3 ms·

except that advanced neuroimaging has shown otherwise: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2738552 https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarti

except that advanced neuroimaging has shown otherwise: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2738552 https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2738552 https://www.pennmedicine.org/news/news-releases/2019/july/advanced-neuroimaging-brain-matter-alterations-gov-personnel-developed-neurological-symptoms-cuba https://www.pennmedicine.org/news/news-releases/2019/july/ad... this is not just a mass hysteria/placebo/negative-placebo effect. "Among patients compared with controls, there were significantly greater ventral diencephalon and cerebellar gray matter volumes and significantly smaller frontal, occipital, and parietal lobe white matter volumes; significantly lower mean diffusivity in the inferior vermis of the cerebellum (patients: 7.71 × 10−4 mm2/s; controls: 8.98 × 10−4 mm2/s; difference, −1.27 × 10−4 [95% CI, −1.93 × 10−4 to −6.17 × 10−5] mm2/s; P < .001); and significantly lower mean functional connectivity in the auditory subnetwork (patients: 0.45; controls: 0.61; difference, −0.16 [95% CI, −0.26 to −0.05]; P = .003) and visuospatial subnetwork (patients: 0.30; controls: 0.40; difference, −0.10 [95% CI, −0.16 to −0.04]; P = .002) but not in the executive control subnetwork (patients: 0.24; controls: 0.25; difference: −0.016 [95% CI, −0.04 to 0.01]; P = .23).

maxbond 5y ago
I don't have the expertise to critique these findings, but they smell very weird (tiny sample size, control group that seems weirdly specific), and "an investigation that seems incredibly motivated by a particular conclusion managed to find the evidence it was looking for" still makes a lot more sense than, "some organization is injuring US diplomats, all over the world, with no clear goals or demands, with a wide constellation of symptoms, that an awful lot like mass hysteria." If there's really a there there and they solve the "who, what, why", then I'm happy to eat crow. But I don't think they will because I don't think there is.
- tablespoon 5y ago
  > I don't have the expertise to critique these findings, but they smell very weird (tiny sample size, control group that seems weirdly specific) Huh? I think you're misunderstanding the situation here and misapplying a heuristic. That sample size of 40 people may be the universe of cases (at the time) or a significant fraction of it, and I don't know what could be "weirdly specific" about "48 demographically similar healthy controls."
  - maxbond 5y ago
    Perhaps there's a nuance I'm missing, but it's odd to me that you'd look at 48 _government employees_ and not as many people off the street of a similar age etc. as you could afford. Is there reason to believe people who work in government have different brains? Are we trying to see if these government employees are different than other government employees, or that they're different from _people in general_? 40 is a significant fraction of 200, but it's still a small number. You subject 40 people to a whole battery of imaging and examination, and I'm sure you'll find something odd in at least one of the tests. "Intensive and repeated investigation of a small population yields artifacts, and there is no plot" seems the stronger case to me. If there is a plot, then I'm sure the CIA can solve it. That's what they do, and they have all the resources in the world to do it. If they don't solve it, then I think we should accept that there was no plot and that mass hysteria is the best explanation. Similarly if they do solve it, then we have to accept that. Several years in, the explanations are shifting and vague, which is the hallmark of mirage.
boomboomsubban 5y ago
You left out this key part in the conclusion >The clinical importance of these differences is uncertain and may require further study Not to mention the lengthy list of limitations the study itself mentions. Basically they examined two groups and listed the differences between them
Taniwha 5y ago
I think you need before and after comparisons, because people "who believe they were subject to weird stuff have smaller brains" might be confusing cause and effect

maxbond 5y ago

I don't have the expertise to critique these findings, but they smell very weird (tiny sample size, control group that seems weirdly specific), and "an investigation that seems incredibly motivated by a particular conclusion managed to find the evidence it was looking for" still makes a lot more sense than, "some organization is injuring US diplomats, all over the world, with no clear goals or demands, with a wide constellation of symptoms, that an awful lot like mass hysteria." If there's really a there there and they solve the "who, what, why", then I'm happy to eat crow. But I don't think they will because I don't think there is.

tablespoon 5y ago
> I don't have the expertise to critique these findings, but they smell very weird (tiny sample size, control group that seems weirdly specific) Huh? I think you're misunderstanding the situation here and misapplying a heuristic. That sample size of 40 people may be the universe of cases (at the time) or a significant fraction of it, and I don't know what could be "weirdly specific" about "48 demographically similar healthy controls."
- maxbond 5y ago
  Perhaps there's a nuance I'm missing, but it's odd to me that you'd look at 48 _government employees_ and not as many people off the street of a similar age etc. as you could afford. Is there reason to believe people who work in government have different brains? Are we trying to see if these government employees are different than other government employees, or that they're different from _people in general_? 40 is a significant fraction of 200, but it's still a small number. You subject 40 people to a whole battery of imaging and examination, and I'm sure you'll find something odd in at least one of the tests. "Intensive and repeated investigation of a small population yields artifacts, and there is no plot" seems the stronger case to me. If there is a plot, then I'm sure the CIA can solve it. That's what they do, and they have all the resources in the world to do it. If they don't solve it, then I think we should accept that there was no plot and that mass hysteria is the best explanation. Similarly if they do solve it, then we have to accept that. Several years in, the explanations are shifting and vague, which is the hallmark of mirage.

boomboomsubban 5y ago

You left out this key part in the conclusion >The clinical importance of these differences is uncertain and may require further study Not to mention the lengthy list of limitations the study itself mentions. Basically they examined two groups and listed the differences between them

Taniwha 5y ago

I think you need before and after comparisons, because people "who believe they were subject to weird stuff have smaller brains" might be confusing cause and effect