Early Ideas (2016‑2020)
| Key Elements | Evidence and Reasoning |
|---|---|
| Sound‑based or RF weapon | When 21 American and Canadian diplomats in Havana suddenly developed symptoms in 2016, they reported hearing a loud, directional noise and feeling pressure in their ears【353199664016319†L58-L69】. This led to speculation that a directed attack using sonic or radio‑frequency energy was causing the illness【353199664016319†L58-L69】. |
| Directed radio‑frequency hypothesis | The 2020 U.S. National Academies of Sciences (NAS) report concluded that the acute symptoms were most consistent with a directed RF energy attack【877532337646814†L100-L116】. The committee noted that pulsed RF energy could explain clicking sounds, perceived pressure and localized sensations【877532337646814†L157-L165】, but found no evidence of a specific RF device and acknowledged that many chronic symptoms matched those seen after head trauma or stress【877532337646814†L100-L116】. |
| Chemical/infectious exposure | Canadian researchers suggested insecticide exposure might be involved. The NAS reviewed organophosphate and pyrethroid insecticides but concluded the evidence did not support this hypothesis – exposures were possible but not demonstrated at levels likely to cause the illness【877532337646814†L308-L409】. Infectious agents were also considered but lacked evidence. |
| Psychological or mass sociogenic illness | Some researchers suggested that stress and mass sociogenic illness could explain the symptoms. The NAS evaluated psychological factors and concluded that while they might contribute to chronic symptoms, they could not explain the sudden onset of distinctive audio‑vestibular symptoms【877532337646814†L636-L640】. |
| Crickets and other innocuous sounds | An advisory group (JASON) analyzed recordings from Havana and concluded the sounds were likely mechanical or biological – such as crickets – and judged it highly unlikely that pulsed RF or ultrasound explained the recordings【353199664016319†L171-L180】. |
| Cuban Academy of Sciences | A 2021 report from Cuba’s Academy of Sciences argued that the variety of symptoms could not be treated as a single syndrome and that some proposed mechanisms violated basic physics. The authors suggested psychological suggestion as a plausible explanation and noted many illnesses could be due to pre‑existing conditions【172303499171832†L175-L230】. |
Shifts in 2021‑2024
| Evolving Findings | Evidence and Reasoning |
|---|---|
| More cases but little physical evidence | As reports surfaced globally, more than 1 000 cases were reported by 2022. Multiple investigations found no consistent structural brain abnormalities; advanced MRI studies detected no significant differences between affected personnel and controls【226198777139408†L288-L316】. |
| Continued interest in energy weapons | Some researchers and officials continued to view pulsed RF or ultrasound as plausible. Studies noted that Russia and China were developing directed‑energy technologies, keeping suspicion of foreign involvement alive【353199664016319†L246-L254】. |
| Skepticism grows | A 2023 Intelligence Community Assessment concluded that it was “very unlikely” a foreign adversary was responsible【117009588593710†L166-L231】. Investigations found no pattern or forensic evidence linking cases to a directed‑energy weapon; many symptoms could be explained by pre‑existing conditions or environmental factors. |
| Counter‑arguments | A minority of officials and some media outlets continued to suspect foreign attacks. A 2024 joint investigation by The Insider, Der Spiegel and CBS linked some incidents to Russia’s GRU Unit 29155 and alleged development of non‑lethal acoustic weapons【161418733129850†L162-L233】. |
Current Assessments (2024‑2025)
| Current Theories | Evidence and Reasoning |
|---|---|
| Updated intelligence assessment | The January 2025 National Intelligence Council (NIC) assessment reported that most U.S. intelligence agencies still consider it “very unlikely” a foreign adversary caused the incidents. A few remain open to the possibility with low confidence, noting foreign research into directed‑energy technologies【128849173807518†L60-L67】. All agencies agree that the experiences of affected individuals are genuine and deserve continued investigation【128849173807518†L60-L67】. |
| House Intelligence Committee dissent | A December 2024 interim report from the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence criticized the 2023 assessment and argued that a foreign adversary may be behind some incidents【341708917237†L15-L38】. The report cited findings from an experts panel that considered pulsed electromagnetic energy and ultrasound plausible; psychosocial factors alone were deemed insufficient【341708917237†L424-L448】. |
| Mass sociogenic illness perspective | Skeptics highlight that recent government reports support psychosocial explanations. A 2025 article in the Center for Inquiry noted that two new reports cast doubt on the attack hypothesis and emphasize that many incidents are likely attributable to natural medical conditions, environmental exposures or psycho‑social factors【30684355991063†L148-L156】. The article stressed the absence of patterns or forensic evidence pointing to directed‑energy weapons【30684355991063†L148-L179】. |
| Psychology Today and other commentary | Commentators such as Robert Bartholomew argue that panic over secret weapons is waning. He notes that the latest intelligence assessment found no evidence of a mystery weapon; claims of attack are considered “highly unlikely”【494719396892300†L193-L207】. Bartholomew suggests the syndrome reflects common ailments and stress reactions【494719396892300†L243-L253】. |
| Ongoing uncertainty | Some intelligence agencies still consider a foreign actor plausible with low confidence【128849173807518†L60-L67】, and policymakers continue to debate the issue【341708917237†L424-L448】. Victims continue to report persistent symptoms, and the U.S. government provides medical care and compensation. At least 334 Americans qualified for care in the military health system by January 2024【341708917237†L341-L343】. |
Comparison of Early vs. Current Thinking
Cause of the illness: Initial speculation focused on sonic or microwave attacks because patients heard mysterious noises and felt pressure【353199664016319†L58-L69】. Later assessments by NAS and the JASON group raised skepticism, and most intelligence agencies now conclude a foreign adversary is very unlikely【128849173807518†L60-L67】. A minority of officials and journalists still cite directed‑energy research or Russian involvement.
Other explanations: Early reports largely overlooked mass sociogenic illness; NAS noted psychological factors could contribute but not explain the sudden onset【877532337646814†L636-L640】. Current commentary emphasizes psychosocial and environmental causes【30684355991063†L148-L156】.
Evidence: Early investigations produced little physical evidence. Later imaging studies found no consistent brain injuries【226198777139408†L288-L316】. Current assessments stress the absence of forensic or geolocation evidence linking incidents to a weapon【30684355991063†L148-L179】.
Consensus: The early narrative of hostile attacks has fractured. While some still view directed‑energy as plausible, most intelligence agencies now doubt the attack hypothesis【128849173807518†L60-L67】. Skeptics favor mass sociogenic illness or environmental explanations, while some policymakers continue to suspect a foreign adversary【341708917237†L424-L448】.