
Was it an invisible attack on U.S. diplomats, or something stranger? - farseer
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/05/15/magazine/diplomat-disorder.html
======
ricardobeat
I don't know what to make of this article. It showed no evidence to invalidate
the original results of physical examination, while going on and on about it
being a 'functional disorder' purely based on 'what ifs'. What is it reporting
on? Even the original study [1] mentions, and excludes, the possibility of it
being mass delusion.

[1]
[https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2673168](https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2673168)

~~~
hurleydan
Hey Ricardo, this is the author of the article. Not sure how carefully you
read it. The editorial accompanying the JAMA paper, plus letters to the editor
and analyses in other journals all criticized the original paper as not
showing evidence of "brain damage." Leading physicists likewise say it's
impossible for microwaves or ultrasound to cause brain damage. Plus, even if
they had suffered actual concussions, most should have recovered in a matter
of weeks at most. But while everything about the case is inconsistent with a
physical attack, it's entirely consistent with functional or psychogenic
disorders. You gotta check out the videos online of people with functional
movement disorders to see how bizarre and powerful these things are. It's not
like a kid whining at 8 am on a school morning, "I feel sick! I wanna stay
home!" This shit is real and, as another person commented below, there are
many cases in which fuel is added to the fire by well-meaning doctors and
alarming press reports. The real "what ifs" come from the State Department
insisting it was an "attack" based on zero evidence and despite at least six
visits to Cuba by the FBI. Not that politics would ever enter into U.S.-Cuba
relations.

------
rdtsc
> The piercing, high-pitched noises were first heard by a couple of recently
> arrived United States Embassy officials in Havana in late 2016, soon after
> Donald Trump was elected president.

If it is a psychogenic thing, I wonder if that partially explains it. The
embassy was opened and cooperation between US and Cuba increased during the
Obama years. After Trump was elected, the writing was on the wall for the
continued cooperation and the fate of the embassy. What was expected to be a
fun and exciting post to a Caribbean, now turned into a dead-end position with
everyone possibly soon shuffled back to desk jobs until the next reassignment.

And the suddenly everyone is shuffled to the SCIF, all huddled together, and
they are told "we are under attack, something mysterious, possibly Russians is
frying our brains. Also don't tell anyone about this". That's a lot of stress,
uncertainty, and anxiety. It would put even the most cool headed people into a
hyper-vigilant state.

I know someone who had a habit cough for a while. That's a very physical and
real symptom that can affect someone quality of life quite bit. So as the
article says, just because it is psychogenic doesn't mean it is benign, made
up, and not serious.

~~~
Fnoord
> That's a lot of stress, uncertainty, and anxiety.

The resemblance with the acronym FUD is striking. The problem of FUD is
indeed, that _itself_ has an effect. FUD can lead to a desirable effect by the
perpetrator(s).

------
ALittleLight
"Psychogenic" seems like an awfully implausible explanation. Two dozen
diplomats from two countries, with similar stories, with similar injuries as
identified by a doctor - and it's psychogenic?

If I asked a thousand people on the street "Do you remember when you were
debilitated by a strange noise and suffered mental problems for days
afterwards?" What percentage would experience the psychogenic trauma? Is that
the idea? That the diplomats just had this trauma "suggested" to them and
therefore believe in it?

~~~
ceejayoz
We had a case of this in schools near my town a few years back. It's hardly
unheard of, and cases tend to snowball a bit, especially once rumor and news
coverage gets involved.

[https://www.cbsnews.com/news/mass-hysteria-outbreak-
reported...](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/mass-hysteria-outbreak-reported-in-
ny-town-what-does-it-mean/)

There's some significant skepticism/criticism of the claims of impairment and
physical brain trauma:

[https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-
abstract/26970...](https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-
abstract/2697000)

[http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/neuroskeptic/2018/04/07/ba...](http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/neuroskeptic/2018/04/07/bad-
science-havana-attack/)

------
chriselles
The United States doesn’t have the monopoly on a category of weapons called
Less Than Lethal(LTL).

There are a range of production LTL weapons that are used for riot control
that use directed/focused microwave transmitters.

It’s not unreasonable to think that US adversaries have developed similar LTL
weapons.

Many small/portable systems exist for use by the military/police/secret
service to disrupt UAVs up to several kilometres away.

It’s within the realm of possibility that an adversary of the US is applying
some form of LTL weapon in certain locales.

There is also a theoretical possibility a substance used to mark
known/suspected intelligence officers could cause the reactions described.

This is based on the 80’s era KGB “Spy Dust” marking agent story.

Perhaps such substances have evolved in both capability and side-effects.

------
781
Another weird thing about this is the attacker perspective. Let's assume there
was some sort of energy weapon/chemical agent. This went on for months.
Wouldn't you as an attacker worry that the americans with all of their
technology will detect it? Unless you have invented some sort of dark matter
ray gun.

Also, physical assault against diplomats is quite a bridge to cross. The
Russians are known to harass diplomats, but not in this way -

> _Russian intruders had broken into their homes late at night, only to
> rearrange the furniture or turn on all the lights and televisions, and then
> leave. One diplomat reported that an intruder had defecated on his living
> room carpet._

[https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-
opinions/russ...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-
opinions/russia-is-harassing-us-diplomats-all-over-
europe/2016/06/26/968d1a5a-3bdf-11e6-84e8-1580c7db5275_story.html)

~~~
GVIrish
In the 50's or 60's the Soviets tried some passive listening devices that were
basically reflectors hidden in walls. When they were hit with microwave
radiation, the reflected beams could allow them to capture conversations. It's
not out of the realm of possibility that Russian intelligence services have
improved significantly on this concept in the last few decades. Or that they
found a way to weaponize it.

~~~
781
And the americans discovered those microwaves.

------
tiimbz
There is also a theory by this audio engineer that the sound is caused by the
flag poles opposite the embassy building, which can start shaking with the
right amount of wind, which could cause a sound with an infrasonic resonance
frequency.

Link: [https://eelcogrimm.tumblr.com/post/181905499356/cuban-
duck](https://eelcogrimm.tumblr.com/post/181905499356/cuban-duck)

~~~
ricardobeat
That sounds like the same kind of fantasy as shown in this article. The
incidents happened at their diplomatic homes and hotels, not the embassy.

------
bjourne
It's obvious it was crickets. Here is the "mysterious" sound:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANykud9iE1A](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANykud9iE1A)
Here is the sound of Cuban crickets:
[https://entnemdept.ifas.ufl.edu/walker/buzz/492a.htm](https://entnemdept.ifas.ufl.edu/walker/buzz/492a.htm)
That is what the Cubans themselves said when they heard the recording:
[https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.4375193](https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.4375193)

~~~
bill_from_tampa
That is pretty convincing, even from a person with high frequency hearing
loss! So Embassy persons heard crickets (in the walls or ceiling or somewhere)
and then the conspiracy theories flowed like Spice from Dune... Very
interesting. I'm saying it's crickets till proven otherwise!

------
usmannk
It is unusual that there is no mention here of the theory that the sound was
actually caused by crickets:
[https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2019/01/sound-
ha...](https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2019/01/sound-haunted-
diplomats-cuba-crickets/579637/)

~~~
neonate
I was also surprised not to find that mentioned. But the article you linked to
doesn't answer many questions. For example, has it been explained why the only
people affected were inside the embassy? Presumably such crickets would be all
over the area.

~~~
UncleEntity
> For example, has it been explained why the only people affected were inside
> the embassy?

They hate our freedoms: our freedom of religion, our freedom of speech, our
freedom to vote and assemble and disagree with each other.

~~~
vangelis
Those are some hateful crickets.

------
mzs
Here's basically the same article from 9mo ago, basically experts that did not
have all the info:

>…groups of doctors specialising in neurology, neuropsychiatry and
neuropsychology described what they believed were major flaws in the study.

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17789011](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17789011)

edit: these things in past were accidents, it could have been one again,
"Sonic attack" may have been two ultrasonic signals accidentally interfering,
Mar 4, 2018:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16515552](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16515552)

------
HocusLocus
Someone deployed a miniaturized surveillance wind turbine.

------
coleifer
I'm surprised gulf war syndrome wasn't mentioned in the article. What ever
ended up being the consensus on that?

~~~
UncleEntity
They send me a newsletter every year or so and there's no consensus beyond
"well, they can't _all_ be faking it". OK, that's a bit harsh -- they haven't
really found a distinct cluster of symptoms that would suggest a single source
à la Agent Orange but there's probably many contributing factors leading to
differing sets of problems they're looking into.

Does qualify you for some free VA healthcare though...

~~~
bill_from_tampa
"Free" unless you have insurance, which they will then happily overbill ad
infinitum. I'm a Gulf War vet, and enrolled at the VA for healthcare. My
private insurance (BC/BS) has reimbursed the VA for every single thing they
have done for me.

The evidence for "gulf war syndrome" is underwhelming, but that is a long
discussion. The specific diagnoses that can be accepted as service connected
by the VA in relation to Gulf War service are all 'mystery diseases', like
fibromyalgia and chronic fatigue syndrome.

Likewise, the links between Agent Orange and actual human illness 30-40 years
later is ... tenuous. The "National Academy of Sciences" has found such links
more likely than not for multiple conditions (diabetes, coronary
atherosclerosis, multiple myeloma, etc) but the science backing these findings
are a bit tenuous - "more likely than not" is not typically the standard of
evidence required for a 'scientific finding'. But the VA is trying to 'do the
right thing' and that may cost taxpayers $$$$$, but so it goes!

------
foxhop
How different would a small LTL weapon be to lets say a 5G antenna?

~~~
zhte415
The office park I work in has 5G. Nothing changed.

~~~
johnsimer
Your sperm motility probably decreased

~~~
calciphus
Only if you are resting them on the tower, in which case I suspect something
else is at issue.

------
emilfihlman
Are memetic agents real now? I bet SCPs are a research subject at alphabet
agencies.

~~~
blattimwind
> Are memetic agents real now?

They have always been real.

~~~
dane-pgp
Indeed:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memetic_warfare](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memetic_warfare)

------
asveikau
It's funny how many quotes in this article (not the article itself, but quotes
from others) seem to imply that it being "psychogenic" makes the symptoms and
experience any less real, painful and problematic to the sufferer. It's
repeatedly contrasted with a "real" problem. As if having a psychogenic
illness is some kind of weakness. It sure doesn't sound fun.

~~~
erentz
> As if having a psychogenic illness is some kind of weakness.

Having a mental illness is not a weakness. But the problem with the term
psychogenic is history teaches us it probably doesn't exist, and if it did
exist, we could never truly be confident of it.

Through the history of medicine we have had illnesses come up such as Multiple
Sclerosis, that contemporary medicine at the time failed to understand, and
falsely believing they somehow had good enough testing at the time that if
they couldn't find anything wrong with someone then there could be nothing
wrong, they label it a psychogenic problem. This happened over and over and
over again. You'd think medicine would learn. On top of that psychology also
over history has had this weird obsession with trying to fill the void in
these cases, with big psychologists/psychiatrists seemingly trying to claim
new territory in the name of their field.

The idea of the functional disorder presented in the story is testable in this
case. (It doesn't make sense to me given the symptoms described but assuming
it did). Take these patients, send them to this magical school that they said
fixes people's functional disorders, and let's see if they recover. _But_
please do not blame any of these people if they don't recover after this
treatment, as is usually what happens when the labels functional disorder and
psychogenic are applied. (You're not trying hard enough, you're not believing
in the cure enough, etc.)

Conversion disorder is a particularly despicable label to give someone that
for some reason some neurologist still do, usually because they can't just
admit they don't know what's wrong. (See Jen Brea's story.)

~~~
wswkb
Any kind of illness, including a mental illness, is a weakness.

~~~
asveikau
If you want to play a game with literal definitions, maybe. The problem is
that this phrasing implies fault and stigma. No one should be considered weak
for this.

~~~
wswkb
Let's agree to disagree, then. :)

~~~
asveikau
This issue is so important that you will not get agreement to disagree from me
on this. I hope you don't have to deal with a loved one, or god forbid your
own self, suffering from a horrible illness to see how idiotic your opinion
is, because in addition to not being the fault of the suffer it is not a lot
of fun. Then some jerk like you will come along and make that sufferer feel
worse. So if you have it in you, please be less of a jerk.

~~~
fromthestart
>Then some jerk like you will come along and make that sufferer feel worse

That's absolutely ridiculous. Its absurd to deny reality to preserve people's
feelings. One can acknowledge that mental illness is a form of weakness
without treating people poorly. The problem doesn't come from the fact that
people _consider_ mental illness as a form of weakness, but from the _fact_
that mental illness makes people less resilient to life's trials.

Pretending there's nothing wrong with being mentally ill doesn't do anyone any
favors; in fact I'd argue it's worse than acknowledgement as it may discourage
treatment at least as much as the current stigma.

I think the only one being a jerk here is you. Perhaps your definition of
weakness needs adjustment, since you seem to conflate it with choice.

~~~
asveikau
I'm afraid you misunderstand. If popular belief is that this happens to
somebody because of weakness, or because they are weak people, people will
resist talking about it and letting on that they show symptoms ("showing
weakness") and there will be no treatment.

Then in real life, some people do react that way when people have the courage
to admit to it, and if people are made to believe their symptoms are a
character flaw, then again, no treatment, only people feeling bad.

I didn't make this stuff up, I've seen it happen.

And it doesn't happen to people from "their weakness". It is a very jerk move,
and absurd, to go anywhere near that phrasing. Just as we don't get cancer or
a broken leg from being weak people.

~~~
wswkb
I understand your point. Still I disagree. I want to call things by their name
even if calling them by their name might make people feel bad (not seek help,
etc).

~~~
asveikau
You say you understand it but I think you do not. If someone has cancer, do
you say, "I guess a stronger person wouldn't have gotten that tumor"?

There are correlations with genetics that can make someone predisposed etc.
but it is absolutely wrong thinking to say it happens because of "weakness",
it is, however unfortunate, a natural part of the spectrum of human condition.

~~~
DuskStar
It isn't "you got cancer because you were weak", it's "getting cancer makes
you weaker". There's a rather critical difference there.

