[boomboomsubban]

I say something like this every time I see a Havana syndrome article, but their summaries of the US National Academies of Sciences report is just ridiculous.

>The panel looked at psychological and other causes, but concluded that directed, high energy, pulsed microwaves were most likely responsible for some of the cases,

The panels ruling on a psychological cause was basically "all the available evidence fits it being a psychological cause, but as we didn't specifically test for that we can't rule it's the cause." How they completely ignored that and ruled microwaves the most likely cause is a mystery.

[coliveira]

It is not a mystery, the media is creating a narrative, and acknowledging this fact would prevent them from continuing this narrative that seems to be profitable. Now, millions of people around the world believe in the existence of a mysterious "Havana syndrome", and will continue reading articles that try to "investigate" it.

[Theory5]

But a psycological cause wouldnt result in the damage found on the victims, right?

Didn't one doctor who examined some of these people describe damage that looked like "a concussion without a concussion"? I.e. damage to the brain you'd see on people who had conxussions, but they experienced no physical trauma?

[boomboomsubban]

>But a psycological cause wouldnt result in the damage found on the victims, right?

A psychological cause absolutely could have physical effects. It'd be really hard to develop an ethical experiment to test if these specific injuries could have a psychological cause, but other damage has had such a cause.

Also, like two people had concussion like brain scans without knowing they had a concussion. They could have just unknowingly had a concussion, it's not like they had brain scans before and after the "attack" to compare.

This would have been part of the evidence the panel ruled could fit a psychological cause anyway.