I "understand" (well, I actually don't want to understand the dude) why quasi-BlueAnon conspiracy theorist, and general batshit crazy conspiracy theorist, Jim Stewartson, believes that Havana Syndrome is "real." Here's a non-crazy (sort of, he's a cell phone radiation nutter) BlueAnon type who thinks the same.
I certainly "understand" the Nat-Sec Nutsacks, the professional ones, want to believe that Havana Syndrome is real, not only the ones who talked to "60 Minutes" but the avid retweeters. This is Cold War 2.0 stuff, whether Moscow gets blamed more or Beijing. And, Greg Edgreen is exactly that. Here's another in Twitter drag, whatever his ALLEGED "three-letter agency" was.
Because of why they're suffering, and the fact that they thing an Illness being psychogenic, or psychosomatic, means they're crazy, I get why sufferers want to believe it's real.
The "pseudoleftists," though? And yes, they're out there. This guy, from the non-Merikkkan division; even more as a Beijing fellator. I've seen American ones, too.
All wrong!
IT IS psychogenic/psychosomatic. Post-mortem is right. except for "60 Minutes" trolling for ratings. And, Robert Bartholemew, co-author of the "post-mortem," as well as others, were on the trail three years ago. Per one story about that, it's also Cold War 2.0-mongering by calling it "Havana Syndrome," as the World Health Organization officially advises against giving illnesses geography-based or country-based naming.
I think one problem, re the sufferers, is that people think that identifying an illness as psychosomatic means they're being told the symptoms aren't real. No, they're very real, including on Havana Syndrome, and that's per a neurology professor. I have little doubt that, besides the sufferers, their lawyers are confused.
Perhaps identifying it with the label of "functional neurological disorder" might reduce stigma, per the excellent book by Suzanne O'Sullivan.
The Sleeping Beauties: And Other Stories of Mystery Illness by Suzanne O'Sullivan
My rating: 5 of 5 stars
A simply great, and straightforward, book on psychosomatic illness, or functional neurological disorder, as O'Sullivan notes the more modern term is.
She visits several sites to see modern such cases in action, or in a couple of cases, at their tale end or afterward. Some involve a few individuals, but others involve larger groups. She notes that in such cases, it's not mass psychogenic illness, but mass sociogenic — the group is part of the induction.
Especially with groups, she notes people don't want to accept such prognoses, because they find it shaming and believe that this is a claim they are "faking it." O'Sullivan notes that is not the case, while also noting officials making pronouncements of psychogenic illness often don't explain that in particular and don't present the diagnosis well in general.
And so, alternative explanations are sought, such as in traditionalist religion in some cases, or things like antivaxxer conspiracies in others. [Or now, Cold War 2.0 nonsense.] With individuals, sometimes it's outside society that doesn't want to accept a psychogenic illness identification because they know it's an indictment of wider society. Here, O'Sullivan's first case, children of asylum seekers in Sweden who have had their asylum claims rejected at least once, and many the maximum three times, exhibiting "resignation syndrome" (also displayed elsewhere) come to mind. The Swedish doctor in the book, at least, clearly doesn't want to accept that these children are reacting to their parents' asylum claims being rejected, their internalization of their parents' fear, etc.
View all my reviews
The pseudoleftists and Nat-Sec Nutsacks? Either not confused about what psychosomatic means, and willfully lying, or without even thinking one way or the other, willfully lying. Lying for where their bread is buttered.
