...and you think psychogenic processes are the simpler explanation? Wow, we don't just disagree.

We see things using the lens of our brains and life experience. The Cuban's operating some mysterious, publicly undetectable remote energy weapon that we have no counter-measures to stop is pretty far fetched to me yes.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/...-embassy-don-rsquo-t-add-up-mdash-for-anyone/

 

...and you think psychogenic processes are the simpler explanation? Wow, we don't just disagree.

I don't understand why you'd say that. Psychosomatic illnesses are widely known and in particular are known to impact people under stress. The power of suggestion, much like the placebo effect, is a powerful force that exceeds the efficacy of many pharmaceuticals. I would say it's the null hypothesis that requires strong evidence to dispel.

 

We see things using the lens of our brains and life experience. The Cuban's operating some mysterious, publicly undetectable remote energy weapon that we have no counter-measures to stop is pretty far fetched to me yes.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/...-embassy-don-rsquo-t-add-up-mdash-for-anyone/

The facts of the reported symptoms are STRIKINGLY consistent consistent with pulsed RF/MW
https://static1.squarespace.com/sta...0455/1535088022263/Cuba+2018-08-23c+-NEJM.pdf That is undeniable. That DOES NOT mean an RF/MW weapon of some sort was used. It means that the relationship needs to be investigated.

That we are now seeing normal MRIs (from JAMA) is interesting and notable but does not mean that there was not a mTBI or something functionally similar - we know this from much blast overpressure studies as well as concussion and sub-concusion injury research. We do not have the advantage of a post-mortem analysis and an MRI could not be expected to necessarily resolve a small or transient lesion.

NOBODY with any credibility at all is suggesting anything about any weapon being undetectable and nondefensible - that is complete media hype and it is unfortunate that you would repeat it, if only to deny it. Certainly you can not possibly suggest that I have stated that.

Those who tout a mass psychogenic illness do so as a provocative commentary and without any evidence at all - it is underwhelming, to say the least. See, the quote from the "medical sociologist" here

"We have an array of vague somatic complaints, most of which have no known association with exposure to acoustic waves but are common in cases of MPI"

If you look at the NEJM paper, there is a very nice comparison with known symptoms from RF/MW as I have already mentioned. If his quote refers to acoustic waves as in cricket noise - well then so what, nobody credible said the symptoms were from crickets. The paper I cited said that the recorded sound was determined by them to be crickets. That we can all listen to that sound and not experience those symptoms is not evidence for psychogenic processes. In fact, there is no evidence at all to indicate a mass psychogenic illness that I can see. While a stressful environment, it was not acutely so and crossed both American and Canadian workers and there family - and the symptoms seem to have persisted as far as I can tell.

The idea that we can't figure it out so we will say that it is simply mass psychogenic illness or mass hysteria should have gone out with UFO research in the 1950s. For example, we are allowed to say that this is very puzzling and on the one hand it looks an awful lot like the symptoms from concussions but they did not have concussions. It also looks a lot like MW exposure but we can't prove that either. We are not allowed to simply invoke a garbage explanation because one simply has to have an explanation and right now.

 

I don't understand why you'd say that. Psychosomatic illnesses are widely known and in particular are known to impact people under stress. The power of suggestion, much like the placebo effect, is a powerful force that exceeds the efficacy of many pharmaceuticals. I would say it's the null hypothesis that requires strong evidence to dispel.

Do you honestly think that I am not familiar with the idea of psychogenic processes or adverse stress effects when I am the one who brought it up and after telling you that I have a PhD in Psychology and have worked as a research scientist for more than 30 years including preclinical research in related areas - and you are going to tell me what a null hypothesis is and that psychosomatic illness is widely known. Do you have any idea how that might come across to me. This much I will agree with, you don't understand why I have said what I have said...and you likely will not understand anytime soon.

Feel free to believe what you want.

 

I too, like nsa, lean towards the easiest explanation. Occam's Razor is an excellent tool for most scientific purposes. Then again, this is not entirely about science. If a smart person (or organization) were to enact an anonymous attack, I'm sure that he/they would do everything possible to cover their tracks and have the victim doubting as of the source and/or nature of the attack. Sowing confusion is a favorite technique of communist countries.

The truth is I do not know what to think, there's simply not enough information for a complete assessment. One can only speculate, which is what we all here are doing.

 

he he ... they know what done it and who done it. They afraid to tell Trump.

 

I too, like nsa, lean towards the easiest explanation. Occam's Razor is an excellent tool for most scientific purposes. Then again, this is not entirely about science. If a smart person (or organization) were to enact an anonymous attack, I'm sure that he/they would do everything possible to cover their tracks and have the victim doubting as of the source and/or nature of the attack. Sowing confusion is a favorite technique of communist countries.

The truth is I do not know what to think, there's simply not enough information for a complete assessment. One can only speculate, which is what we all here are doing.

Occam's razor does not state that the EASIEST explanation is the best one, it says, essentially, that, all things considered, the SIMPLEST explanation is preferred.

As I have stated (3 times now)

If one contends that the adverse health effects were psychogenic, whatever that means, I would look for simpler explanations.

This is not an accidental statement, it is with intent that I typed it. To say that psychogenic mass illness is the simplest explanation is utter nonsense when MW exposure and/or concussion are simpler and better understood explanations. That this mass hysteria is EASY is not in doubt. Just tell them it was all in their head and it happened because they were stressed and now you don't have to bother with studying anything else. And if you are asked to show any evidence that it was from mass hysteria, just post a link from some commentary as all the evidence that you need.

Look, I am just going to leave this thread because it is just too exasperating. You folks are welcome to pile on, lecture me on things that I have studied for many years and do so because, well, I don't know, because you feel like it, I suppose. You are free to believe what you want, but please note that NONE of you three (nsaspook, wayneh or cmartinez) said even a word about mass psychogenic illness (or mass hysteria or psychosomatic illness) until I brought it up - then collectively, you decided as a group that it must be what is going on - it is bizarre. Feel no compulsion to explain why you believe as you do as I have seen enough to conclude that it is not much of a discussion.

Sorry if I have offended you but that is just the way I see it and it is too bizarre to discuss this and plus, I have learned from other experiences here. Maybe it has something to do with the differences between engineers and scientists - I don't know.

 

Sorry if I have offended you but that is just the way I see it and it is too bizarre to discuss this and plus, I have learned from other experiences here. Maybe it has something to do with the differences between engineers and scientists - I don't know.

You have not offended me, at all. I did my comment to explain that I find this whole affair very intriguing. And of course I like to read your opinion (although I lean in another direction <- operative word: lean) because you seem to be well informed in the matters that you're referring to. For me, at least, this is not a debate. It's rather a chance to learn what others think of this event, and that also includes you.

 

Sorry if I have offended you but that is just the way I see it and it is too bizarre to discuss this and plus, I have learned from other experiences here. Maybe it has something to do with the differences between engineers and scientists - I don't know.

The main difference is that engineers who have worked in this field as long has you have in your field actually understand why most of the MW energy weapon crap in the media is just crap when applied outside some laboratory. My first question in an investigation of this type is 'Why did it happen'. I still don't have a reason for that. When you consider Cuba and its reaction to US actions you should consider the long history of their agents and ours in their country. I was in Key West during the mid 70's
https://entnemdept.ifas.ufl.edu/walker/buzz/492a.htm Indies short-tailed cricket
working inside our 'monitoring' mission on Cuba/Russia, receiving and sending 'x' broadcasts, typing up hours long translated speeches from the Cuban leadership and watching pirate US movies on TV Cubana. It was extremely rare for the sides (Russian trained Cubans) to actively, openly harass known US personal at the height of the cold war. What possible reason would today's Cuba while trying to become US tourist destination as an official 'non-adversary' per the state dept. pull such a boneheaded move?

https://thepsychologist.bps.org.uk/volume-31/july-2018/neuropsychological-impairments-everybody-has

This article has attracted a lot of attention, but remarkably little scrutiny. A closer reading of the paper shows that the neuropsychological evidence presented in the Supplementary Material (eTable 2) is almost unbelievably flimsy. The six people assessed with the neuropsychological battery were tested with 37 tests split across 10 cognitive domains. In each domain, the person was considered impaired if their score fell below the 40th (fortieth) percentile in at least one of the tests. This threshold for impairment is inexplicably high.

By definition, 40% of people assessed on any test should score at or below the 40th percentile. Considering that each participant was given 37 tests, without any statistical correction for the number of tests administered, it seems unlikely that anyone would escape with a clean bill of cognitive health (for further analysis, see Della Sala & Cubelli, in press). As we have reported in a letter to the Journal of Neurology, we tested this intuition using a simple simulation. We substituted the authors’ raw data for randomly-generated test scores, and applied their bizarre diagnostic criteria (Further details of this simulation, including analysis code and graphical output, are available at https://osf.io/5b4sq/). Across a thousand repetitions of our simulation, the cognitive symptoms of this syndrome proved to have a worrying lack of specificity: everybody is affected.

It is hard to understand how claims like this, based on the most blatant p-hacking, could pass any meaningful peer-review process. The pseudo-scientific approach taken implies that one may define arbitrarily liberal cut-offs to make one’s case, and interpret the outcomes as if they were clinically valid. We should be much more worried about reputational damage to neuropsychology, and psychology in general, than about any sinister new sonic weapons.

https://theintercept.com/2019/01/07...ts-in-cuba-the-culprits-were-likely-crickets/

It would be impossible to parody that. Permit me to highlight my favorite line from Dilanian: “The other interesting thing that we’re reporting here is that one of the technologies used to injure these American spies and diplomats was some kind of microwave weapon, that is so sophisticated, that the Americans don’t even fully understand it.” Yes: those poor American CIA officials who are such innocent naifs that they are not even aware of the latest developments in villainous technological weaponry.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nati...65d92a3585d_story.html?utm_term=.8599be1fd07d

Critics say this just doesn’t pass a plausibility test.

“It’s crazy,” said Kenneth R. Foster, a professor of bioengineering at the University of Pennsylvania who studied microwave phenomena while working at the Naval Medical Research Center in Bethesda. Foster, who was not involved in examining the diplomatic personnel, said that the reported illnesses remain mysterious and that he doesn’t have an explanation.

“But it’s sure as heck not microwaves,” he added.

University of Cincinnati neurologist Alberto J. Espay said, “Microwave weapons is the closest equivalent in science to fake news.”

 

Do you honestly think that I am not familiar with the idea of psychogenic processes or adverse stress effects when I am the one who brought it up and after telling you that I have a PhD in Psychology and have worked as a research scientist for more than 30 years including preclinical research in related areas - and you are going to tell me what a null hypothesis is and that psychosomatic illness is widely known. Do you have any idea how that might come across to me.

Whoa, relax, it's not a personal attack. My leading words were "I don't understand" your position. You had mentioned related experience and I'm curious what you're seeing in this event that leads you to your position. I attempted to convey my own understanding - that of a disinterested observer - of the situation. I'm perfectly happy to consider other positions on this but the first condition is that I understand that position.

I have a lot of friends with allergies. Every one of them had to get past the "it's all in your head" argument before they could address the issue. I know a lot of medical people. Their first challenge with a new patient is to likewise dismiss the possibility that the patient's problem is "all in their head". So I've come to feel that the null hypothesis in medicine is "it's all in your head" and that data and evidence are needed to move past that.

 

yep,it must feel like you have stepped on a landmine after each word you say :<

 

https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/canada-cuba-diplomats-illnesses/2019/01/30/id/900511/

More crickets.

 

https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/canada-cuba-diplomats-illnesses/2019/01/30/id/900511/

More crickets.

Why would the Cubans attack Canadians? They've always had good relations with Cuba even during the 'Cold War'.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada–Cuba_relations

 

If Cuba had a new weapon or device......I do not think they would try it out on diplomats. They would probably be in Venezuela. Plenty of un-protected game there.

Cuba might be as puzzled as we. They might even think it's a premise for tougher scrutiny and political pressure.

Bolton's notepad was quite a stunt.

This illness might be something totally new. But remains suspicious because so far, it's only in Cuba.

And it is only the diplomats......no citizens or tourists were effected. Strange. Wonder if Cuba has asked for citizens to come forward.

What would the WHO think? A political disease?

 

Cuba under space attack.

https://theweek.com/speedreads/821292/meteorite-just-hit-cuba

 

Evidence is mounting supporting the reality of this event:

https://www.newscientist.com/articl...the-mysterious-sonic-attack-in-cuba-was-real/

The brains of US diplomats who were struck down with a mysterious illness while stationed in Cuba appear to have undergone changes that are unlike any known disorder. The findings are tentative, but if borne out they would undermine the theory that “mass hysteria”, otherwise known as mass psychogenic illness, is to blame.

 

Evidence is mounting supporting the reality of this event:

https://www.newscientist.com/articl...the-mysterious-sonic-attack-in-cuba-was-real/

That seems dubious. There is still zero evidence these people were attacked by anything other than crickets.
https://www.npr.org/sections/health...-injury-in-u-s-diplomats-who-fell-ill-in-cuba

A close look at the brains of 40 U.S. Embassy workers in Cuba who developed mysterious symptoms has found no evidence of injury. The State Department has said the employees were hurt by some sort of attack.
...
"First of all, these techniques are not diagnostic, they are descriptive," he says. "And they don't provide any clinical evidence of any kind of abnormality or pathology. What they show are minor differences between two groups."

And the existence of some differences is hardly surprising, he says.

"These methods are used to find differences that are associated with being left-handed or right-handed, male or female, low IQ [or] high IQ, whether you are a musician or not," he says. "They're all within the normal range."

And 12 of the workers had a history of concussion, which also could account for some of the differences.

The real importance of the study is in what it did not find, Fields says.

"If there'd been brain injury, that would have been evident on the clinical brain imaging studies that were done before," he says. "There was no evidence of any pathology, and these more sophisticated measures confirm that."

 

here's what I found... not sure how credible it all is so take a grain of salt... there are some citations but can't find great information.... will take time.

Beta brain waves are 12-40Hz depending on activity and the theory is that subsonic or infrasonic waves can disturb brainwaves. I would imagine that if this is true it wouldn't matter if you are deaf or not. I'm sure there are studies maybe it's secret. LRAD makes it a point to say they only build public announcement devices. Seems that this has been a military subject for a while. Who knows for certain. The NSA doesn't want you to know... ... there are psyop guys who I'm sure has all kinds of things that we don't know about.

Either way without a smoking gun it's only accusations... how do you prove acoustic damage?

10-100 Hz
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16201210

below audio perception
https://littlefield.co/the-psychoac...ic-frequencies-within-non-lethal-cf05e1fd8673

 

here's what I found... not sure how credible it all is so take a grain of salt... there are some citations but can't find great information.... will take time.

Beta brain waves are 12-40Hz depending on activity and the theory is that subsonic or infrasonic waves can disturb brainwaves. I would imagine that if this is true it wouldn't matter if you are deaf or not. I'm sure there are studies maybe it's secret. LRAD makes it a point to say they only build public announcement devices. Seems that this has been a military subject for a while. Who knows for certain. The NSA doesn't want you to know... ... there are psyop guys who I'm sure has all kinds of things that we don't know about.

Either way without a smoking gun it's only accusations... how do you prove acoustic damage?

10-100 Hz
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16201210

below audio perception
https://littlefield.co/the-psychoac...ic-frequencies-within-non-lethal-cf05e1fd8673

Like I said, ZERO evidence of any brain altering force that would result in the long term effects we are seeing.

"Brain scans hint the mysterious 'sonic attack' in Cuba was real"

Actual evidence from the scientific to the motivational screams it was not a real attack on the diplomatic staff.

https://gizmodo.com/cuban-sonic-attack-study-finds-brain-differences-in-vic-1836632207

Fields doesn’t discount the possibility that something else might turn up that could prove these cases are caused by something more extraordinary. But he disagrees with the rampant theorizing by certain members of the media, scientists, and the U.S. government in studying and reporting these cases. Government officials even pulled diplomats from China in 2017 and 2018, claiming they had experienced something “very similar” to the Havana cases.

“The problem with this story all along is in separating speculation from fact. And the facts provide no evidence that there was an injury of any kind; that there was an attack or weapon.”