Merged US may close Cuba Embassy over 'health attacks'

[Skeptic Ginger]

Mass hysteria is almost always limited to "affecting members of a cohesive group" (Stacko's quotation above)....

The definition of a "cohesive group" may not be as confined and homogenous as you think.

Mold Hysteria: Origin of the Hoax

Over time, there appeared to be no limit to claims of building related illness, and it was “reported” that almost any kind of clinical symptom, real or imaginary, could be blamed on indoor environments. As society became more and more litigious, many of these disorders were erroneously played out in courtrooms rather than medical offices, creating a circus atmosphere surrounding this class of disorders. With the advent of the internet, as well as other advances in telecommunications, these issues eventually became part of a media frenzy, and all truths could be thrown out the window as issues became more and more decided upon by emotions and unfounded beliefs, rather than scientific data and logical thinking.

Science Versus Hysteria

Mold can be deadly–if you eat enough of it or if your immune system is compromised. But there’s no reliable evidence that people are getting seriously ill from inhaling the stuff.

Some molds produce mycotoxins, unavoidable contaminants found in foods such as peanuts, corn and wine. They are also nonvolatile molecules that can’t float freely in the air. So to get into a human’s lungs, they have to ride on mold spores or dust particles. It would take a lot of those spores to make you sick.

A 2004 study in the International Journal of Toxicology concluded that even at 200,000 spores per cubic meter–more than most people could tolerate because of the smell and reduced visibility–a person couldn’t inhale enough toxins associated with Stachybotrys chartarum (black mold) in a 24-hour period to get sick. Exposures to other mycotoxins were at tiny fractions of the levels known to cause effects in humans and animals. “People are exposed to mycotoxins every day,” says Daniel Sudakin, a toxicologist and mold expert at Oregon State University who has testified for the defense in one mold case. “But they are present at very low concentrations that don’t harm us.”

To this day people believe mold in your walls is deadly. There are mold abatement companies. People have won lawsuits, buildings torn down.

Yet the evidence of harm is seriously lacking.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

People join the Foreign Service -- and getting in isn't easy -- because they want to do the work. It's a prestigious job, and the people sent to Havana would be among the most experienced in the State Dept. Nobody got there by accident. Anybody who wants to get out can find a better job -- or at least an easier job -- elsewhere in government or private industry pretty much any day of any week.

And if all these people are faking or imagining their symptoms for selfish motives, why would doctors and senior bosses, including the Secretary of State and the President, support them and even consider changing U.S. policy because of them?
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/17/us/politics/tillerson-cuba-embassy.html
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/top-u-s-security-official-targeted-in-cuba-embassy-health-attacks/
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/some-u...rious-health-conditions-medical-records-show/
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/11/world/americas/cuba-united-states-embassy-diplomats-illness.html

Why would senior bosses believe? Because people believe this stuff.

As for the doctors, I think you'd have to look at the specifics. If a patient comes in and tells me all their symptoms, I'm not going to report the patient was lying. And they probably aren't. The medical history I write up will list all their reported symptoms. Then I'll note clinical findings. I may or may not make a diagnosis but the way medical billing is today, you must put something down in order to be reimbursed. So I might code the visit as hearing loss even though it is only a subjective complaint.

I currently have an undiagnosed autoimmune condition. My mouth is inflamed. One of my doctors coded it as gingivitis which caused the insurer to reject the claim calling it dental. It's not dental, it's autoimmune. It's not just the gingiva, it's my entire mouth: tongue, throat, lips, palate and gingiva. I have other symptoms as well. It took the physician changing the coding and talking to the insurer to get it straightened out. In the meantime, I don't have a diagnosis, no one knows what it is.

Bottom line, you don't know what those doctors really found unless you look more closely.

 

[Sherkeu]

The big question remains as to why the US Gov't is playing up these 'attacks' and making actual changes against Cuba without evidence? Does it serve some purpose?
Maybe it does. See this NY Times article from last November.

Even some Obama administration officials concede that the thaw is highly vulnerable to reversal because much of it has been accomplished through (Obama) executive action. Mr. Trump could, for example, order the State Department to review its decision last year to remove Cuba from the list of state sponsors of terrorism, or suspend diplomatic relations that were resumed last summer with the opening of embassies in Havana and Washington.

But Josh Earnest, the White House press secretary, argued on Monday that Mr. Trump would have a hard time reversing a policy that had already yielded business deals and benefited the people of both countries. There will soon be 110 daily flights from the United States to Cuba, he noted, not to mention the investments by cruise, tour and hotel operators to prepare for those visits.

I can almost see the logic of using the story to threaten a roll back and obtain a better deal with Cuba - or revert back totally. But isn't it terribly risky to use a conspiracy theory that doesn't make sense for this purpose?

 

[Darat]

Exactly. How does a doctor verify 'hearing loss' independent of the patients reporting?

Normal hearing tests use tones where the patient raises their hand when they can hear it. To really determine it, they'd have to look at how the brain itself responds to sound, independent of what the person says they can/cannot hear.

It's simpler than that. Unless they had a hearing test prior to their posting there would be no way to objectively determine if the hearing loss happened during the posting, or indeed if there had even been a hearing lost.

 

[Darat]

Why is there this desperate need to discredit reports by the employees' own union? There are U.S. embassies in almost every country in the world, including numerous hellholes and multiple war zones. Havana would be an easy gig, combining the prestige of opening an important new embassy with the comfort of a tropical island and the close proximity to home. Staffers can fly back to the U.S. every weekend if they feel like it. Why would they imagine something like this in Cuba, but not Iraq, Afghanistan, Zimbabwe, Angola, Venezuela, etc., etc.?

And at least one Canadian diplomat reported similar symptoms. What's his/her motive?

What desperate need to discredit? I'm just being skeptical of something we have scant knowledge of and of something for that would require an unknown mechanism.

 

[Sherkeu]

It's simpler than that. Unless they had a hearing test prior to their posting there would be no way to objectively determine if the hearing loss happened during the posting, or indeed if there had even been a hearing lost.

You're right.
I had been interpreting the one claim of 'permanent hearing loss' to mean someone became deaf, which you could test with the brain, but that isn't really what it means. Any level of hearing loss could be labeled as 'permanent'.

 

[dann]

The definition of a "cohesive group" may not be as confined and homogenous as you think.

I don't think that the definition is "confined and homogenous."
In Denmark there has been widespread distrust of the HPV vaccine - probably due to girls from all regions of the country meeting online and persuading each other that their various symptoms (in some cases real) were caused by the vaccine. (Very similar to the autism scare.) One of the doctors, now retired, who sided with them is convinced that they couldn't possibly have been inspired by other girls' stories, probably because he's not aware how young people communicate online these days (or even in this millennium), but a journalist found discussions about this, for instance on an internet forum for young girls who are into horses.

 

[dann]

Psychology Today medical sociologist weighs in:

Great article!

 

[dann]

But isn't it terribly risky to use a conspiracy theory that doesn't make sense for this purpose?

With this Administration!? You must be kidding!!!

 

[Bob001]

Psychology Today medical sociologist weighs in:

The author makes this statement:

For instance, an acoustical device generating inaudible sounds, cannot damage a person’s hearing.

Is that true? We know there are sounds at frequencies that are below or above the normal range of human hearing. Children hear tones at higher frequencies than most adults. Could a tone emitted at a frequency -- high or low -- that can't be heard still be broadcast at a volume -- a decibel level -- that would cause damage to the structures of the ear, or that would cause other physical symptoms? The energy would still strike the body, even if the subject couldn't hear it.

I wouldn't be so quick to say "If I can't hear it, it's not there." I'm not sure a sociologist, as opposed to a physicist or an occupational health scientist, is the guy to ask about this.

 

[dann]

I wouldn't be so quick to say "If I can't hear it, it's not there." I'm not sure a sociologist, as opposed to a physicist or an occupational health scientist, is the guy to ask about this.

OK, then I can hear aliens!

Could you present us with a recording of these alleged noises? You are aware that so far we have seen only conjecture and anecdotal evidence, right?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

The author makes this statement:


Is that true? We know there are sounds at frequencies that are below or above the normal range of human hearing. Children hear tones at higher frequencies than most adults. Could a tone emitted at a frequency -- high or low -- that can't be heard still be broadcast at a volume -- a decibel level -- that would cause damage to the structures of the ear, or that would cause other physical symptoms? The energy would still strike the body, even if the subject couldn't hear it.

I wouldn't be so quick to say "If I can't hear it, it's not there." I'm not sure a sociologist, as opposed to a physicist or an occupational health scientist, is the guy to ask about this.

From The Guardian article:

the facts and the physics don’t add up.

“None of this has a reasonable explanation,” said Fulton Armstrong, a former CIA official who served in Havana long before America re-opened an embassy there. “It’s just mystery after mystery after mystery.”

Suspicion initially focused on a sonic weapon, and on the Cubans. Yet the diagnosis of mild brain injury, considered unlikely to result from sound, has confounded the FBI, the state department and US intelligence agencies involved in the investigation.

They go on to say:

The United States first acknowledged the attacks in August – nine months after symptoms were first reported.

Really? Or did the US acknowledge the claims that something had been used on these people? There's a difference. The article like the other news sources make it sound like the US has officially acknowledged awareness of a weapon. That's not what I see has actually occurred. But I can guarantee you that given how the news worded the story, it will forever be believed by some people that governments have a secret sonic weapon.

Get out the tin foil hats folks, we're going to need them.

Here's a typical finding in hysteria that is in the Guardian story, a red flag:

The cases vary deeply: different symptoms, different recollections of what happened....

Some felt vibrations, and heard sounds – loud ringing or a high-pitch chirping similar to crickets or cicadas. Others heard the grinding noise. Some victims awoke with ringing in their ears and fumbled for their alarm clocks, only to discover the ringing stopped when they moved away from their beds.

The attacks seemed to come at night. Several victims reported they came in minute-long bursts.

Yet others heard nothing, felt nothing. Later, their symptoms came.
The scope keeps widening. ...

And no single, sonic gadget seems to explain such an odd, inconsistent array of physical responses.

Again the Guardian reports the story as if physicians have confirmed some weapon caused injury:

doctors had confirmed another two cases, bringing the total American victims to 21. Some have mild traumatic brain injury, known as a concussion, and others permanent hearing loss.

That does not mean the physicians confirmed a sonic weapon caused the medical findings.

Back to the physics:

Sound and health experts are equally baffled. Targeted, localized beams of sound are possible, but the laws of acoustics suggest such a device would probably be large and not easily concealed. ...

“Brain damage and concussions, it’s not possible,” said Joseph Pompei, a former MIT researcher and psychoacoustics expert. “Somebody would have to submerge their head into a pool lined with very powerful ultrasound transducers.” ...

FBI investigators swept the rooms, looking for devices. They found nothing,

I'm going to lower that 1% chance of actual weapon caused injuries here to .0000001%.

 

[Bob001]

....
It will forever be believed by some people that governments have a secret sonic weapon.
.....

Governments do have sonic weapons. But they're not secret.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_Range_Acoustic_Device

 

[Bob001]

....
Again the Guardian reports the story as if physicians have confirmed some weapon caused injury:That does not mean the physicians confirmed a sonic weapon caused the medical findings.
....

And that is the subject of debate. The U.S. government says these people suffered injuries; it has not stated a specific cause, let alone claimed that they were deliberately assaulted by Cuba. There has been some speculation that there could have been some kind of malfunctioning eavesdropping device, but nobody has really explained how that could work.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Governments do have sonic weapons. But they're not secret.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_Range_Acoustic_Device

That's not a weapon intended to injure, it's not secret and it's a red herring in this discussion. It's a fancy loudspeaker to drive crowds to disperse.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

And that is the subject of debate. The U.S. government says these people suffered injuries; it has not stated a specific cause, let alone claimed that they were deliberately assaulted by Cuba. There has been some speculation that there could have been some kind of malfunctioning eavesdropping device, but nobody has really explained how that could work.

No, the news media reported the people claimed they were injured and the US is investigating.

Besides, if Trump did believe it so what? He's an Alex Jones fan.

 

[Bob001]

No, the news media reported the people claimed they were injured and the US is investigating.

Besides, if Trump did believe it so what? He's an Alex Jones fan.

What? Do you think media reports came first? That this didn't happen until "the news media" said so? That's really not the way it works. The media finally reported what had been happening for months.

Heres one of the first reports:

On Friday, Secretary of State Rex W. Tillerson said the illnesses were a result of “health attacks,” adding, “We’ve not been able to determine who’s to blame.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/11/world/americas/cuba-united-states-embassy-diplomats-illness.html

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

What? Do you think media reports came first? That this didn't happen until "the news media" said so? That's really not the way it works. The media finally reported what had been happening for months.

Heres one of the first reports:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/11/world/americas/cuba-united-states-embassy-diplomats-illness.html

Let's divide a bit of this up into facts, politics, media reports and the actual medicine/science.

Re the media: I've already noted a lot of what is being reported in the media is being stated as if it were fact, when that is not established. It is a fact these employees believe they have symptoms and believe some secret weapon caused it. It is not a fact that is what actually occurred.

Re the facts: If it were a real weapon with real injuries the injuries would be more consistent between victims. The theoretical physics of the device and the damage would be explicable even if the weapon itself was not known. That is also not the case.

Re the politics: You are putting too much stock in Trump/Tillerson et al. If they go along with the CT, honestly is that a surprise? They have no reason to deny the CT given Trump's base believes it and there is a benefit in making Cuba out to be evil.

You know that. Your POV of Trump is close to mine. Trump et al claiming Cuba has an evil weapon doesn't mean they actually do. Notice Trump et al cannot point to the weapon and they are being iffy about who they are accusing. All signs the adults in the US government are not convinced there is a weapon.

The medical/science: The symptoms fit hysteria, they are all over the map. There are no physics to explain such a weapon.


I can guarantee you the mystery will never be solved because it is hysteria and no officials are likely to call it that, including the physicians. The docs will say the patients have [symptoms] and we have no diagnosis. That's what you do for hysteria. Telling the patient they have not been injured by sonic waves or whatever is not a productive method of addressing patient concerns.

It's also likely one of more of the 21 people will file for workers' comp claiming chronic disability.

It's also more likely federal employees will have problems like this because of the management problems created by the Trump administration, no support, unfilled positions, big changes not all people cope well with. It's workers' comp case management 101: people unhappy at work miss more work and file more claims.

 

[Sherkeu]

You know that. Your POV of Trump is close to mine. Trump et al claiming Cuba has an evil weapon doesn't mean they actually do. Notice Trump et al cannot point to the weapon and they are being iffy about who they are accusing. All signs the adults in the US government are not convinced there is a weapon.

Also, notice NO TWEETS. If Trump was told that there was a decent chance of it being true, there would be tweets!!

It's also more likely federal employees will have problems like this because of the management problems created by the Trump administration, no support, unfilled positions, big changes not all people cope well with. It's workers' comp case management 101: people unhappy at work miss more work and file more claims.

Yes. I think more than just 'unhappy' and starting before he was sworn in. Let's look at when it started. Reports state "late last year". What was happening back in, oh, let's say, November/December timing?

Imagine you have been working on the 'open Cuba' policy plans, perhaps even before arriving at the new embassy. It was a tough road but things are happening and the future looks secure....as long as Hillary wins. Which she totally will, so no problem, right?
Trump had stated he would close the Embassy down until the US got a better deal. He would reverse Obama's changes.
I'm sure it was discussed how truly awful it could get for staff in Cuba before (and if) it did close- but that wasn't not likely to happen, right?

Then, it happened.

Then, the first symptoms started.

Coincidence?

 

[Bob001]

.....
Imagine you have been working on the 'open Cuba' policy plans, perhaps even before arriving at the new embassy. It was a tough road but things are happening and the future looks secure....as long as Hillary wins. Which she totally will, so no problem, right?
Trump had stated he would close the Embassy down until the US got a better deal. He would reverse Obama's changes.
I'm sure it was discussed how truly awful it could get for staff in Cuba before (and if) it did close- but that wasn't not likely to happen, right?

Then, it happened.

Then, the first symptoms started.

Coincidence?

That's a more elaborate conspiracy theory than we would expect even from the White House. But here's the question: Why would FSOs who support the Cuba thaw give the incoming administration a reason to shut down the embassy by blaming the Cuban government for something it didn't do? How does that advance their goals?