fat", i think this is better to be removed (dunno how).--91.49.164.21 (talk) 23:00, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Jewish Virtual Library
The Jewish Virtual Library article states that this whole story is unsupported. Wikipedia still trying to say "evidence of small experimental" soap making. Still can't seem to weed out the garbage. 159.105.81.25 (talk) 14:48, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

New film "Soaps" by Eyal Ballas
There is a new film and associated useful article on this subject. It is behind a paywall but if someone wants to use it to improve this article, send me email and I'll provide the text. The last sentence is cute: "Israeli poet Yisrael Har, who is interviewed in the film, says the refutations of the soap myth come from Holocaust deniers and Wikipedia." Zerotalk 01:56, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Earlier instance in 18th century Paris
Is the article meant to be only about the 20th century? If so, shouldn't that be indicated in the title? Would it be appropriate to add an example from the 18th century? Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_Innocents%27_Cemetery. Here are the relevant parts: "After a prolonged period of rain in spring 1780, conditions became untenable. On 4 September 1780, an edict forbade burying corpses in Les Innocents and in all other cemeteries in Paris. Bodies were exhumed and the bones were moved to the Catacombs in 1786.[3] Many bodies had incompletely decomposed and had turned into fat (margaric acid). During the exhumation, this fat was collected and subsequently turned into candles and soap.[4]" 4. "You (posthumously) light up my life". Scientific American blog. 15 April 2011.

I came across this in a newsletter, http://adrianleeds.com/component/acymailing/archive/view/mailid-741?key=fAqhD7WF&subid=9161-bff88e6b7b471699b91e92183a35d3fb&tmpl=component The author, Adrian Leeds, also provides some illustrations. "Paris history is so deep that it wasn't until very recently digging a little deeper below the Monoprix at the corner of boulevard de Sebastopol and rue Réaumur did archeologists discover over 200 bodies buried in a communal grave...laid out in neat rows, just like only the French would do...in perfect order. Eight graves were found, and in one, 150 individuals were buried in layers, each placed with great care -- head to toe to fit together like a puzzle to maximize the space. Would we expect less? Under the well-trafficked supermarket was a former cemetery of the medieval Hôpital de la Trinité, that believe it or not, functioned for five centuries -- from the 12th to the 17th. It was believed the bodies had been moved to the Catacombs 200 years ago, but we guess not! Even the archeologists from the French National Institute for Preventive Archaeological Research (INRAP) were surprised to find so many bones, thinking that if so many had died, there must have been a plague or famine that put them there. Among the bones was a bit of pottery dating later -- interesting, no? DNA and carbon testing is planned to determine more about the bodies, and then they will find a new and final resting place, once the city decides where...but no doubt, it will not be under the Monoprix this time around! The Monoprix was once the head office of Félix Potin, a French retailer and businessman of the mid 19th-century who began his career at the young age of 24 in the year 1844. The architect, Paul Auscher (1866–1932), designed several buildings for Félix Potin including this particular building with its distinctive turret bearing Félix Potin's name. He obviously didn't dig deep enough during construction to discover the skeletons. If he had, he might have never built it there. Not far away at what is now known as Place Joachim-du-Bellay, there once existed a medieval cemetery called the "Cimetière des Innocents" -- the oldest and largest cemetery in Paris, often used for mass graves. By the late 1700's, it was overflowing (one pit could hold 1,500 bodies) to the point where the bodies needed to be exhumed and carefully placed in the subterranean quarries we now know as the Catacombs (1786). Being next to the Paris central market of Les Halles, its presence doesn't sound too 'appetizing,' but this little detail might interest you: "Many bodies had incompletely decomposed and had turned into fat (margaric acid). During the exhumation, this fat was collected and subsequently turned into candles and soap." (Wikipedia.org) (I had no idea human fat could be so useful.) Once the bodies were moved out, an herb and vegetable market moved in. The fountain that had been in the cemetery since 1549 was moved to the center of the new market, now known at the "Fountain of Innocents" and still stands on the place Joachim-du-Bellay today..."

Printphi (talk) 11:12, 3 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Sounds awesome, and relevant. Feel free to add the information. Don't copy & paste, but definitely add it, with an apprpriate section heading and the reference information. - Boneyard90 (talk) 17:04, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Later instance in Stalin's USSR
The Gulag Archipelago (Part 1) by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn says that Stalin made people soap in the Gulags. Also, if memory serves, Bloodlands: Europe Between Hitler and Stalin by Yale historian Timothy D. Snyder said that the Soviets did it during the Holodomor.


 * Cool (albeit macabre) find, why didn't you add it? I'll hunt both of those down. Sounds like an interesting read. 121.210.33.50 (talk) 20:49, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Recent change on lede.
Wanted to comment so people know it's not a defacement given I'm at a library and not signed in. I changed a lede element slightly to bring it in line with what the citation provided actually says, specifically that there is one tested sample of soap and maybe two. I'm erring on the side of caution and going with two. 121.210.33.50 (talk) 20:47, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Joachim Neander-Polish historian ?! Big warning signs about this alleged author.
First of all, it's the first time I heard the name and looking for the guy hardly brings up any names in Polish academia. Second of all, his homepage describes him as "freelance historian" dedicated to "perception of Holocaust" and "revisionism". Third of all, the alleged "debunking" article is full of statements like "anti-German Polish myths" and "de-demonizing Spanner". These are very big warning sign about quality of this work and publication. The historical record is clear that Nazis have experimented with soap making although not on industrial scale.--MyMoloboaccount (talk) 22:47, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Neander is certainly not a holocaust denier and is rather active writing for anti-denier websites. The Polish state has also cleared Dr. Spanner from these accusations, since they are indeed untrue, even if medialiony has placed them into the collective memory of Poland. That "soap" made from corpses existed in the Danzig institute =/= that "Nazi human soap" was made or "experimented with". The holocaust-related claims of human-soap are not related to the "soap" from the institute. That human fat is detected in the Danzig-soap does not "prove" that "Nazi human soap" was made, since the "Danzig-soap" is unrelated. Its a non-sequitor and grounded on a false premise to use evidence of human-fat in the Danzig-soap to "prove" "Nazi-soap". --Havsjö (talk) 15:45, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
 * The Polish state has also cleared Dr. Spanner from these accusations, since they are indeed untrue, Absolutely false as can be easily read here:--MyMoloboaccount (talk) 17:28, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Citing the human fat found in the Danzig soap as proof "limited production of Nazi soap" in the article is incorrect, as the Dazing institute is not related to the Nazi Holocaust and the human fat in the Danzig-soap is not sourced from any holocaust victims. This is why Spanner officially acknowledged as innocent and was not prosecuted for any crimes. The article includes all mentions that "soap" was crated in Danzig and so on, but puts this in its proper context, i.e. not connected to the Holocaust. --Havsjö (talk) 17:36, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

} Citing the human fat found in the Danzig soap as proof "limited production of Nazi soap" in the article is incorrect Except Spanner was a Nazi who produced soap from human corpses.--MyMoloboaccount (talk) 18:17, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

POV
I have added POV template to the article. The reasons are following: --MyMoloboaccount (talk) 04:23, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
 * The current version overly relies and puts stronglly undue weight on outdated research by self described "freelance historian" Joachin Neander published in February 2006.Furthermore for whatever reason he is named as "Polish historian" although he is by all accounts a German one.
 * Modern scholarly works from 2011, 2019 have been removed from the article, as well as statements by renown historians like Yahuda Bauer from 1990.Statements from 1981 have been left in the article as they go in line with denial of the soap production.
 * Findings of IPN investigation from October 2006 have been largely removed from the article, including important results contradicting Nazi Spanner statements-which are presented as fact in the article.
 * The current version of the article falsely creates impression that soap production didn't take place at Danzig Institue-while we know now today from modern sources that this has been confirmed, and it included victims from Stutthof camp.
 * Information that Spanner used corpses from victims of Stutthof camp has been removed. Instead a sentence has been added presenting this as myth, which is misleading and goes against modern findings.
 * Findings of professor Stołyhwo that directly address and contradict Spanner claims have been removed.
 * Findings by IPN have been phrased in misleading way, the information that while Spanner didn't commit Nazi crimes, he could have been implicated in concealing them has been removed, as well as Kulesza's statement that his work was one of darkest chapters of WW2.The current version falsely implies IPN somehow cleared Spanner which it did not.
 * Source Tomkiewicz, Monika; Semków, Piotr (2013). Soap from human fat: the case of Professor Spanner is used without any page numbers, quotations and just directs to the book itself. The only case where it uses an actual quote and page number is when I added simple information that both authors confirm that IPN investigation confirmed production of soap. I find it highly dubious that supposed contradictory information is sourced to the book in general without providing any page numbers.
 * "freelance" does not carry the connotations you seem to think it carries. Neander is defiantly a legitimate historian, whos research is, for example, used by the United States Holocaust Museum among other things.
 * The claims from IPN and Stolywho etc are all included, so thats wrong.
 * Tomikewicz (who works in the investigative department of the IPN in Gdańsk) and Semków (formerly also an employee of the IPN, later a lecturer at a naval academy) do indeed confirm there was soap-grease with human-fat in it. That is also stated by Neander. BUT there is a world of difference between that fact and that this is soap "produced" (in order to specifically acquire soap) made from harvested jews/poles. Consider: the very idea, the mere notion, of the "nazi" + "human soap" connection exists because of untrue rumors arising during WW2, a myth known to be false with consensus from all historians. So, we also known that the bone maceration in Danzig, same as in any similar institute, and the soapy byproduct as a result of this, was purposefully conflated with the aforementioned untrue rumors in the immediate postwar. Consider then, that if the false (as agreed by all) rumors of "holocaust-soap" had never started during WW2, the work in Danzig would never have even been conceived of being related to "human soap production from holocaust victims", as that connection/idea rests only on the fact that such untrue rumors existed back then and that a connection was created based on them. What historians like Neander, and the IPN investigators Tomikewicz and Semkow, are trying to show, is exactly this: that the presence of "human soap" in Danzig does not prove the artificial connection that it is "holocaust soap". You seem to find it "contradictory" that they say it was innocent, while also confirming the creation of human soap. This is not contradictory, as they show: that "human soap-grease" came into existence at the institute (as part of the maceration process) is not the same as confirming the allegations of it being "produced" there (as in, soap manufacturing, making of soap-bars, or similar), leading those historians to conclude that the claims of "human soap production in Danzig" to be a myth, despite that "human soap" existed there. That this byproduct soap-grease was made from "harvested" jews/poles is also rebuked, which is also why Piotr Niesyn from the IPN discontinued the 2006 investigation you mentioned due to lack of evidence. While human fat was (naturally) discovered, he did not find grounds to claims that Spanner had incited the killings in order to obtain more corpses for the Institute, the investigation only found that in 1944 and 1945 there was a "chemical substance which was essentially soap" obtained from human fat, the same as Neander, Tomikewicz and Semkow are talking about --Havsjö (talk) 16:47, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

The essence of the article is completely missing
The article only depicts the history of usage but fails to scientifically present how chemical properties work and what makes human corpses favourable for soap production. --2001:16B8:3152:4E00:D12:C694:B8EF:9D16 (talk) 08:25, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Dubious Apologetics
This entire page is bizarrely anti semitic and pro Nazi, dismissing the idea of Nazis making soap out of humans in spite of also citing people and sources stating it to be true and stating as fact that it was thoroughly debunked without citing a single piece of evidence that it was debunked. Propaganda and making statements about how it’s folklore is not evidence or fact. I am especially confused as to how this is all scientifically and rigorously disproved when the Nazis sometimes destroyed their evidence to the point where they planted flowers and built homes on the one where they committed their very real atrocities. Yet those who treat the testimonies of individuals including Holocaust survivors as “fact” are referred to dismissively here as spreading mythology. One letter where Nazis covering up their crimes in one circumstance, Himmler ordering Mueller to incinerate bodies, is cited as proof that they never processed or experimented with dead bodies through the entire war, which they absolutely did. It is very strange to essentially accuse those who lived in the Holocaust of “exaggerating” when every aspect of the Holocaust has been disbelieved and discounted from the time it began because it was clearly a preposterous “rumor.” People testified at trials about this, but the page repeatedly stated these rumors arose from random individuals making a rudimentary mistake. Elleoneiram (talk) 00:58, 8 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence, and the evidence just isn't there. All the evidence indicates it was a repackaging of the "German Corpse Factory" myth. If I recall correctly, Anne Frank mentioned in her diary that allied propaganda broadcasts claimed Jews were being processed into soap, this would explain how the belief became so widespread among European Jews. Many authors have pointed out that clinging to the soap and lampshade myths aids holocaust deniers because they are so easily disproven. CorwenAv (talk) 14:46, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

The Ustaše also created soap from serbs in their conc. camps
This topic belongs in this article. 109.245.39.22 (talk) 12:43, 1 January 2024 (UTC)