Merged: US may close Cuba Embassy over 'health attacks'

[dann]

Cuban experts claim to have considered toxins, electromagnetic waves and insects as possible causes:

Quote:

Cuban state TV aired a documentary late Thursday rejecting any responsibility for the attacks and accusing the Americans of failing to cooperate.
(…)
Those who came down ill reported physical symptoms including hearing loss, headaches, nausea, cognitive issues, and difficulty sleeping.
The Cuban documentary said there is no evidence to confirm what may have caused these symptoms.
Cuba says its experts had considered the possibility of causes like toxins, electromagnetic waves or even insects.
Cuba denies allegations of sonic attacks targeting US embassy (AFP/France24, Oct. 29, 2017)

[calebprime]

Originally Posted by dann

A strong possibility? Really?

This is just plain crazy! There are numerous causes of hearing loss in adults, for instance ”inherited from your parents or acquired from illness, ototoxic (ear-damaging) drugs, exposure to loud noise, tumors, head injury, or the aging process.” The Mayo Clinic mentions the following risk factors: aging, loud noise, heredity, occcupational noises, recreational noises, some medications and some illnesses, so if even one of those drugs exists in Cuba, it suddenly becomes number one suspect – after super-sonic weapons and crickets have f-i-n-a-l-l-y been eliminated from the competition.

If the pursuit of the suspicious Cypermethrin as the culprit remains unsuccessful, let me suggest that it might be worthwhile to find out if any of the patients had Cuban ancestors who might have brought the susceptibility to hearing loss down on their unsuspecting grandchildren.
And if that doesn't work, we should consider that these guys spent time in Cuba, and we all know what happens when we spend time, don't we? That's right, we age, even in Havana, so this is yet another one of those things that the Cubans didn't properly protect the US agents against!

Gotta make that Cuban connection stick – somehow!

Oh, just an emotional reaction on my part. My biases are showing. Pesticides scare me.

That's why I put in weasel words like "think" "might" and "possibility". I figured three weasel words would be enough.

Oh, and eta: My bias in relation to psychogenic (imaginary) causes is the opposite of Sceptic G's: She's a nurse and so has heard a lot of conflicting symptoms from worried people. I'm someone who hates going to the doctor, so I don't unless there's really something wrong with me. I know myself very well (I'm always being commended on the metacognitive skills) even if I can't use a soldering iron. I can't imagine going to the doctor and just complaining about vague things like being run down, or having headaches, etc.

In other words, my bias is toward believing that some people were actually sick from something.

[dann]

I know the feeling, but I would probably still resort to the Sick-President Syndrome. At least it's got syndrome in it, so it must be something serious!

[Checkmite]

Originally Posted by dann

Yes, you have "been looking through some (!) past cases", but apparently not enough, and there's probably a reason why you seem to prefer the medieval ones when no properly medically trained observer was present...

They did not have cartoons in Japan in medieval times; that reference was to a case from 1997. The fainting schoolgirls reference was to a case from Sri Lanka in 2012. The laughing epidemic comes to us from 1962. In fact of all the cases I made a reference to only a single one was from "medieval" times, which was the "dancing mania".

Originally Posted by dann

It simply isn't true - at least it isn't true of contemporary cases: sick building syndrome, complaints about electro smog or the recent, and to some extent still ongoing HPV-vaccine scare in my own country.

Most of these are simple personal delusions, not cases of mass hysteria. "Windmill sickness", "WiFi sensitivity", "Morgellon's disease", and being a "targeted individual" are similar instances. Yes, in the internet age individuals who have these delusions are able to find each other, communicate, and reinforce each other's delusions; but two people who live downwind from a wind turbine but a mile away from each other getting "sick", and finding a website where they can talk to isolated "sick" people downwind from wind turbines in completely different regions and countries does not make a case of "mass hysteria". Likewise, a person living near a cell tower who gets sick, and only later finds out about cell towers "making people sick" and becomes convinced that's what happened to him, is not a victim of "mass hysteria"; he's just wrong.

As for "sick building syndrome" - again, "mass hysteria" is a reach. When minor illnesses with simple symptoms are a dependable occurrence, and nearly everyone works in buildings where many other people work, and a good number of people live in multi-family dwellings, it is a statistical inevitability that there will be workplaces and apartment buildings where there is what looks like an unusually high number of inhabitants with a variety of illnesses at the same time.

Originally Posted by dann

So now you're blaming me that what I guess will happen "in the near future" hasn't already happened???!

The point was, we are already in the "near future" relative to the months-old events in the article you're referencing. At what point do we stop being in the "near future" of those events? A year afterward? Can't be too many cases of mass hysteria where some random tourist succumbs to the "mystery illness" 8 months later.

Originally Posted by dann

If all you're saying is that sometimes people may develop memory loss, then I'll have to agree with you. People do that all the time and for various reasons. But the kind of memory loss described here is pretty specific, and the reason why I mentioned my own experience with very similar 'symptoms' was that I seriously doubt that we're talking about anything other than people in a prolonged state of anxiety beginning to question and worry about every little thing that they imagine might be wrong with them and a symptom of a serious defect - much like the tourist staying at the Hotel Capri who appears to have come down with a bad case of hypochondria based only on the tingling sensations that he felt in his extremities when he started relaxing after a long day of walking in Havana.

The "kind" of memory loss here meaning, "inability to recall certain words", as related by the article I presume? This isn't very specific at all; it could just as easily refer to a diminishing score on a CAS assessment during a checkup, rather than a victim running in a mortal panic to his doctor because there's been a word right on the tip of his tongue all day and he just knows That Cuba Thing must've made him unable to recall it.

Originally Posted by dann

That is the problem with the diagnosis of mass hysteria/mass psychogenic illness that you seem to be unable to grasp: In modern medicine it has become fairly easy to find evidence for most diseases: you x-ray the led and find the fracture, you analyze the blood and discover the virus or the antibodies corresponding to a well-defined disease. That is proof positive. What's funny about the diagnosis of a psychogenic illness is that you do much the same thing, and when you don't find anything, you begin to suspect hypochondria or - if you have a number of patients from the same group: mass psychogenic illness. That is the 'proof', i.e. the absence of proof of something else, an actual disease - but, of course, proof is not what you're looking for ...

But that's not always true, though. Of course things like fractures have simple explanations. Many diseases have defining and singular characteristics that allow them to be diagnosed as easily as a broken bone, or tests that are highly accurate at indicating the presence of a specific pathogen. Other symptoms like headaches and nausea are far less definitive or useful for diagnosis. They are actually caused by real diseases - AND can also be caused by stress, or environmental factors, or nothing at all. And without something specific to look for, it's very difficult to perform tests; hospitals generally cannot take a vial of blood and literally screen it for an all-encompassing list of every single chemical and pathogen it contains which can then be scrutinized to root out the culprit whatever it may be. For the most part, doctors must look at the totality of symptoms and hope that somewhere among them is a telltale, or at least something suggestive of an actual, more specific, practical and likely path to diagnosis - something that tells them which of the myriad more-narrow and -practical tests available to them is most likely to give a useful result. If they can't find such a helpful symptom or symptoms, they do not immediately leap to "hypochondriac" or "mass hysteria". The symptoms are typically just considered idiopathic and the course of treatment then becomes to simply treat the symptoms.

Originally Posted by dann

No, it isn't! If you get diarrhea (and I've had the 'pleasure' more than once in Cuba), it's fairly easy to diagnose what causes it: You just have to look for the "micro-critters" in a stool sample. Critters found - diagnosis complete: That is what actually caused the symptoms, and it's usually relatively easy to cure. (And if not: drink plenty of water and wait it out.)

That's convenient in the case of diarrhea specifically; but here you've taken one symptom of from a list I've given, and one cause from a list I've given, and while you've earned congratulations for managing to square those specific items with each other, we can't act like that throws the entire point out the window. Diarrhea, among symptoms, and local infectious bacteria, among causes, happen to be particularly easy to diagnose just as you describe. The headaches and nausea, and environmental causes, do not so easy lend themselves to simple tests as I explained above.

Originally Posted by dann

Wondering, investigating and inquiring are very admirable endeavors, but now you're trying to change the paradigm, to turn it into a case of semi-skeptics coming down with something on a sea cruise, which is obviously not what happened here.

I don't see where "semi-skeptics" is important to the scenario; a ship of outstanding fools can just as easily each come down with something around the same time and wonder if there's a connection with no less credibility. But essentially, I disagree - I think the idea of a bunch of people "coming down with something on a sea cruise" is a rather excellent metaphor for what has happened in this case.

[Sherkeu]

Originally Posted by calebprime

In other words, my bias is toward believing that some people were actually sick from something.

I think it is evident now that there was something. (I did not think so at the start). The reason is that there are people with direct knowledge of what happened who have a large incentive to discredit the claims, and they have not.
Ben Rhodes (former Deputy Nat. Security Advisor), who was heavily involved in the detente negotiations , does not question if it happened but speculates on who did it.
The possibilities according to his recent interview in Europe:

Quote:

The first held by the former adviser is that it is the responsibility of the "internal hard sector" of the Cuban government.[] The other possibility is that it is Russia," says the former adviser in his conversation with the three European media. "Its objective would be to sow chaos, separate the US from Cuba and make the island return to its orbit," he stresses.

Then there is Mark Feierstein (Former NSC Sr. Director Western Hemisphere) who wrote a piece on Oct 10:

Quote:

The perpetrators of the alleged attacks on U.S. officials apparently wanted the U.S. and Cuban people to drift apart again. Whatever the origin of the illnesses afflicting U.S. diplomats, Cuban opponents of President Raul Castro’s opening to the United States will be pleased if Americans disengage from Cuba, and critics of normalization in the United States are cheering the renewed tensions.

On the issue of removing the staff at the embassy he says:

Quote:

“It’s a wrenching decision,” said Mark Feierstein, the former White House official who shepherded the detente with Cuba in the final years of the Obama administration. “There’s clearly some entity out there that wants to damage relations between the two countries, and unfortunately, they’ve been successful.”

Further, the people working at the NSC during Obama's term are still working there including this guy who McMaster promoted to be his Sr. Advisor last month:

Quote:

Another holdover is Fernando Cutz, McMaster’s director for South America who previously reported to former deputy NSC advisor Ben Rhodes, according to administration sources. Cutz enthusiastically endorsed Obama’s Cuba policy throughout his tenure as an NSC staffer.

So it seems that the sources leaking info about this 'mysterious covert sonic weapon' overlap both administrations and neither side disputes it. In fact it's possible that Rhodes is a source himself. The reporter who broke the story in a State Dept briefing, Steve Dorsey, happens to work for Ben Rhodes brother, CBS President David Rhodes, as an Exec for CBS Radio.

In that briefing, spokesperson Nauert is quite personal with the room of reporters but she needs to ask Dorsey his name. (Not so for the AP's Matt Lee who is there with him and they will end up collaborating on Cuba stories.) Hours later, Dorsey puts out an article including "a source familiar with the incidents" that goes way beyond any facts given in the briefing. From then on the AP and CBS manage to get all the 'scoops' from official sources (except a report by CNN).

It is all very curious, isn't it?

[Sherkeu]

It's still possible that everyone 'in the know' long ago concluded it's mainly a psychogenic phenomena and the Obama folks are agreeing to, and perhaps even instigating, the 'attack' story to avert some larger looming threat to US-Cuba relations, and hence, protecting Obama's legacy.

But reading between the lines in their interviews it sounds more like Cuba did do something and the Obama folks are saying "Hey, we understand it wasn't your official orders to do that so let's try to get through this on good terms."

It was reported that Trump said "Cuba did some bad things".
But that isn't what he said. He said "Some very bad things happened in Cuba. They did some bad things in Cuba." Because he puts little thought into his off-the-cuff remarks, sometimes there is truth in there!

The 'health attack' may just be the public face of some activity more serious that is not disclosed, like avoiding WW3 with Russia because we caught them doing 'bad things' there and Cuban forces were complicit.

[dann]

Originally Posted by Checkmite

we are already in the "near future"

”near future” has now grown to such proportions that it requires a post of its own to untangle it!
It began on Nov. 3 with Delphic Oracle quoting a news report:

Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle

"Some victims now have problems concentrating or recalling specific words, several officials said, the latest signs of more serious damage than the US government initially realized."

Originally Posted by Checkmite

I think it strengthens the "claim" such as it is that those having such issues are suffering from a genuine malady of some kind. It doesn't strengthen any relationship to whatever sounds they believe they heard in Cuba.

Originally Posted by dann

Oh boy, here we go again!
It actually strengthens the claim that we are dealing with a case of mass hysteria: any new symptoms only show how it is evolving. The first case of hearing loss may very well have been genuine:

Quote:

However, it is certainly possible that the initial index case may have an organic diagnosis, but not those subsequently afflicted. This is a pattern that is frequently reported in other MPI episodes.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3536509/

That you have to add "of some (!) kind" certainly doesn't strengthen your diagnosis!

My guess is that in the near future, any of the previous 22 (23?) 'victims' forgetting one of the items that they intended to buy at the supermarket will think that they are now exhibiting a symptom of this "genuine malady", and this in spite of the fact that from time to time we probably all experience these 'symptoms': "problems concentrating or recalling specific words."

Originally Posted by Checkmite

That's obviously not true; after all this report we're talking about is months old already and there haven't been any new developments along the line that you predict, at least that have been reported.

Originally Posted by dann

So now you're blaming me that what I guess will happen "in the near future" hasn't already happened???! I'm sorry, but that's kind of how the future works, even the near one.

Originally Posted by Checkmite

The point was, we are already in the "near future" relative to the months-old events in the article you're referencing. At what point do we stop being in the "near future" of those events? A year afterward? Can't be too many cases of mass hysteria where some random tourist succumbs to the "mystery illness" 8 months later.

But maybe Checkmite’s calendar just doesn’t work. If you google the text that Delphic Oracle quoted, you find this: This article is 1 month old , which I guess will change to two months in a week or so.
That was an awful lot of work to clear up this little problem!

[dann]

Originally Posted by Checkmite

They did not have cartoons in Japan in medieval times; that reference was to a case from 1997. The fainting schoolgirls reference was to a case from Sri Lanka in 2012. The laughing epidemic comes to us from 1962. In fact of all the cases I made a reference to only a single one was from "medieval" times, which was the "dancing mania".

No, you're probably right, I don't know much about the history of Japanese cartoons, but we can agree that they weren't around in the middle ages. In 2012 there should have been a good chance that somebody recorded their symptoms systematically - depending on if and when health authorities were contacted, so I can't help wondering why you go into great detail about this and choose to ignore (= leave out) this:

Originally Posted by dann

And I would really like to see your documentation that this is what characterizes an outbreak of mass hysteria (or mass psychogenic illness): "every (!) person who ends up being afflicted, has headaches AND nausea AND vomiting."

[dann]

Originally Posted by Checkmite

Most of these (I referred to: "sick building syndrome, complaints about electro smog or the recent, and to some extent still ongoing HPV-vaccine scare" in Denmark. dann) are simple personal delusions, not cases of mass hysteria. "Windmill sickness", "WiFi sensitivity", "Morgellon's disease", and being a "targeted individual" are similar instances. Yes, in the internet age individuals who have these delusions are able to find each other, communicate, and reinforce each other's delusions; but two people who live downwind from a wind turbine but a mile away from each other getting "sick", and finding a website where they can talk to isolated "sick" people downwind from wind turbines in completely different regions and countries does not make a case of "mass hysteria". Likewise, a person living near a cell tower who gets sick, and only later finds out about cell towers "making people sick" and becomes convinced that's what happened to him, is not a victim of "mass hysteria"; he's just wrong.

Thank you for clearing that up, Checkmite - as if anybody needed this attempt at obfuscation: It does indeed require a little more than one person to define something as mass hysteria or mass psychogenic illness! One person does not constitute mass! (As if anybody had claimed that this is the definition.)

However, when a lot of these individual cases come together and inspire each other, then it is mass hysteria/mass psychogenic illness. Your case, however, about the one, individual person who "only later finds out about cell towers", is plain fiction, invented for the occasion, pure fabrication: as if that's the way people come down with electro smog syndrome: They never ever talk with anybody else about their weird symptoms until after they've developed them, and only then does each individual case "become convinced that's what happened to him."
Yeah, right!

That's as much as I have time for for now.

[dann]

Originally Posted by Sherkeu

The 'health attack' may just be the public face of some activity more serious that is not disclosed, like avoiding WW3 with Russia because we caught them doing 'bad things' there and Cuban forces were complicit.

Wow! You've actually gone full-blown conspiracy theory now! Is Kim Jong Un involved?

[dann]

I just have time for one more:

Originally Posted by Checkmite

As for "sick building syndrome" - again, "mass hysteria" is a reach. When minor illnesses with simple symptoms are a dependable occurrence, and nearly everyone works in buildings where many other people work, and a good number of people live in multi-family dwellings, it is a statistical inevitability that there will be workplaces and apartment buildings where there is what looks like an unusually high number of inhabitants with a variety of illnesses at the same time.

Yes, but that's not what we're talking about here. Yes, people come down with all kinds of stuff all the time or, as you put it, "with a variety of illnesses at the same time." However, if they come down with a variety of illnesses that medical doctors can't explain as regular symptoms of regular diseases, that's when you start to wonder what's going on.
And again, people's symptoms shouldn't simply be dismissed as psychogenic unless they've been thoroughly examined to rule out actual diseases. But on the other hand, you also shouldn't let yourself be fooled by the symptoms of mass hallucination. Case in point:

Quote:

In 2012, Brockovich got involved in the mysterious case of 14 students from LeRoy, New York, who began reporting perplexing medical symptoms including tics and speech difficulty.[18] Brockovich believed environmental pollution from the 1970 Lehigh Valley Railroad derailment was the cause and conducted testing in the area. Brockovich was supposed to return to town to present her findings, but never did; in the meantime the students' doctors determined the cause was mass psychogenic illness and that the media exposure was making it worse.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erin_B...her_litigation

And another one:

Quote:

The "kind" of memory loss here meaning, "inability to recall certain words", as related by the article I presume? This isn't very specific at all; it could just as easily refer to a diminishing score on a CAS assessment during a checkup, rather than a victim running in a mortal panic to his doctor because there's been a word right on the tip of his tongue all day and he just knows That Cuba Thing must've made him unable to recall it.

"inability to recall certain words" is a pretty specific description of memory loss. I wouldn't expect them to specify which "certain words" they were talking about: pronouns, auxiliary verbs, four-letter words or words beginning with the letter c.

[dann]

Originally Posted by Checkmite

But that's not always true, though. Of course things like fractures have simple explanations. Many diseases have defining and singular characteristics that allow them to be diagnosed as easily as a broken bone, or tests that are highly accurate at indicating the presence of a specific pathogen. Other symptoms like headaches and nausea are far less definitive or useful for diagnosis. They are actually caused by real diseases - AND can also be caused by stress, or environmental factors, or nothing at all. And without something specific to look for, it's very difficult to perform tests; hospitals generally cannot take a vial of blood and literally screen it for an all-encompassing list of every single chemical and pathogen it contains which can then be scrutinized to root out the culprit whatever it may be. For the most part, doctors must look at the totality of symptoms and hope that somewhere among them is a telltale, or at least something suggestive of an actual, more specific, practical and likely path to diagnosis - something that tells them which of the myriad more-narrow and -practical tests available to them is most likely to give a useful result. If they can't find such a helpful symptom or symptoms, they do not immediately leap to "hypochondriac" or "mass hysteria". The symptoms are typically just considered idiopathic and the course of treatment then becomes to simply treat the symptoms.

Please, spare me the hyperbole! Who said anything about "immediately"?! Your very long introduction to your very short point is correct, in as far as MDs examine the patient, looks at the symptoms, and based on that they come up with an assumption about what is wrong with people and a possible cure. Sometimes the treatment starts here, and only if it doesn't seem to help do they begin to suspect that the symptoms might be caused by something else, and so they try another treatment. Or the first test(s) was/were inconclusive, but based on this conclusion they move on to other tests.
However - and I know this from the case of my girlfriend, who had Hodgkin's about 35 years ago - when they still don't find anything conclusive, they begin to consider sending you to a psychiatrist. (The girlfriend I mentioned was scheduled to see a psychiatrist because she was still in pain after six months of different kinds of treatment, and only because they finally discovered what actually caused the pain, was the appointment with the psychiatrist cancelled.)
So MDs usually don't begin to consider psychogenic illness or hyponcondria until they've ruled out at least the most common causes associated with the symptoms exhibited by a patient. And again: Nobody said: "immediately"!

Quote:

That's convenient in the case of diarrhea specifically; but here you've taken one symptom of from a list I've given, and one cause from a list I've given, and while you've earned congratulations for managing to square those specific items with each other, we can't act like that throws the entire point out the window. Diarrhea, among symptoms, and local infectious bacteria, among causes, happen to be particularly easy to diagnose just as you describe. The headaches and nausea, and environmental causes, do not so easy lend themselves to simple tests as I explained above.

That depends on the specific "environmental cause." Radiation, for instance? Sometimes it's very easy to diagnose, sometimes it isn't. Very often it also depends on the severity of the symptoms.

Quote:

I don't see where "semi-skeptics" is important to the scenario; a ship of outstanding fools can just as easily each come down with something around the same time and wonder if there's a connection with no less credibility. But essentially, I disagree - I think the idea of a bunch of people "coming down with something on a sea cruise" is a rather excellent metaphor for what has happened in this case.

Excecpt that in your fictitious analogy:

Quote:

The fact that a couple of people hearing sounds and feeling weird things around the same time led others to more keenly notice the random but innocuous medical issues they'd also started experiencing since moving to Cuba and simply wondering or even investigating if there might be a connection, is just fairly typical "inquiry" to me, not enough to go slapping the "mass hysteria" label on the entire affair and treating them like they're a bunch of woos crying about gluten.
(Checkmit's own use of bold, in this case; the ones above were mine, dann)

you have invented people who keenly notice, simply wonder and investigate, instead of a bunch of scared people imagining things and attacks with sonic blasters - as it appears to have been the case in the real world.

[dann]

PS Let me help you with this one, Checkmite,

Originally Posted by dann

And I would really like to see your documentation that this is what characterizes an outbreak of mass hysteria (or mass psychogenic illness): "every (!) person who ends up being afflicted, has headaches AND nausea AND vomiting."

Originally Posted by Checkmite

I've been looking through some past cases of what is generally considered to be mass hysteria, and the definitive common factor between all of them is that all of the victims share the exact same symptoms.
(Checkmite’s italics, dann)

Since the task is probably too daunting for you, I’ve taken it upon myself to ‘look through some past cases’, that is, the ones that you mentioned:
Apparently you got most of your examples from this Wikipedia list of notable cases of mass hysteria, but you didn’t even bother to investigate beyond the one-to-six-line descriptions of the cases.

In the case of the The Dancing Plague of 1518, it doesn’t say that ”all of the victims share the exact same symptoms”, but it does say that “some of those affected died of heart attack, stroke, or exhaustion.” Some, Checkmite, obviously not all.
That’s right! It doesn’t say that "every (!) person who ends up being afflicted” dances AND dies AND is buried AND …

This is what you find if you use google’s own link to the case from 1962:

Quote:

Six to eighteen months after it started, the phenomenon died off. The following symptoms were reported on an equally massive scale as the reports of the laughter itself: pain, fainting, flatulence, respiratory problems, rashes, attacks of crying, and random screaming. The Tanganyika Laughter Epidemic

However, you will notice that the Wikipedia article about this case doesn’t claim that ‘every single person who ends up being afflicted laughs AND has pain AND faints AND farts AND has respiratory problems AND has rashes AND cries AND screams.’
Why not?

And if we finally go to the Denno Senshi Porygo case:

Quote:

At this point, viewers started to complain of blurred vision, headaches, dizziness and nausea. Some experienced seizures, blindness, convulsions and loss of consciousness. Japan's Fire Defense Agency reported that a total of 685 viewers – 310 boys and 375 girls – were taken to hospitals by ambulances.[5][9] Although many victims recovered during the ambulance trip, more than 150 of them were admitted to hospitals. Two people remained hospitalized for more than two weeks. Some other people had seizures when parts of the scene were rebroadcast during news reports on the seizures. Only a small fraction of the 685 children treated were diagnosed with photosensitive epilepsy. This phenomenon was later called "Pokémon Shock".
Later studies showed that 5–10% of the viewers had mild symptoms that did not need hospital treatment. Twelve thousand children who did not get sent to hospital by ambulance reported mild symptoms of illness; however, their symptoms more closely resembled mass hysteria than a grand mal seizure. A study following 103 patients over three years after the event found that most of them had no further seizures.

At this point I don’t need to quote you anymore, Checkmite. These cases obviously contradict your claim, they show the exact opposite of what you say they do, and I’m pretty sure that you realize that.
If not, then at least I am absolutely sure that they convince everybody else …

[Sherkeu]

Originally Posted by dann

Wow! You've actually gone full-blown conspiracy theory now! Is Kim Jong Un involved?

Haha! Yes, well I have competing theories dueling it out in my own head.

For me, the thing that has caused me to rethink the possibilities is the fact that no one with knowledge of it has come out with a skeptical view. Not even as an anonymous source. It's been presented as this extraordinary claim without any solid evidence of who or what it could be. Where is the usual debate?

Don't you find it odd that everyone accepts that the removal of embassy staff was the right thing to do? It was a major setback to normalization to do that. There should have been some heavy criticism that followed.
Disagreements do exist on the expulsion of the 2 Cuban diplomats, the "excessive" travel warning, and the stoppage of visa services. But that some sort of targeted attack happened? No one seems to question it.

[dann]

I think that this case is a variation of my sig-line quotation:
"Stupidity renders itself invisible by assuming very large proportions. Completely unreasonable claims are irrefutable. Ni-en-leh pointed out that a philosopher might get into trouble by claiming that two times two makes five, but he does not risk much by claiming that two times two makes shoe polish." B. Brecht
Except that in this case, it should go: "The stupidity of stupid claims renders …"

If you are an ordinary reporter, how the hell do you go about contradicting or even questioning these statements? The obvious thing to do, of course, is to ask the experts, and almost all of them seem to agree: There is no such thing as the super sonic weapon, and if there were, it would have to be so enormous in size that you couldn't possibly conceal it. So it's not true that "No one seems to question it." (In Denmark, too, by the way: Scientist: Questionable that American diplomats were exposed to sonic weapons (Ingeniøren, Aug. 15, 2017)).
And I have a hard time believing that the US agents in Havana have no counter-espionage apparatus, that they have no surveillance whatsoever of their immediate surroundings, so why didn't they detect the super sonic blasters?!

Apart from that, people involved in spying generally aren't available for interviews, and in this case we don't seem to have a single eyewitness report. Trump doesn't question anything because he can use the story politically - and he is not exactly a big fan of truth anyway. And the spies themselves are probably too embarrassed by the whole thing at this point, which might also be the reason why they won't allow the Cubans to see as much as the medical reports. If some disgruntled employee with a grudge feels the need to leak more embarrassing details at some point, we'll know more, but until then …

And remember: The people at the US embassy in Havana continued to invite friends and family to visit them after the 'attacks' began! That doesn't sound like the beginning of WW3 to me!

[Andy_Ross]

US administration publishes new Cuba travel restrictions

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-41918907

The US administration has published a series of measures increasing limits on Americans' dealings with Cuba.
The package includes a blacklist of state-owned companies and entities, including shops and hotels.
Most US citizens travelling to the island will now have to go as part of organised tour groups.
The measures come as part of a partial rollback of ex-president Barack Obama's policy of engagement with Cuba, as announced by President Trump in June.
Officials have denied that any of these steps are related to the recent acoustic incidents, defined as "health attacks" by the state department against its officials in Havana.

Restrictions have also been placed on people-to-people exchanges, a travel category under which Americans can stay with families on the island.
From now on, these exchanges can only take place "under the auspices of an organisation subject to US jurisdiction" and accompanied by a representative of that organisation.

[The Don]

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop

US administration publishes new Cuba travel restrictions

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-41918907

The US administration has published a series of measures increasing limits on Americans' dealings with Cuba.
The package includes a blacklist of state-owned companies and entities, including shops and hotels.
Most US citizens travelling to the island will now have to go as part of organised tour groups.
The measures come as part of a partial rollback of ex-president Barack Obama's policy of engagement with Cuba, as announced by President Trump in June.
Officials have denied that any of these steps are related to the recent acoustic incidents, defined as "health attacks" by the state department against its officials in Havana.

Restrictions have also been placed on people-to-people exchanges, a travel category under which Americans can stay with families on the island.
From now on, these exchanges can only take place "under the auspices of an organisation subject to US jurisdiction" and accompanied by a representative of that organisation.

I've long had the suspicion that the Trump Administration wanted to roll back another Obama accomplishment, the improvement in relations with Cuba. This seems to confirm my suspicions and in part seem to be an attempt to bolster GOP among Cuban ex-pats in places like Florida.

[dann]

No need to suspect anything! He thought that he already did!

Quote:

“I am canceling the last administration’s completely one-sided deal with Cuba,” Trump proclaimed to thundering applause – even though he’s not.

In Miami, Trump toughens Obama Cuba policy ‘like I promised’ (Miami Herald, Jun. 16, 2017)

[Sherkeu]

Originally Posted by dann

If you are an ordinary reporter, how the hell do you go about contradicting or even questioning these statements? The obvious thing to do, of course, is to ask the experts, and almost all of them seem to agree: There is no such thing as the super sonic weapon, and if there were, it would have to be so enormous in size that you couldn't possibly conceal it. So it's not true that "No one seems to question it." (In Denmark, too, by the way: Scientist: Questionable that American diplomats were exposed to sonic weapons (Ingeniøren, Aug. 15, 2017)).

I'm talking about people with insider knowledge, not experts who are giving opinions based on the news story.
There are people with access to the highest security level information, inside and outside the current administration, who were working with Cuba and were there at the time. They are pro-normalization. It's their treatment of the attacks as fact that I find unusual given that it plays against their stated goals.
Why is some unknown secret weapon an accepted theory instead of say, a drug or poison that alters perception? Or the obvious psychogenic one?
Wouldn't you think they might say "That's quite a bold theory when there is no evidence such a device exists. These are clearly scare tactics! I trust the FBI will deliver their findings and Americans will be assured that Cuba was, and continues to be safe for our embassy staff." ??? Why are they not saying that?

Quote:

And I have a hard time believing that the US agents in Havana have no counter-espionage apparatus, that they have no surveillance whatsoever of their immediate surroundings, so why didn't they detect the super sonic blasters?!

No idea. The FBI has been there 4 times now. It's reasonable to think they have something they are investigating that requires their presence. I agree though that, whatever their theory, it didn't involve anything that would be caught on surveillance.
Maybe the FBI are lollygagging bureaucrats that go through certain investigative requirements before making a final report. Or they are using this unique 'invitation' to spend time with Cuban police/intelligence (basically working for the CIA). Who knows? They are currently acting as if they have something serious to investigate.

Quote:

Apart from that, people involved in spying generally aren't available for interviews, and in this case we don't seem to have a single eyewitness report. Trump doesn't question anything because he can use the story politically - and he is not exactly a big fan of truth anyway. And the spies themselves are probably too embarrassed by the whole thing at this point, which might also be the reason why they won't allow the Cubans to see as much as the medical reports. If some disgruntled employee with a grudge feels the need to leak more embarrassing details at some point, we'll know more, but until then …

And remember: The people at the US embassy in Havana continued to invite friends and family to visit them after the 'attacks' began! That doesn't sound like the beginning of WW3 to me!

Yes, seems it wasn't considered some serious thing until later when some sort of pattern emerged. The illnesses, taken separately, are things with normal explanations, besides the descriptions individuals gave of sounds and vibrations. If it was super obvious, there would not be people who delayed reporting for weeks or months. Of course, that makes it seem as if they themselves had a normal explanation for what happened to them at the time and were later suggestible to recollect it in a more sinister way. Plus, there are still staff there now, so the threat level can't be very high or they would all be evacuated. (Like I said, I have competing theories!).

There was one eyewitness report that described vibrations being in one part of a room. Ill see if I can find it.

[Sherkeu]

Here's the one first hand account - it's brief. AP News.

Quote:

The blaring, grinding noise jolted the American diplomat from his bed in a Havana hotel. He moved just a few feet, and there was silence. He climbed back into bed. Inexplicably, the agonizing sound hit him again. It was as if he’d walked through some invisible wall cutting straight through his room.

Soon came the hearing loss, and the speech problems, symptoms both similar and altogether different from others among at least 21 U.S. victims in an astonishing international mystery still unfolding in Cuba.

These AP reporters, who get nearly all of the inside scoops, lay on the dramatics pretty thick!

[Sherkeu]

Originally Posted by The Don

I've long had the suspicion that the Trump Administration wanted to roll back another Obama accomplishment, the improvement in relations with Cuba. This seems to confirm my suspicions and in part seem to be an attempt to bolster GOP among Cuban ex-pats in places like Florida.

True. But it wasn't always the case. For the majority of his campaign, and 5 or 6 visits to Florida, Trump was fine with opening up Cuba- especially market opportunities, like hotels and resorts. No surprise there really. He did say the deal could have been better.

Quote:

In September 2015 he said "I think it's fine. But we should have made a better deal. The concept of opening with Cuba — 50 years is enough — the concept of opening with Cuba is fine. I think we should have made a stronger deal," he told The Daily Caller.
Trump also said in March that he would consider opening a hotel in Cuba.
"Maybe it won't work out, but I will tell you, I think Cuba has a certain potential and I think it's OK to bring Cuba into the fold," Trump told CNN.

In September 2016, his views had changed.

Quote:

...the next president can reverse them. And that is what I will do unless the Castro regime meets our demands," Trump said Friday.
"Those demands will include religious and political freedom for the Cuban people and the freeing of political prisoners," Trump said.

Of course, this was after he became the nominee and more pressure was on to get those Florida votes. In the final stretch, you do what it takes to win, right? But it was also after he had access to classified security briefings (began Aug 17), which may have changed his friendly outlook.

[dann]

Originally Posted by Sherkeu

I'm talking about people with insider knowledge, not experts who are giving opinions based on the news story.
There are people with access to the highest security level information, inside and outside the current administration, who were working with Cuba and were there at the time. They are pro-normalization. It's their treatment of the attacks as fact that I find unusual given that it plays against their stated goals.
Why is some unknown secret weapon an accepted theory instead of say, a drug or poison that alters perception? Or the obvious psychogenic one?
Wouldn't you think they might say "That's quite a bold theory when there is no evidence such a device exists. These are clearly scare tactics! I trust the FBI will deliver their findings and Americans will be assured that Cuba was, and continues to be safe for our embassy staff." ??? Why are they not saying that?

My guess is that security has been tightened since Wikileaks and Snowden. The "treatment of the attacks as fact" is one thing, but at the same time they say that they don't know what might have caused it, which makes it a very strange 'fact' indeed!

Quote:

No idea. The FBI has been there 4 times now. It's reasonable to think they have something they are investigating that requires their presence. I agree though that, whatever their theory, it didn't involve anything that would be caught on surveillance.
Maybe the FBI are lollygagging bureaucrats that go through certain investigative requirements before making a final report. Or they are using this unique 'invitation' to spend time with Cuban police/intelligence (basically working for the CIA). Who knows? They are currently acting as if they have something serious to investigate.

At one point the US authorities required no restrictions on the number of personnel being allowed to enter Cuba. This was one way increasing that number, if only temporarily, and probably also of gaining access to places that would otherwise have been off limits.

Quote:

Yes, seems it wasn't considered some serious thing until later when some sort of pattern emerged. The illnesses, taken separately, are things with normal explanations, besides the descriptions individuals gave of sounds and vibrations. If it was super obvious, there would not be people who delayed reporting for weeks or months. Of course, that makes it seem as if they themselves had a normal explanation for what happened to them at the time and were later suggestible to recollect it in a more sinister way. Plus, there are still staff there now, so the threat level can't be very high or they would all be evacuated. (Like I said, I have competing theories!).

There was one eyewitness report that described vibrations being in one part of a room. Ill see if I can find it.

But that is the one that might just be a cricket or tinnitus (noise only, no vibrations): He heard the noise in bed, it disappeared when he got out of bed, only to return when he got back in bed again.

[dann]

The Cuba Acoustic Files: “The Balloon that Inflates By Itself” (Havana Times, Oct. 21, 2017)

An article about the declassified JFK files also mentions the recent 'attacks':

Quote:

Surely it’s no coincidence that the first people affected by these alleged attacks were CIA agents who secretly operate in Cuba, under a diplomatic guise.
Would it be absolutely crazy to think that this is a new self-harm plan? Maybe we’ll have to wait another 50 years for these history files that the “Langley boys” write today to be declassified.
Where Cuba Fits in the Newly Declassified JFK Files (Havana Times, Nov. 2, 2017)

[dann]

Originally Posted by Checkmite

These statements seem to echo those quoted in the Guardian article I linked to a couple of pages ago:

One of the statements was: "Some victims now have problems concentrating or recalling specific words."

The condition seems to be called either dysnomia, “Difficulty remembering names or recalling specific words: word finding problems,” or anomic aphasia.

In adults the latter may be caused by a stroke: Causes of Anomic Aphasia.

[dann]

A new statement has been issued by the CUBAN SOCIETY OF OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY AND HEAD AND NECK SURGERY

(And in case I’m not the only one who didn’t know the word OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY (Wikipedia))

Quote:

As it has been informed in several news media, the American government has notified to the Cuban authorities the alleged occurrence of “acoustic attacks” against some officials of its diplomatic seat in Havana. According to the State Department of that country, these events started since November 2016, however, it was not until February 2017 that the Cuban State learned of these via an official note delivered to our Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The reported symptoms were: deafness, tinnitus, and disequilibrium, general physical discomfort, headaches, a feeling of pressure, cognitive disorders and a head concussion was even reported.

As soon as that information was made public it became a concern for Cuban ENTs and other related disciplines. Scientific research conducted by an Experts Committee, officially created to this effect, determined it is impossible that the symptoms referred by the US government were caused by a “sonic weapon”. On the other hand, toxicity and viral infections were also ruled out. All of the information gathered followed a document called “Medical Report” delivered to our Foreign Affairs Ministry and which lacks objective proof backing the American hypothesis. Concretely, it does not have the scientific requirements of the usual medical practice and Evidence Based Medicine.

Cuban and American ENTs have maintained a close academic relation, and an environment of ethics, transparency and friendship. For that reason, we reject the accusations related to the alleged sonic attacks and urge the American government to show medical evidence supporting such attribution. We found very worrisome the recent measures of the US government, damaging the free exchange between professionals and scientist of both countries.

We express our desire for the recovery of those diplomats and family members who might be sick, and the will to contribute to their recovery. We invite the homologue societies in America and the rest of the world to join this concern, and divulge its content and contribute to preserve scientific relations among health care professionals in the world, pursuant to our ethical duty to clarify the truth.
9 november, 2017

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by calebprime

Oh, just an emotional reaction on my part. My biases are showing. Pesticides scare me.

That's why I put in weasel words like "think" "might" and "possibility". I figured three weasel words would be enough.

Oh, and eta: My bias in relation to psychogenic (imaginary) causes is the opposite of Sceptic G's: She's a nurse and so has heard a lot of conflicting symptoms from worried people. ...

Nurse practitioner and in the particular areas of occupational health and infectious disease. It's not that I've seen a lot of patients, it's that I've addressed this particular phenomena more than once. The whole 'tear down the building someone found mold' hysteria happened when I was working as the hospital employee health provider. We also had a bunch of employees that thought something in the ED was giving people rashes and headaches. Headache and scratchy throat was a common catching ailment. And then there are the worker's comp cases where people are sure the new carpet or the building makes them ill, yet rarely if ever does someone's new carpet in the home make people ill. Driving to work with all those road fumes and disintegrating tires one breathes in every day never seems to create the same problems as work environmental toxins.

I'm saying in essence this is a problem that comes up in occupational health. I've had considerable experience and education in this area.

And I should point out, sometimes we actually do find building issues. And sometimes people really are reacting to new paint or new carpet fumes. There are indicators that help distinguish between hysteria and actual environmental toxins.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by dann

A new statement has been issued by the CUBAN SOCIETY OF OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY AND HEAD AND NECK SURGERY

(And in case I’m not the only one who didn’t know the word OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY (Wikipedia))

This fits with what I see as well in as much as one can go by news accounts:

Quote:

determined it is impossible that the symptoms referred by the US government were caused by a “sonic weapon”. On the other hand, toxicity and viral infections were also ruled out.

oto- ear
rhino - nose
larynx - throat

[calebprime]

I have considerable experience in not going to the doctor and in not being in an organization where I might be pressured to lie like the CIA, and a lot of experience of just kicking back, smoking weed, and masturbating.

Also, in fairness, listening to improving music.

So I would never go to the doctor unless I were unable to enjoy these things.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by calebprime

I have considerable experience in not going to the doctor and in not being in an organization where I might be pressured to lie like the CIA, and a lot of experience of just kicking back, smoking weed, and masturbating.

Also, in fairness, listening to improving music.

So I would never go to the doctor unless I were unable to enjoy these things.

No worries. I wasn't discounting your experience. I was correcting a false assumption you made about mine.

[dann]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

oto- ear
rhino - nose
larynx - throat

Thank you. I recognized the rhino from rhinoplasty and the larynx from laryngitis, but the oto … not so much even though I think I've used it once before myself in this thread.
Also: How do you tell them apart at first glance? OTOR-HINOL-ARYN-GOLOGY?!

[dann]

I've been in Berlin for the past couple of days so I didn't hear that Cuba had an online forum about the alleged acoustic attacks Thursday & Friday this week, and I hadn't noticed the announcement when it was made one week ago:

Cuba Puts Its Scientists Online To Dispute Washington's Sonic Attack Claims
Call to online forum on the alleged accoustic attacks
Statement of the Cuban Expert Committee on the celebration of the Online Forum (Nov. 17, 2017)

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by dann

Thank you. I recognized the rhino from rhinoplasty and the larynx from laryngitis, but the oto … not so much even though I think I've used it once before myself in this thread.
Also: How do you tell them apart at first glance? OTOR-HINOL-ARYN-GOLOGY?!

If you are familiar with the prefixes/words your brain divides them appropriately. And ology is a very common suffix meaning the study of or the science of. Surely most people in this forum recognized that one.

As for oto, anyone who has ever used an otoscope would recognize that one.


Nice links, BTW.

[Steve]

Is the embassy closed yet?

[dann]

Seems to be up and running - unless you're Cuban and need a visa for the USA.

[dann]

Breaking News (5 hours ago):
US govt taps star brain-injury doctor to probe attacks on American diplomats (Crendy News, Nov. 20, 2017)

[dann]

Science vs. manipulation in alleged sonic attacks (CMHW Leader Radio Station, Nov. 15, 2017)

US experts prepare to release ‘sonic attack’ findings amid Cuba’s denial - Sources say Journal of the American Medical Association to publish findings (Local Ten News, Nov. 16, 2017)

Experts note inconsistencies in hypothesis about alleged sonic attacks (Granma, Nov. 16, 2016)

[dann]

Does anybody know anything about cicadas and crickets in Uzbekistan? They seem to be quite common.

But this is the news today: Uzbekistan incident raises suspicions of Russian involvement in Cuba attacks:

Quote:

A newly revealed incident reported by a USAID officer who is based at the American embassy in Uzbekistan is raising suspicions Russia may have been involved and could have had a hand in bizarre attacks targeting U.S. diplomats in Cuba, according to American sources.
In September, the officer and his wife reported, according to one source familiar with the incident, what may have been at least one acoustic attack similar to those experienced by the diplomats in Havana. (CBS, Nov. 28, 2017)

Incident In Uzbekistan Raising Suspicions Russia Involved In Cuba Sonic Attacks (CBS Miami, Nov. 28, 2017)

I notice that the "attacks" don't seem to be merely alleged in the CBS reports.

[dann]

Breitbart (Nov. 29, 2017) reports that

Quote:

State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert fervently denied that any incident had occurred in Tashkent, the Uzbek capital.

[William Parcher]

Doctors find brain abnormalities in victims of Cuba mystery

Originally Posted by The Washington Post

Doctors treating the U.S. embassy victims of suspected attacks in Cuba have discovered brain abnormalities as they search for clues to explain hearing, vision, balance and memory damage, The Associated Press has learned.

It’s the most specific finding to date about physical damage, showing that whatever it was that harmed the Americans, it led to perceptible changes in their brains. The finding is also one of several factors fueling growing skepticism that some kind of sonic weapon was involved.

Medical testing has revealed the embassy workers developed changes to the white matter tracts that let different parts of the brain communicate, several U.S. officials said, describing a growing consensus held by university and government physicians researching the attacks. White matter acts like information highways between brain cells...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...2d0_story.html

[dann]

I love that Washington Post article! Everybody who’s at all interested in the truth about this case should read it.

I notice in particular the reference to ”white matter” in William Parcher's quotation, but also this:

Quote:

Most patients have fully recovered, some after rehabilitation and other treatment, officials said. Many are back at work. About one-quarter had symptoms that persisted for long periods or remain to this day.

That makes it so much easier for us to connect the dots:

1) As early as the second day of this thread, September 18, I mentioned ”that Alzheimer is much more frequent among people who suffer loss of hearing”. See also: Hearing Loss is Associated With Risk of Alzheimer’s Disease: A Case-Control Study in Older People

2) Cerebral White Matter Disease is Associated with Alzheimer Pathology in a Prospective Cohort

3) Most patients recovering fully is consistent with the course that outbreaks of mass psychogenic illness usually run:

Quote:

Most of these outbreaks stop when people get away from the place where the illness started.
What Is Mass Psychogenic Illness? (American Family Physician website)

But apart from that, the US authorities have handled this case like true nincompoops. At least they have if the purpose had ever been to stop the outbreak instead of, what seems to have been and probably still is the case, causing an international diplomatic incident:

Quote:

After experts check out the place where the outbreak started, they can reassure people that it is safe to go back to that place.
What Is Mass Psychogenic Illness? (American Family Physician website)

Quote:

Minimize unnecessary exposure to medical procedures, emergency personnel, media or other potential anxiety-stimulating situations.
(…)
Remind patients that rumors and reports of "suspected causes" are not equivalent to confirmed results.
(…)
Some responses by authorities to MPI are not appropriate. Intense media coverage seems to exacerbate outbreaks. Once it is determined that the illness is psychogenic, it should not be given credence by authorities.
Mass psychogenic illness: Response to outbreaks (Wikipedia)

So we are now left with: Mass Hysteria! Conspiracy!
But two out of three ain't bad!