In early December we published a story on the rejection by the Cuban Academy of Sciences of the conclusions from the report presented by the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine of the United States (NASEM) on the so-called “Havana Syndrome.” The report’s summary stated that radio frequency wave exposure (microwaves) was the most plausible explanation for symptoms experienced by American and Canadian diplomats in Havana.
Cuban scientists called this conclusion “a very unlikely hypothesis,” and “speculation not established science.” The NASEM Report is a US government-sponsored report that consulted a panel of mainly US-based scientists.
That a report produced by one scientific institution contains a conclusion declared by another scientific institution to be “a very unlikely hypothesis” undoubtedly demands further investigation. Scientific investigation is even more pertinent when the report is one sponsored by an administration which was probably not impartial.
In pursuit of “both sides of the story,” and truth in reporting, I contacted Dr. Mitchell Valdes Sosa, Director of the Cuban Center for Neuroscience in Havana. I had originally asked Dr. Valdes only to comment on a few items from the NASEM report. This fascinating conversation turned into a full-length interview over the phone, presented here.
Dr. Valdes is an internationally respected MD and Senior Researcher, specializing in Cognitive Neurosciences. He holds a PhD in Physiological Sciences from the University of Havana, and is Member Emeritus of the Cuban Academy of Sciences, as well as heading its committee to study the so-called “Havana Syndrome.”
Cuba Business Report: Could you comment on the need for scientific collaboration between scientists in matters like these?
Dr. Mitchell Valdes-Sosa:
There is this false story of the so-called “Havana Syndrome” that goes as follows: a large group of US and Canadian diplomats and families were attacked with a mysterious energy beam and all suffered brain damage as a consequence of alleged “attacks.” After extensive examination I can say that every part of that story is unsubstantiated and false. True, some people that were in Havana became ill, probably due to different causes, but they were definitely not attacked. A large part of the confusion remaining on this issue is because it has been shrouded in mystery, assessments have been very biased, and the story was useful for political purposes for those wanting to roll back the improvement in relationships between the US and Cuba that occurred during Obama’s administration. Voices that should have been heard were ignored or silenced.
It’s inconceivable that a health crisis (like the one involving the US diplomats) occurred in a city and that the scientists from that city/country were not adequately involved in the assessment of the problem. Scientists belonging to the Cuban expert committee–created to study the health complaints–were invited to meet in Washington with the medical staff of the State Department (not the doctors treating the diplomats) for one session of conversation. The only information shared was what had already been published in a medical journal. During that visit we offered to collaborate more deeply to uncover the nature of the complaints. We also offered our collaboration directly to the leaders of the US National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) and also to the American Association for the Advancement of Science. Unfortunately, communications were cut off and no further exchange carried out. Artificial (politically motivated) barriers for communication between the US and Cuban scientists were created. When NASEM announced the creation of a Standing Committee to study the health complaints of the diplomats, we immediately wrote to its chairman offering to give our input, who said he would get back to us, but never did.
In fact, the US scientists we contacted to discuss the issue have been visited by government agencies and have been discouraged to exchange with us. And we know that US scientists–who are government employees–that have opinions different from what was expressed in the report have been told to shut up. They’ve been muzzled. So, there’s not been a climate of listening to whatever information Cuban scientists have, or to listen to voices in the US that do not agree with the official version, or should we say, versions because the story has changed drastically over time. Discrepant scientific opinions in the US have not been heard.
It’s good that the Biden administration says it is going to listen to science. It is going to heed what is said about climate change and rejoin the Paris Agreement. They are going to take a different approach on the coronavirus epidemic because science suggests urgent actions are needed to save lives. They should also heed the full science on the case of the so-called “Havana Syndrome,” not only the biased reports that are full of internal contradictions.
They have to listen to all sides in the US, in the United Kingdom, in Europe, in Cuba, and around the world, because there are scientists that have very strong opinions and they have not been listened to.
We had a meeting here in Havana, with the topic “Is There a Havana Syndrome?” This was held in March 2020, and we invited American, Canadian, European scientists and a colleague from New Zealand. We even invited one of the US people that proposed the radiofrequency idea to join in by teleconference. But unfortunately, other scientists were invited, and they were discouraged or limited from attending by US officials. In fact, one of the people who did come said that the FBI visited him and told him he would have trouble in Cuba. Many are willing to speak out about this harassment, but I prefer they tell their own story when it is the right time. So, this is the situation where there is lack of collaboration with Cuba and the silencing of differing opinions within the Western world and specifically in the US.
Really frightening. It’s very, very interesting to hear this. Could you comment further on this paragraph? This is from the highlights of the Cuban Academy of Science response to the report by NASEM.
"This claim is not supported by direct evidence, nor by a critical examination of the available literature, nor that by the main body of the report itself and also exhibits intrinsic contradictions."
Dr. Valdes:
Yes, this refers to the final claim of the NASEM report, the conclusion that microwaves caused symptoms described by US diplomats and their families during their stay here in Havana. NASEM published a report that is full of internal contradictions.
This microwave claim had been made months ago, and it was completely debunked by many scientists. And if you look carefully at the report, they recognize in the main text there’s no evidence for this idea. But despite this, they opted to make this claim in the conclusions. We have consulted about the report with experts on microwaves (who have been studying their effects on the human body and on animals for decades). They do not agree with this conclusion and, in fact, are jointly writing a detailed technical rebuttal with us. What is the evidence for this microwave hypothesis? Zero evidence. The scientific articles they cite are very contradictory. And even some authors of the articles they cite say this is not possible. The only argument they have is that some other US employees heard sounds coming from a certain direction. And they tried to involve the Canadians, but we’ve spoken to the Canadian scientists involved with this, Dr. Alon Friedman, and he says that the majority of Canadian cases did not report this directional phenomenon. This is very flimsy, not convincing.
Note that the NASEM report is well written and uses a serious scientific approach in its sections, however, the conclusion that microwaves were involved comes out of the blue. I think they retrofitted the analysis to conform to the story, that I mentioned before and that’s been peddled by certain people in the US government, that a mysterious energy beam affected the diplomats and their families, and that this caused brain damage. This is absurd. The evidence presented to implicate brain damage is not supported by science, as the corresponding section of the NASEM report concludes. The NASEM report (and a buried two-year-old CDC report) recognize that the people labeled as suffering from the Havana Syndrome are not a homogenous group. It is probably a collection of people with different disorders that have lumped together. Thus the NASEM report in its sections debunks all the elements of the energy-beam/brain-damage story but bizarrely jumps to the conclusion that microwaves were plausibly involved in its summary. And some reporters and politicians with an agenda pounced on the summary but ignored the rest of the report.
How would this “weapon” miss all the hundreds of Cubans and Canadians who go to the Canadian embassy every day except the one day they’re closed? How could this weapon miss all those Cubans and Canadians that actually were at the embassy, either waiting outside or visiting inside the embassy?
Dr. Valdes:
That is a good question. It is implausible for that to have happened at the Embassies, because other people would have been harmed or it would have been detected. I think the claim is that people were “attacked” in their homes and hotel rooms. The problem is that to harm the brain, microwaves would first burn the skin. This will require some kind of energy source that goes against the laws of physics. It would have to be very strong and this would have produced malfunction in electronic devices. It makes no sense.
I was Googling microwave weapons, and I saw some kind of vehicle with huge, round antenna.
Dr. Valdes:
I know little about these weapons. We have been told by US experts that these microwave weapons are not useful against people but could be used to interfere with drones. They are large. The logistics problem of maneuvering such a weapon into the sites where they alleged attacks were supposed to take place is enormous. And impossible to go unnoticed. There has not been one report of someone in Havana seeing something (a vehicle) of this type anywhere on the streets. And they would have “fried” electronic equipment in the houses or hotel rooms.
From the scientific point of view, this is absurd. It’s part of the many claims that have been hyped in the media and have no basis on facts.
It is interesting that the NASEM report recognizes that psychogenic factors could have played a role in propagating and exacerbating many of the symptoms. I will say this simply, if your government, your State Department, your doctors, all say that you are under attack, you have to be worried. And this can really make you feel ill.
You know, it’s strange that this disease/ infection/ hysteria only targeted Americans and Canadians.
Dr. Valdes:
Yes, of all the other diplomats I’ve talked to here, no one reports anything like this.
Because of our international collaboration programs, I have met with some ambassadors from other countries and they don’t believe this story of the attacks. They find it ridiculous.
This quote is from the highlights of the Cuban Academy of Sciences document. Let me read it to you:
"The lack of sufficient evidence was considered in the report as a reason to strongly doubt pesticide poisoning and infectious origin or a psychological trigger is a cause of symptoms. However, the same logic was not applied to the microwave hypothesis, which for which there is even less evidence."
Do you want to talk about that?
Dr. Valdes:
I really doubt that an infectious agent explains what truly happened, that there could be some kind of virus or something we don’t know. The Canadian scientists recruited by their government have presented evidence that part of the symptoms could be due to a pesticide intoxication, they reasoned that a massive anti-Zika public fumigation program was being carried out in Cuba. And the Canadian Embassy was also applying the pesticides themselves in their buildings and homes. It’s known that pesticides can produce a dysfunction or injuries in the brain at high concentrations. This hypothesis has led to joint research between Canadian and Cuban scientists looking at possible pesticide intoxication in Cuba citizens. We are examining this, although we do not think it explains all the health complaints. But it is a testable hypothesis. The NASEM report does not completely dismiss the possibility of pesticide poisoning, but it concludes that there’s not enough evidence to accept it. But there is some evidence. But then we don’t understand how the NASEM report accepts the microwave explanation for which there’s absolutely zero evidence.
To summarize what I think of the so-called “Havana syndrome attacks”: There is no plausible weapon for the alleged attacks. Everything suggested about the mysterious energy weapons (sound, microwaves) goes against the laws of engineering and physics. As recognized by the NASEM panel, there is no direct evidence for brain damage in all the subjects and, if present, could be due to pre-existing conditions or unrelated diseases. Several cases where the reports of attacks investigated by Cuban authorities by request of the diplomats were shown to be without basis. The FBI concluded something similar. There is important evidence that there were psychogenic factors at play. And finally, there is no motive for Cuba to take part in attacks or allow the attacks to take place and no possibility that it would escape Cuban police surveillance. Cuba has taken this very seriously and investigated thoroughly wherever an avenue of inquiry has been possible. If any similar notion were claimed about foreign diplomats living in the US, with so little evidence, they would have been dismissed immediately.
Thank you, Dr. Valdes, for speaking with me. I am very honored. What you have said is that crucial scientific evidence is obviously lacking in the NASEM report to support a microwave explanation of the health complaints of the US diplomats. And that this further contributes to refute the idea that alleged attacks on diplomats took place in Havana.
