It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Catherine Werner, an American diplomat diagnosed with an unexplained brain injury she received in Guangzhou, China, linked to the similar illnesses or injuries confirmed in over two dozen Americans working in Cuba cannot go back to work despite returning to the United States for treatment. According to mother Laura Hughes, who suffered similar symptoms after spending time in her daughter’s Guangzhou apartment, Werner was diagnosed with “vision, balance and hearing problems along with an organic brain injury.”
originally posted by: loam
a reply to: AndyFromMichigan
So some food for thought.
Attacking diplomats in this manner makes no sense. Makes me wonder if the technology being used actually causes the damage as a side effect to the technology's true purpose?
Wonder what THAT could be? Mind reading? Thought recording?
Spooky stuff, huh.
Not really "documented", as such. The damage diagnoses were based on psychological testing which may have been flawed.
Some of these people have medically documented brain damage as a result of these incidents.
Leighton and other scientists have questioned whether the JAMA paper actually measured harm caused by a sonic attack. One symptom investigated in the study, white matter changes in the brain, made headlines. White matter is composed of axons, the long extensions of nerve cells that connect different parts of the brain.
“As a result, people got the impression this was some sort of ultrasonic death rifle,” Leighton says. But only three people in the study had white matter abnormalities, and the researchers couldn’t attribute those changes to a sonic attack. They may just have been physical differences that those people’s brains had all along.
What’s more, in the JAMA study, scores that classified diplomats as having a deficit in brain function fall into humans’ normal variation, says Sergio Della Sala, a cognitive neuroscientist at the University of Edinburgh.
In an experiment, Della Sala and University of Edinburgh colleague Robert McIntosh substituted random numbers for diplomats’ test scores and ran a simulation of possible outcomes, using the standards from the JAMA study. The result? “Everybody tested would result affected, everybody. To make sure, we repeated the simulation 1,000 times,” Della Sala wrote in an email.
In four separate letters to the Journal of the American Medical Association, which published the original medical study, groups of doctors specialising in neurology, neuropsychiatry and neuropsychology described what they believed were major flaws in the study.
Among the criticisms, published on Tuesday, are that the University of Pennsylvania team which assessed the diplomats misinterpreted test results, overlooked common disorders that might have made the workers feel sick, or dismissed psychological explanations for their symptoms. Doctors at the University of Pennsylvania defended their report in a formal response in the journal, but the specialists told the Guardian they stood by their criticisms.