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.
But there’s a deeper problem. Who would benefit from the deployment of attacks (which as the report notes may not be physically possible since ‘physicists have voiced doubts that such weapons were even feasible’)? Difficult to believe that Cuba itself would at a time when it…
View original post 124 more words