Mostrando entradas con la etiqueta Cuba. Mostrar todas las entradas
Mostrando entradas con la etiqueta Cuba. Mostrar todas las entradas

lunes, 18 de marzo de 2019

La industria del odio entre cubanos

La industria del odio entre cubanos y contra #Cuba sigue dando resultados: usan resentimientos, medias verdades, falsos argumentos, viejos mitos, suposiciones, mentiras. 
Es triste ver cómo gente con cerebro, intoxicada de tanta información chatarra, repiten esos argumentos y crean confusión, frustraciones y enemistades con sus propios amigos, viejos colegas, familias, vecinos de antaño.
Pero lo más triste es que produce, sobre todo, mucho dinero para quienes la organizan y lucran con nuestras pasiones inflamadas. Y lo seguirán haciendo mientras se priorice el enfrentamiento. Tienen mucha experiencia en eso porque lo vienen haciendo desde varias generaciones. 
Vaya vil manera de ganarse la vida!
Sé que me acusarán de viejo recalcitrante comunista o, cuando menos, de tonto engañado por la propaganda de la dictadura castrista, anclado en el pasado. Cuánto daño nos hace la desmemoria!

miércoles, 9 de enero de 2019

The Real Story Behind the Havana Embassy Mystery (from Vanity Fair)

U.S. officials say dozens of diplomats in Cuba were felled by a sonic "attack." But the likeliest culprit is far less futuristic—and much more terrifying.
Jack Hitt / January 6, 2019 5:00 PM
The most dire diplomatic crisis of the Trump administration, or maybe just the weirdest, began without much notice in November 2016, some three weeks after the new president was elected. An American working at the U.S. Embassy in Havana—some call him Patient Zero—complained that he had heard strange noises outside his home. "It was annoying to the point where you had to go in the house and close all the windows and doors and turn up the TV," the diplomat told ProPublica. Zero discussed the sound with his next-door neighbor, who also worked at the embassy. The neighbor said, yeah, he too had heard noises, which he described as "mechanical-sounding."
Several months later, a third staffer at the embassy described suffering from hearing loss he associated with a strange sound. Before long, more and more people at the embassy were talking about it. They, too, started to get sick. The symptoms were as diverse as they were terrifying—memory loss, mental stupor, hearing problems, headaches. In all, some two dozen people were eventually evacuated for testing and treatment.
The outbreak at the U.S. Embassy in Cuba wasn't the only mysterious illness to pop up in the headlines. Around the same time that embassy officials were preparing to fly home, more than 20 students at an Oklahoma high school suddenly came down with baffling symptoms—uncontrollable muscle spasms, even paralysis. A few years before, a similar incident at a school in upstate New York had caught the attention of the local Fox News affiliate, which sent parents into a panic over the possibility that their children had been stricken by an unidentified immune disorder. But the Cuban mystery, the Trump administration insisted, was different. It was not some environmental mishap, but something far more diabolical.
Encouraged by U.S. officials, the media quickly unfurled a story that the mysterious sound was an "attack"—an act of war. Some kind of "acoustic weapon" had been secretly aimed at the diplomats, in an effort to reduce them to brain-damaged zombies. The story got told with a side helping of Cold War envy. Private contractors and the Pentagon's own hip military lab, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, had long been working to develop an arsenal of sound weapons. There had been some limited success with cumbersome devices like MEDUSA (Mob Excess Deterrent Using Silent Audio) and LRAD (Long Range Acoustic Device), designed to cause excruciating ear pain to disperse mobs on the ground and pirates at sea. The dream, of course, was to get past such giant blunderbusses to something more portable and powerful, like a Flash Gordon ray gun. But the air force, after some experiments, concluded that any such effort using sound waves would be "unlikely" to succeed due to "basic physical principles." If someone had developed a portable acoustic weapon, they had leapfrogged well beyond the skill set of a Raytheon or Navistar and into the arsenal of Q Branch from the Bond movies.
For the past year, the effort to crack the mystery of which technology could have caused the physical symptoms in Cuba has sparked a ferocious nerd fight—one that has pitted scientist against scientist, discipline against discipline, The New York Times against The Washington Post. New theories have emerged, only to be knocked down or marginalized by the evidence, or put down by the petty sarcasm of rivals and skeptics.
Sift through these scientific feuds and media battles, however, and you will end up at a single unified theory that fully explains the diverse symptoms of the injured diplomats, as well as the seemingly inexplicable circumstances surrounding their ailments. Unlike a futuristic gun, it turns out, the cause of the pain and suffering at the American Embassy in Havana appears to be as old as civilization itself. Over the centuries it has been responsible for some of the most confounding epidemics in human history, from the Middle Ages in Europe to Colonial America. And in Cuba, it appears to have been weaponized for our time, opening up a whole new battlefield in Donald Trump's war on reality.
From the time it was reopened by Barack Obama in July 2015, after a half-century of Cold War tensions, the American Embassy in Havana felt like a place in the crosshairs. C.I.A. agents returned to Cuba under the same regime that the agency had repeatedly tried and failed to overthrow. During the 2016 campaign, Trump signaled he would "terminate" the new open-door policy, and met publicly with aging veterans of the failed Bay of Pigs invasion.
Tensions spiked in September 2017, after Secretary of State Rex Tillerson summoned home some two dozen afflicted diplomats and staffers to undergo medical tests at the University of Pennsylvania. When someone suggested that the diplomats might be allowed to return to Havana once their health improved, Tillerson freaked. "Why in the world would I do that when I have no means whatsoever to protect them?" he huffed to the Associated Press. "I will push back on anybody who wants to force me to do that." Even before any cause had been discovered, the State Department's medical director, Charles Rosenfarb, seemed to rule out the usual candidates for any overseas affliction—molds, viruses, ill-advised shellfish. "The patterns of injuries," he insisted, "were most likely related to trauma from a non-natural source." The government had already decided that foul play was afoot—and that the primary suspect was a secret weapon.
One of the chief difficulties of using sound that people can hear as a weapon is that it dissipates quickly. That means you have to make the sound really, really loud to start with, so it can still do damage by the time it reaches the target. "To harm someone from outside a room, a sonic weapon would have to emit a sound above 130 decibels," said Manuel Jorge Villar Kuscevic, a Cuban ear-nose-and-throat specialist who examined the evidence. That's a roar comparable to "four jet engines on the street outside a house"—a blast that would deafen everyone in the vicinity, not just a single target.
Another bug in the initial sonic-weapon theory was exposed by … a bug. As the diplomats prepared to undergo a battery of tests, the Associated Press leaked a recording made in Cuba by one of the two dozen afflicted staffers and posted it on YouTube. Although the sound had been described in a number of contradictory ways, some of those who heard it experienced something like a high-pitched, high-frequency stridulation. In short, it sounded like chirping. And, in fact, once experts listened to the YouTube recording, there was an almost embarrassing revelation. What did many hear? Crickets.
Literally, crickets. Specifically, Gryllus assimilis, a.k.a. the Jamaican field cricket, also known sarcastically among bug experts as the "silent cricket." And while Gryllus can get as loud as, say, a vacuum cleaner, it's not noisy enough to cause deafness. Or, others argued, the sound might be cicadas. ProPublica's groundbreaking investigation into the embassy mystery last winter quoted a biology professor named Allen Sanborn as saying that the only way a cicada could injure your hearing was if "it was shoved into your ear canal."
By January 2018, some of the government's own experts had ruled out a sonic attack. In an interim report, the F.B.I. revealed that it had investigated sound waves below the range of human hearing (infrasound), those we can hear (acoustic), and those above our hearing range (ultrasound). The conclusion: there was no sonic cause to the physical symptoms experienced by the diplomats.
But the Trump administration was not about to let good science stand in the way of politics that satisfies the base. The State Department slashed American staff in Havana by 60 percent and downgraded the posting to a "standard tour of duty"—a designation reserved for the most dangerous embassies, such as those in South Sudan and Iraq. A day after the F.B.I. ruled out a sonic attack, Marco Rubio, who despised Obama's policy of restoring relations with his family's homeland, gaveled open a hearing on Cuba before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. As far as Rubio was concerned, the "attacks" were a given—as were the weapon and the assailant. "There is no way that someone could carry out these number of attacks, with that kind of technology, without the Cubans knowing about it," he told Fox News. "They either did it, or they know who did it."
After the hearing, Senator Jeff Flake, who had been briefed on the evidence, said out loud what the scientists already knew: that there was no proof Cuba had anything to do with the symptoms experienced by embassy staffers. "The Cubans bristle at the word attack," he told CNN during a visit to Havana. "I think they are justified at doing so. The F.B.I. has said there is no evidence of an attack. We shouldn't be using that word."
In reply, Rubio essentially told Flake to shut the fuck up. "It is impossible to conduct 24 separate & sophisticated attacks on U.S. Govt personnel in #Havana without the #CastroRegime knowing about it," Rubio tweeted. "Any U.S. official briefed on matter knows full well that while method of attack still in question, that attacks & injuries occurred isn't." Rubio, like many in the Republican Party, was copying the playbook of the man he had tried so hard to defeat for the presidency: if you repeat misinformation often enough, and angrily enough, it starts to take on the shape of reality.
Cuban officials, still operating under the Enlightenment principles of science, reacted with disbelief, and sometimes snark. "It is evident that to attack #Cuba some people don't need any evidence," tweeted José Ramón Cabañas, Cuba's ambassador to the United States. "Next stop UFOs!!"
Not long after Rubio's hearings, a new sonic theory emerged from scientists at the University of Michigan and Zhejiang University, in China. After reverse-engineering the sound on the audiotape, they concluded that ultrasound signals from an everyday device—a burglar alarm, say, or a motion detector—crossed with those from a secret surveillance system could produce a sound like the YouTube cricket. But the new theory, known as intermodulation distortion, didn't catch on, for the same reason the F.B.I. investigation was dismissed: because Rubio and others in the administration continued to insist that there had to be malicious intent involved. Rubio's paranoia sustained a major blow in March, when the medical team that had been allowed to examine 21 of the patients published its finding in The Journal of the American Medical Association. Given the limited data, the article's 10 authors couldn't get very specific. "Because of security and confidentiality considerations," they wrote, "individual-level demographic data cannot be reported." But investigating this "novel cluster of findings" and "neurotrauma," they found that the victims suffered from a wide range of symptoms: balance issues, visual impairments, tinnitus, sleep disorders, dizziness, nausea, headaches, and problems thinking or remembering.
They also concluded that while the patients experienced this assortment of brain-rattling symptoms, they couldn't find what should have been clear evidence of concussion in the brain scans and other tests. "Most patients had conventional imaging findings, which were within normal limits," the medical team reported, noting that the few scattered anomalies could "be attributed to other pre-existing disease processes or risk factors." The scientists wrapped up their report with a sentence that expressed their bafflement: "These individuals appeared to have sustained injury to widespread brain networks without an associated history of head trauma." According to one author, the team enjoyed referring to this contradiction as the "immaculate concussion."
With the medical doctors left scratching their heads, and a sonic weapon ruled out by the F.B.I., enterprising scientists continued their search for a sonic explanation. In September, The New York Times published a breathless front-page story that read like a Tom Clancy novel: "Members of Jason, a secretive group of elite scientists that helps the federal government assess new threats to national security, say it has been scrutinizing the diplomatic mystery this summer and weighing possible explanations, including microwaves."
The article reached back three decades, to the early era of sonic research. Those were the days when spooky words like "neurowarfare" were coined, and scientists dreamed of developing a weapon that could induce "sonic delusions." The Russians, the Times added suggestively, had also been working on this. Then, carriage return, new paragraph:
"Furtively, globally, the threat grew."
There was even talk, the Times trembled, of a sonic weapon capable of "beaming spoken words into people's heads." And the threat could be coming to fruition, the paper warned, thanks to new research based on an old finding. The potential weapon might rely on a phenomenon known as the Frey effect, in which a tiny pulse of microwaves is aimed at one's ear, raising the temperature inside the ear by an amount so small it can't be measured—around a millionth of a degree. That would be enough, though, to ever so slightly rattle the moisture molecules and create an acoustic effect. Sadly, the suspected weapon had been downgraded from a sonic ray gun to a high-tech version of a popcorn-popper.
There were several obvious problems with this theory. An "inside the skull" explanation, for instance, doesn't account for the sound that the diplomats in Havana recorded. But before anyone could dive into the scientific details, a tiny press skirmish broke out between the Times and The Washington Post, which took a blue pencil to the Clancy plotline. "Microwave weapons is the closest equivalent in science to fake news," Alberto Espay, a University of Cincinnati neurologist, told the Post. Kenneth Foster, a bioengineer who delineated the Frey effect way back in 1974, called the entire idea "crazy." The microwaves involved, he told the Post, "would have to be so intense they would actually burn the subject." Or, as he put it vividly a decade ago, "Any kind of exposure you could give to someone that wouldn't burn them to a crisp would produce a sound too weak to have any effect."
If you view what happened to the diplomats in Havana as an "attack," you must look for something capable of producing such an assault. It would have to emit a sound that varied widely from listener to listener. It would have to strike only people who worked at the embassy. It would have to assail them wherever they happened to be, whether in their homes or staying at a hotel. It would have to produce a wide range of symptoms that seemed to bear no relation to one another. And it would have to start off small, with one or two victims, before spreading rapidly to everyone in the group.
As it happens, there is and always has been one mechanism that produces precisely this effect in humans. Today it's referred to in the medical literature as conversion disorder—that is, the conversion of stress and fear into actual physical illness. But most people know it by an older, creakier term: mass hysteria. Among scientists, it's not a popular term these days, probably because "mass hysteria" summons the image of a huge mob, panicked into a stampede (with a whiff of misogyny thrown in). But properly understood, the official definition, when applied to the events in Havana, sounds eerily familiar. Conversion disorder, according to the International Journal of Social Psychiatry, is the "rapid spread of illness signs and symptoms among members of a cohesive social group, for which there is no corresponding organic origin."
We tend to think of stress as something that afflicts an individual who is enduring heavy psychological pain. But conversion disorder, or mass psychogenic illness, as it is also known, is essentially stress that strikes a close-knit group, like an embassy under siege, and behaves epidemiologically—that is, it spreads like an infection. Because the origins of this affliction are psychological, it's easy for those on the outside to dismiss it as being "all in the victim's mind." But the physical symptoms created by the mind are far from imaginary or faked. They are every bit as real, every bit as painful, and every bit as testable, as those that would be inflicted by, say, a sonic ray gun.
"Think of mass psychogenic illness as the placebo effect in reverse," says Robert Bartholomew, a professor of medical sociology and one of the leading experts on conversion disorder. "You can often make yourself feel better by taking a sugar pill. You can also make yourself feel sick if you think you are becoming sick. Mass psychogenic illness involves the nervous system, and can mimic a variety of illnesses."
Scientists in Cuba were among the first to realize that the outbreak at the American Embassy conformed to mass hysteria. Mitchell Valdés-Sosa, director of the Cuban Neuroscience Center, told The Washington Post, "If your government comes and tells you, 'You're under attack. We have to rapidly get you out of there,' and some people start feeling sick … there's a possibility of psychological contagion."
Some American experts who were able to review the early evidence concurred. "It could certainly all be psychogenic," Stanley Fahn, a neurologist at Columbia University, told Science magazine.
If you retrace the key events and anomalies of the outbreak at the embassy in Havana, every step of the way corresponds to those in classic cases of conversion disorder. The first few staffers hit by the symptoms were C.I.A. agents working on hostile soil—one of the most stressful positions imaginable. The initial conversation between Patient Zero and Patient One referenced only the odd sound; neither experienced any symptoms. Then, a few months later, a third embassy official reported that he was losing his hearing due to a "powerful beam of high-pitched sound." As word spread quickly throughout the small, tight-knit complex of diplomats and other staff, Patient Zero helped sound the alarm. "He was lobbying, if not coercing, people to report symptoms and to connect the dots," says Fulton Armstrong, a former C.I.A. officer who worked undercover in Cuba.
According to ProPublica, Patient Zero informed Ambassador Jeffrey DeLaurentis, in a telling phrase, that "the rumor mill is going mad." So a meeting was called, which spread the word even further. Over the next weeks and months, more than 80 staffers and their families came forward to complain of a dizzying and seemingly unrelated range of symptoms: deafness, memory loss, mental stupor, head pain. Many reported hearing the strange noise, but they couldn't seem to agree on what it sounded like. One described it as "grinding metal," and another called it a "loud ringing." Yet another compared it to feeling the "air 'baffling' inside a moving car with the windows partially rolled down."
The sound also moved around a lot. The first four complaints all came from C.I.A. agents working undercover in Havana, who reported hearing the noise at their homes. But then others claimed that they had been felled by the mysterious sound while staying temporarily at Havana hotels, specifically the Hotel Capri and the Hotel Nacional.
Within days of the first report, U.S. officials like Rubio tipped the scale of belief toward a super-secret sonic ray gun, issuing press releases that referred to "acoustic attacks." The State Department's medical director uttered this exquisite contradiction: "No cause has been ruled out," he insisted, "but the findings suggest this was not an episode of mass hysteria." Rather than waiting for actual data and expert analysis, officials immediately leapt to the most exotic possible explanation. The outbreak in Havana certainly could have been caused by a mysterious unheard-of secret weapon. But the story, as it has developed in the media, has always worked backward from the idea of a sonic attack. The cause was a given; the only question was which branch of acoustic science was responsible.
Government secrecy made things worse. "We will not release information," the State Department declared, "that violates individuals' privacy or reveals their medical conditions." The government also ignored data that didn't fit its preferred theory. Early on, there was an outbreak of symptoms among Canadian officials in Havana, one of whom lived next door to Patient Zero. But Canada and Cuba enjoy good relations, so it made no sense for Cuba to be attacking Canadians. Likewise, an isolated report of a similar "attack" at the U.S. Embassy in China briefly made the news, but was eventually dropped from the narrative. U.S. officials further loaded the dice by selecting the people sent home for testing—presenting an incomplete and misleading set of data for doctors to examine.
When The Journal of the American Medical Association published the report by the initial medical team, it also ran a hand-wringing editorial undermining the very article it was publishing. The "initial clinical evaluations," the JAMA editors observed, "were not standardized." The "examiners were not blinded," and some of the ailments were based on "patient self-report." There was a "lack of baseline evaluations and the absence of a control." Those factors, the editors concluded—along with the fact that many of the reported symptoms "occur in the general population"—meant that the results of the study are "complicated." The editors added a disclaimer, much like the one in Bush v. Gore (don't ever cite this case in the future!), urging "caution in interpreting the findings."
The editors suspected that skeptical scientists would attack the study, which is exactly what happened. The chief editor of Cortex, Sergio Della Sala, ridiculed the authors' methods, specifically for setting a low bar for reporting embassy staffers as "impaired"—resulting in "numerous false positives." Take the symptom of tinnitus. Some 50 million Americans—one in six people—experience ringing in the ears. If the JAMA scientists had assessed "any group of normal, healthy people" using the same criteria they applied to the diplomats, Della Sala pointed out, they would have found "several of them performing below the chosen cut-off score in one or another test."
So, between the shaky medical study and the government secrecy, the description of the patients that emerged has always remained vague. Bartholomew, the medical sociologist, calls this the data equivalent of "a fuzzy Bigfoot photo." That is to say, every nonexistent creature captured in an out-of-focus photograph is typically just blurry enough to permit anyone to see whatever they want to see, like Chupacabra, or the Ivory Billed Woodpecker, or Ebu Gogo, or batsquatch, or the Lizard Man of Scape Ore Swamp.
The authors of the JAMA study noted that they briefly considered conversion disorder, but dismissed it after screening for "evidence of malingering." Malingering means to fake illness, which was a very weird thing for the JAMA authors to say. "Malingering was in the literature about 60 years ago," says Bartholomew, somewhat bemused. "So I'm not sure what literature they were looking at." Conversion disorder isn't faking illness. Conversion disorder is being panicked into actual illness.
In December, a new study found that 25 embassy staffers tested positive for real, physical symptoms—in this case, impairments to balance and cognitive functions. "What we noticed is universal damage to the gravity organs in the ear," the study's lead author told the Times. But a closer look at the study itself, experts say, reveals that it found no such thing. "This paper only reports statement of deficits without giving any evidence, or scores, or methods, or statistics, or procedures," explains Della Sala, the editor of Cortex. "It is far below par, and would not pass the scrutiny of any respected neuropsychology outlet." In other words, he says, the symptoms cited in the study may be testable. But that alone "does not necessarily support an organic cause."
Psychological contagion, it turns out, happens all the time. Bartholomew, who is writing a book on the subject, sets aside time each week to scour the Internet for unrecognized instances of mass psychogenic illness all over the world. "If you go on Google and type in 'mystery illness in school' or 'mystery illness in factory' or 'mystery illness' in general, you'll get a lot of outbreaks," he says. Sometimes the public doesn't know that the illnesses were actually diagnosed, he adds, because one way to treat conversion disorder is to keep calm, let the stressful situation pass, and watch the symptoms disappear. That's what happened in that outbreak of paralysis at an Oklahoma high school in 2017, around the time the U.S. diplomats were headed home. The superintendent, Vince Vincent, ordered tests for mold issues or water poisoning, which found nothing, and followed up by reassuring parents that health officials had diagnosed the problem as "conversion disorder," and that everyone was safe. If, however, you make a big deal about an outbreak, the way Rubio and the State Department did, you can add to the hysteria and make things worse.
It doesn't help that discussions of mass hysteria typically revolve around the craziest and most extreme examples. Every standard article on mass psychogenic illness seems obligated to cite the Salem witch trials, with detailed descriptions of the young girls' convulsions and trances. Or there's a mention of the barking children in Holland in 1673, or the laughing epidemic that broke out at a girls' boarding school in Tanzania in 1962. The outbreak of "meowing nuns" in the Middle Ages usually warrants a mention, as does choreomania—the dancing frenzy—that gripped the German city of Aachen seven centuries ago.
But what's most striking about episodes of mass hysteria is how the symptoms—and suspected causes—change over the centuries to fit each moment and culture. Several centuries ago, they were taken as evidence of the invisible reality of witchcraft or spiritual possession, because that made total sense at the time. After World War I, and Germany's infamous use of mustard gas to burn or kill thousands of soldiers, psychological contagion started to be triggered by smells. Depression-era Virginia, apparently, was especially susceptible to outbreaks of gas fears, which the local authorities eventually traced to organic causes ranging from backed-up chimneys to phenomenal farting. After the group panic that broke out over Orson Welles's legendary broadcast of a Martian invasion in 1938, a later survey showed that one out of every five people who flipped out actually thought it was a German gas attack. And during World War II, a small town in Illinois became convinced that it was under siege by a mysterious assailant who became known as the "Mad Gasser" of Mattoon.
Today, in an age defined by an invasion of noise pollution, funny sounds may be emerging as the new catalyst for conversion disorder. Beyond the omnipresent clicks and chirps alerting us of our new duties to our gadgets and appliances, sound has already been weaponized. Convenience stores deploy high-frequency devices as teen repellents, and the C.I.A. has tortured suspected terrorists with round-the-clock broadcasts of the Meow Mix theme or, for the most intractable, the Bee Gees. But increasingly, people all over the world report being sickened by persistent humming sounds. The Taos Hum, heard by thousands, has long plagued areas of New Mexico. In the late 1990s, the Kokomo Hum caused more than 100 people in Indiana to suffer headaches, light-headedness, muscle and joint pain, insomnia, fatigue, nosebleeds, and diarrhea. (A firm hired to investigate the mystery left the cause, as with so many cases of psychological contagion, as a mystery.) Canadians in Ontario now worry about the Windsor Hum. A Web site called the World Hum Map has identified some 7,000 locations around the world, searchable in the "World Hum Sufferers Database."
Psychological contagion typically occurs in places where people are thrown together under pressure, and where escape is difficult—hence monasteries in the Middle Ages, or modern-day schools, factories, and military bases. In terms of locations under pressure, embassies are strong candidates, especially when a considerable number of the staff are undercover spies. One C.I.A. agent told me that these low-grade panics happen a lot. Writing in The New Yorker in 2008, the novelist and former British spy, John le Carré, made the case that spies are susceptible to a unique form of hysteria. One of his first missions, he recounted, was to accompany a superior on a late-night rendezvous with a mysterious source. But the source never arrived. Only later did le Carré realize that his boss was a bit touched, and there had probably been no source in the first place. "The superbug of espionage madness is not confined to individual cases," he warned, in a prescient nod to the embassy in Havana. "It flourishes in its collective form. It is a homegrown product of the industry as a whole."
Bartholomew suggests that le Carré's "espionage madness" is a harbinger of things to come. In 2011, an epidemic broke out among a dozen kids at a school in Le Roy, New York. The children were suddenly overtaken by speech impediments, Tourette's, and muscular twitches. Health officials quickly suspected the symptoms were the result of psychological contagion, but the local Fox News channel stoked the outbreak by amplifying one doctor's diagnosis that the kids were suffering from a "PANDAS-like" strep infection. Outraged parents formed an advocacy group, and Erin Brockovich showed up demanding an investigation that would discover the "real" cause. Fake news fueled a real illness, and scientific evidence was rejected in favor of pre-determined beliefs. Eventually the Fox rage subsided, and the symptoms went away.
The Le Roy outbreak was intensified by texts and tweets, fanning the fear and ramping up the number of kids who reported symptoms. Social media has a toxic way of creating tight, sealed-off, le Carré spy dens everywhere. Since 2000, Bartholomew says, there have been more events of mass psychogenic illness than there were in the entire previous century. The prescribed treatment for psychological contagion—avoiding inflammatory rhetoric and letting everyone calm down—will be increasingly difficult in the age of the Twitter Presidency, when the populace is regularly needled into fits of panic.
This fall, the Joint Chiefs of Staff were briefed by several experts about the mysterious noise at the embassy in Havana. Among them was James Giordano, chief of neuroethics studies at Georgetown University, who believes that there is a "high probability" that the diplomats in Cuba were attacked by a "directed energy" weapon. After the briefing, Giordano reported that the Joint Chiefs expressed interest in "the idea of brain sciences as forming at least one vector to the new battle space."
Then, as scientists are prone to do, Giordano switched from English to the kind of sci-fi word salad rarely heard beyond the bridge of the starship Enterprise, when Scotty carries on about tachyon pulses and anti-time convergences.
"The most likely culprit here," Giordano explained, "would be some form of electromagnetic-pulse generation and/or hypersonic generation that would then utilize the architecture of the skull to create something of an energetic amplifier or lens to induce a cavitational effect that would then induce the type of pathologic changes that would then induce the constellation of signs and symptoms that we're seeing in these patients."
Machete one's way through all the Star Trek syntax and twaddle, and what Giordano is telling us, in sum, is both true and terrifying. There is a new battlespace in America's ongoing war over what is real, and it can be found inside the architecture of our own skulls.

sábado, 22 de diciembre de 2018

Aprendizajes

En más de 15 años de activismo #LGBT en #Cuba he aprendido que:

1. No podemos sentarnos a esperar, porque nada viene solo. Se lucha contra prejuicios muy arraigados en la cultura y hay que trabajar fuerte contra ellos.

2. La felicidad nunca viene completa. Los resultados vienen pasó a paso,  sólo se triunfa persistiendo sin perder el objetivo.

3. Se deben aprovechar las oportunidades, que no siempre se puede avanzar en el tema y son muchos los obstáculos, desde todos los flancos.

4. Cada momento de avance es motivo de celebración, de volver a adecuar tácticas y estrategias.

No queda más remedio que luchar, aprovechando cada momento y construyendo nuevas vías sobre cada logro, aunque parezcan mínimos

miércoles, 28 de noviembre de 2018

Los servidores públicos en #Cuba y Twitter

Se ha vuelto común que los dirigentes cubanos abran cuentas en Twitter, tras el reclamo del congreso de los periodistas y que el presidente de la república anunciara la apertura de la suya. Loable esfuerzo, siempre que se exploten al máximo las potencialidades de tan poderosa herramienta. 

Twitter le da a los servidores públicos la posibilidad de rendir cuenta de su gestión, consultar directamente las políticas que le atañen y mantener un diálogo directo con el público. Pero si se usa solo para repetir consignas y retuitear lo que otros han tuiteado, se está perdiendo la mayor parte de su beneficio.

El canal informativo Caribe ya transmite por 12 horas seguidas y no se anuncia en ningún momento una cuenta en Twitter, con la que pudiera interactuar en vivo con sus televidentes. 

La cancillería anuncia en Twitter un canal para intercambiar públicamente sobre la política exterior del país y pide las inquietudes... por correo electrónico!

Las TICS abren un enorme abanico de posibilidades, pero hay que actualizarse también en su uso. Si no, estamos en la web 2.0 y usamos las herramientas de la www. O lo que es lo mismo: usamos los medios digitales con pensamiento analógico.

martes, 4 de septiembre de 2018

Weak Evidence for Microwave Radiation in U.S. Embassy

It's the latest theory—but is it true?
Posted Sep 02, 2018 in Psychology Today
By: Robert Bartholomew Ph.D.
There is a new explanation making the rounds for the mystery illness responsible for sickening 25 U.S. embassy staff in Havana, Cuba, beginning in late 2016: microwave radiation.  On September 1, 2018, the New York Times carried the headline: "Microwave Weapons are Prime Suspect in Ills of U.S. embassy Workers."  Dr. Douglas Smith, one of the lead authors of a recent study of 21 of the affected staff members, told the Times that microwave radiation could be the culprit.  His musings have naturally received significant media attention.  Smith helped to write a recent study on the mysterious illness outbreak in Cuba in the Journal of the American Medical Association.
There's only one problem with the microwave theory: There's very little evidence to support it.  A similar explanation was proposed late last year by James Lin, an Electrical and Computer Engineer at the University of Chicago, who argued that the Cuban illnesses could have been caused by targeted microwave pulses.  The trouble with this hypothesis is that it would require a massive transmitter and the target would have to be right next to the antenna.  It's just not feasible.  Those reporting symptoms were not at the embassy, but in their own homes or in one of two major Havana Hotels.  To target staff in these venues is not only impractical, it doesn't make any sense.             
Curiously, when the JAMA study was published earlier this year, the microwave explanation wasn't even considered.  The researchers claimed that a mysterious energy source had affected the brains of their patients.  The study included phrases like "we must continue to withhold certain sensitive information" and "despite the preliminary nature of the data."  Any time scientists withhold information and ask you to trust them, it is a giant red flag.  Their study was filled with flaws and made claims that were not supported by the data.  That they began their study by stating matter-of-factly that their purpose was "To describe the neurological manifestations that followed exposure to an unknown energy source," tells you all you need to know.  This statement demonstrates from the onset, a lack of scientific rigor.  When you take away the dubious claims of white matter track changes (which are common in everything depression to normal aging) and concussion-like symptoms (for which there was no clear evidence), we are left with a classic outbreak of mass psychogenic illness.
Spread to China
Earlier this year there were claims of a similar 'acoustical attack' in China.  The Chinese twist makes the likelihood of some type the of attack even more improbable.  The manner in which the State Department responded to the new attack claims was quite sensational and unnecessarily alarmist; it issued an alert based on vague symptoms (dizziness, headache) from just two diplomats in Guangzhou.  Apart from ambiguous stomach pain, these two symptoms have to be among the two most common medical complaints in the world.  The State Department's mishandling this case is a recipe for what I call 'The Sonic Attack Scare' (or if you like, 'The Microwave Panic') spreading even further.  The U.S. has nearly 300 physical embassies, consulates and diplomatic missions around the world with thousands of employees, everywhere from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe, all with staff who are now on the lookout for strange sounds and vague feelings of illness.  This is a classic mass hysteria setup.  The groundwork has been laid for future "attacks" via mass suggestion.  As a result, this saga seems destined to continue with no end in sight.
Here's the bottom line:  It's all well and good to speculate but show us some evidence.  So far, it's not there, so I am going with Occam's Razor: The simplest explanation is the most likely. In this case, the most plausible explanation that is grounded in mainstream science is mass psychogenic illness.  Not long ago, the prestigious science journal Nature published an article by Sharon Weinberger reviewing the progress in the development of microwave weapons.  Titled, "Microwave Weapons: Wasted Energy," it concluded that "Despite 50 years of research on high-powered microwaves, the U.S. military has yet to produce a usable weapon."  Ouch!  A piece of advice: Stick with mainstream science and the known, before speculating about exotic, far-fetched explanations, and the unknown.
References
Bartholomew, Robert E., and Perez, Dionisio F. Zaldivar (2018). "Chasing Ghosts in Cuba: Is Mass Psychogenic Illness Masquerading as an Acoustical Attack?" The International Journal of Social Psychiatry 64(5):413-416.
Bartholomew, Robert E. (2018). "Neurological Symptoms in US Government Personnel in Cuba." Letter.  Journal of the American Medical Association 320(6): 602 (August 14). 320(6): 602 (August 14).
Bartholomew, Robert E., and Perez, Dionisio F. Zaldivar (2018). "Sonic Attack Claims Stir Controversy in the United States." Op Ed. Swiss Medical Weekly, February 23: 1-2.

viernes, 24 de agosto de 2018

Scientists doubt alleged “sonic attacks”

August 23, 2018
WASHINGTON, DC – Since late 2016 until recently, staff of the U.S. embassy in Havana (including some who were reportedly part of the local CIA station / https://www.thenation.com/article/what-the-us-government-is-not-telling-you-about-those-sonic-attacks-in-cuba/) began to complain of a broad range of symptoms, including headaches, hearing loss, vertigo, insomnia, weakness, fatigue, memory problems, loss of concentration and others. They associated these symptoms to noises of uncertain description and origin, which were dubbed by the U.S. government as "sonic attacks," a name that was enthusiastically adopted by the media. A few Canadian diplomats and some routine travelers to Cuba have also since been reported to have experienced similar symptoms.  
Without any proof, the Trump administration alleged that Cuba was behind the "attacks," although, in the face of growing evidence against such a theory, it has since traded the "attack" term for the accusation that Cuba has "failed to protect" U.S. diplomatic personnel. The Cuban government has vehemently denied it; and it is hard to imagine that Cuba would take such foolish steps to endanger the fragile gains of the change in Cuba policy under the Obama administration. In any event, the matter rapidly escalated to a confrontation between the two countries.  
The U.S. unilaterally withdrew much of its personnel from the embassy in Havana, expelled most Cubans form their embassy in Washington, and later issued a travel alert warning of the "dangers" of travel to Cuba. These measures, along with other restrictions imposed by the Trump administration, have seriously damaged the modest improvement in relations implemented by the Obama administration, especially but not only the routine consular activities necessary for travel between the two countries.
The cause of these reported health complaints remained a mystery, at least apparently until the administration commissioned a study of the affected individuals by a group of experts based at the University of Pennsylvania (https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/2673168). Their high-profile study, published in March of this year in the prestigious Journal of the American Medical Association, alleged that the symptoms were neurological problems akin to mild concussions, without evidence of impacts or other brain injury, even postulating a possible new syndrome that required further research. They did not put forward an explanation for the cause or the mechanism of the reported health effects, and the report was accompanied by a commentary and an editorial that highlighted numerous shortcomings of its underlying science.
Most importantly, however, the study discounted the possibility that the health complaints could be explained as a mass psychogenic episode (an episode of psychological origin). These are events that occur when a group of closely related individuals under stress—as was the case of the U.S. embassy personnel—manifest a group of apparently unrelated symptoms of unknown cause, including those reported from Havana.  
The term "mass hysteria" has also been commonly used to describe this phenomenon, but it is emotionally-charged and very misleading: it suggests that the individuals involved are "crazy" or are faking the symptoms. That is not the case. In true psychogenic episodes the symptoms experienced by the individuals are real, and they come about because of as yet poorly understood relationships between the brain and other body systems. It can happen to any of us.  
But the story hardly ends there. As early as January of this year, Robert E. Bartholomew, PhD, an expert on psychogenic illnesses, forcefully challenged the congressional testimony of the State Department's medical director, who rejected a psychological cause. Bartholomew, who described reading the testimony "in stunned disbelief," elegantly described how the incident fit perfectly the characteristics of a mass psychogenic episode (https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/its-catching/201801/sonic-attack-not-mass-hysteria-says-top-doc-hes-wrong). "If these same symptoms were reported among a group of factory workers….you would get a very different diagnosis, and there would be no consideration to a sonic weapon hypothesis." Indeed, I have been witness to more than one such episode in industrial environments in my long career evaluating workplace health hazards.
And there is more.  
In a letter to the Guardian in June of 2018, a group of 15 experts from the U.S., UK, Germany and Cuba wrote—in reference to the Pennsylvania study—that the "work is deeply flawed, and does nothing to support the attack theory." (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jun/01/cuba-sonic-attack-conspiracy-theories-and-flawed-science).  
Two other experts, in yet another article (https://thepsychologist.bps.org.uk/volume-31/july-2018/neuropsychological-impairments-everybody-has) which was later published as a letter in the Journal of Neurology—showed that the method of analysis of the Pennsylvania study sponsored by the State Department used a "pseudo-scientific approach." They concluded that "it is hard to understand how claims like this….could pass any meaningful peer-review process." A critique as harsh as this is seldom seen in such a serious scientific journal.  
And last but not least, ten scientists recently published four scathingly critical letters in the very Journal of the American Medical Association in which the results of the Pennsylvania study originally appeared (https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/emilytamkin/jama-letters-criticism-sonic-attacks-study-pennsylvania). The scientists include those mentioned above, plus others from several countries and prestigious academic institutions. They point in their letters to the multiple scientific flaws of both the methods and conclusions of the Pennsylvania study, which are far too numerous to try to summarize here.
So where does this "mystery" stand today? For one, it seems certain that the Pennsylvania study was deeply flawed, and that psychogenic factors—if not the sole cause of the episode–certainly played an important part. But perhaps the best statement of where things stand can be found in the words of the group of fifteen scientists mentioned above, who also wrote that "we hope that sober and calmer heads will prevail in de-escalating this frenzy, avoiding a chill in both diplomatic relations and scientific collaboration between the U.S. and Cuba." (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jun/01/cuba-sonic-attack-conspiracy-theories-and-flawed-science).  
Manuel  R. Gómez, DrPH, MS, CIH has an undergraduate degree from Harvard in Biochemistry, a master's in Environmental Health from Hunter College, and a doctorate in Public Health from Johns Hopkins.  He has been an expert in occupational and environmental health for more than three decades, evaluating chemical and physical hazards on workplace environments.

Los científicos dudan de los supuestos “ataques sónicos”

Agosto 22, 2018
WASHINGTON, DC – Desde fines de 2016 hasta hace poco, el personal de la embajada de Estados Unidos en La Habana (incluidos algunos que, según informes, formaban parte de la estación local de la CIA) comenzó a quejarse de una amplia gama de síntomas, incluyendo dolores de cabeza, pérdida de audición, vértigo, insomnio, debilidad, fatiga, problemas de memoria, pérdida de concentración y otros. Estos ruidos fueron asociados a  ruidos de descripción y origen inciertos que el gobierno de Estados Unidos denominó "ataques sónicos", un nombre adoptado con entusiasmo por los medios de comunicación. También se ha informado que algunos diplomáticos canadienses y algunos viajeros casuales a Cuba han experimentado síntomas similares.
Sin ninguna prueba, la administración Trump alegó que Cuba estaba detrás de los "ataques", aunque, a pesar de la creciente evidencia contra tal teoría, desde entonces ha cambiado el término "ataque" por la acusación de que Cuba "no protegió" al personal diplomático de  Estados Unidos El gobierno cubano lo ha negado con vehemencia; y es difícil imaginar que Cuba tomaría medidas tan tontas para poner en peligro los frágiles logros del cambio en la política hacia Cuba bajo la administración Obama. En cualquier caso, el asunto rápidamente escaló hasta un enfrentamiento entre los dos países.
Estados Unidos retiró unilateralmente a gran parte de su personal de la embajada en La Habana, expulsó a la mayoría de los cubanos de su embajada en Washington y luego emitió una alerta de viaje advirtiendo de los "peligros" de viajar a Cuba. Estas medidas, junto con otras restricciones impuestas por la administración Trump, han dañado seriamente la modesta mejora en las relaciones implementadas por la administración Obama, en especial, pero no solo, las actividades consulares rutinarias necesarias para viajar entre los dos países.
La causa de estas denuncias de problemas de salud siguió siendo un misterio, al menos aparentemente, hasta que la administración encargó a un grupo de expertos con sede en la Universidad de Pensilvania un estudio de las personas afectadas.
Ese estudio de alto perfil, publicado en marzo de este año en el prestigioso Journal of the American Medical Association, alegó que los síntomas eran problemas neurológicos similares a conmociones cerebrales leves, sin evidencia de impactos u otra lesión cerebral, incluso postulando un posible nuevo síndrome que requeriría de mayor investigación. No presentaron una explicación de la causa o el mecanismo de los efectos informados sobre la salud.  El informe fue acompañado por un comentario y un editorial que puso de relieve las numerosas deficiencias de la ciencia subyacente.
Sin embargo, lo más importante es que el estudio descartó la posibilidad de que las quejas acerca de la salud se pudieran explicar como un episodio psicogénico de masa (un episodio de origen psicológico). Estos son eventos que ocurren cuando un grupo de personas estrechamente relacionadas bajo estrés —como fue el caso del personal de la embajada de Estados Unidos— manifiesta un grupo de síntomas aparentemente no relacionados y de causa desconocida, incluidos los reportados desde La Habana.

El término "histeria colectiva" también se ha usado comúnmente para describir este fenómeno, pero tiene una carga emocional y es muy engañoso: sugiere que los individuos involucrados están "locos" o que están fingiendo los síntomas. Ese no es el caso. En los episodios psicógenos verdaderos, los síntomas experimentados por los individuos son reales y se producen debido a las relaciones todavía poco conocidas entre el cerebro y otros sistemas del cuerpo. Puede sucederle a cualquiera.
Pero la historia difícilmente termina ahí. Ya en enero de este año, el doctor Robert E. Bartholomew, un experto en enfermedades psicogénicas, desafió enérgicamente el testimonio ante el Congreso del director médico del Departamento de Estado, quien rechazó una causa psicológica. Bartholomew, quien describió haber leído el testimonio "con asombro e incredulidad", describió con elegancia cómo el incidente se ajustaba a la perfección a las características de un episodio psicogénico masivo.
"Si estos mismos síntomas hubieran sido reportados entre un grupo de obreros fabriles… se obtendría un diagnóstico muy diferente, y no se consideraría la hipótesis de un arma sónica". Es más, he sido testigo de más de un episodio de este tipo en entornos industriales en mi larga carrera evaluando los riesgos para la salud en el lugar de trabajo.
Y hay más.
En una carta a The Guardian en junio de 2018, un grupo de 15 expertos de Estados Unidos, Reino Unido, Alemania y Cuba escribieron —en referencia al estudio de Pensilvania— que "el trabajo es profundamente defectuoso y no hace nada para apoyar la teoría del ataque".
Otros dos expertos, en un artículo adicional que se publicó más tarde como una carta en el Journal of Neurology, demostraron que el método de análisis del estudio de Pennsylvania patrocinado por el Departamento de Estado utilizó un "enfoque pseudocientífico". Llegaron a la conclusión de que "es difícil entender que reclamos como este… podría pasar cualquier significativo proceso de revisión por otros expertos". Una crítica tan dura como esta rara vez se ve en una publicación científica tan seria.
Y por último, pero no menos importante, recientemente diez científicos publicaron cuatro cartas mordaces y críticas en el propio Journal of the American Medical Association en el que aparecieron originalmente los resultados del estudio de Pensilvania. Los científicos incluyen a los mencionados anteriormente, más otros de varios países e instituciones académicas de prestigio. Señalan en sus cartas los múltiples defectos científicos de los métodos y las conclusiones del estudio de Pensilvania, que son demasiado numerosos como para tratar de resumirlos aquí.
Entonces, ¿en qué plano se encuentra hoy este "misterio"? Por un lado, parece cierto que el estudio de Pensilvania fue profundamente defectuoso, y que los factores psicogénicos, si no fueron la única causa del episodio, ciertamente desempeñaron un papel importante. Pero quizás la mejor declaración de dónde están las cosas se pueda encontrar en las palabras del grupo de 15 científicos mencionados anteriormente, que también escribieron: "esperamos que mentes sobrias y más calmadas prevalezcan en el desescalamiento de este frenesí, y que eviten un congelamiento tanto en las relaciones diplomáticas como en la colaboración científica entre Estados Unidos y Cuba".
Manuel R. Gómez, PHD, MS, CIH tiene una licenciatura en Bioquímica de Harvard, una  maestría en Salud Ambiental del Hunter College y un doctorado en Salud Pública de Johns Hopkins. Ha sido un experto en salud ocupacional y ambiental durante más de tres décadas, evaluando los peligros químicos y físicos en los entornos de trabajo.
Traducción de Germán Piniella para Progreso Semanal

viernes, 3 de agosto de 2018

A Revolution Within the Revolution: Cuba Opens to Same-Sex Marriages

A new constitution under discussion is a necessary reform that can set an example in L.G.B.T. rights.
The New York Times, Aug. 3, 2018
By Rubén Gallo
Mr. Gallo is a Mexican scholar who has written extensively about Cuban culture and society. He lives in Havana, Paris and Princeton, N.J.
PARIS — "I want to go there before things change" is a phrase I hear often from friends considering a trip to Cuba. But change has been underway for over a decade, from the day Raúl Castro became president after his brother Fidel fell ill in 2006. Since then, private property and self-employment have been legalized; tourism has boomed, benefiting thousands of Cubans who rent out rooms or serve meals in their apartments; and a lively art scene has sprouted in Havana, where artist-run spaces host exhibitions and lectures.
Reforms have been slow and gradual, but they have added up over the years and have transformed the country: The economic despair of the 1990s, when the collapse of the Soviet Union and the loss of its aid plunged the country into the worst recession in its history, has been left behind, and many Cubans, especially those who are self-employed, now enjoy a modest prosperity. Cuba is now a very different country than it was in 2006. To acknowledge these changes, former president Raúl Castro supported the constitutional change. The Cuban legislature approved a draft in July, and it will now be submitted to a national referendum.
A new constitution is much needed; the current version, written under Soviet tutelage, dates from 1976 and sets "building a Communist society" as the nation's main goal. The new version eliminates this phrase, though it continues to define the country as a "socialist state governed by the rule of law."
There are other substantial innovations: It legalizes private property and introduces a juridical framework for foreign investment. While Cubans have been allowed to buy and sell their primary residence since 2011, the new text recognizes "private" and "personal" among other forms of property, including "socialist, belonging to the people," "cooperatives" and "mixed." It also creates the position of prime minister, who will share power with the president. Other clauses, more attuned to 21st-century problems, affirm Cuba's respect for international law, repudiate terrorism, condemn nuclear proliferation and ban the use of the internet to destabilize sovereign nations. An article on environmental protection emphasizes the need to fight global warming.
Out of all of the projected constitutional reforms, one has provoked intense debate: the proposal to legalize same-sex marriage. It was introduced by Mariela Castro, a daughter of Raúl Castro who, as director of the National Center for Sex Education, or Cenesex, has become a staunch defender of the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender individuals — in Cuba, the preferred term is "trans." Her proposal was adopted by her fellow lawmakers in the National Assembly — where she also serves as a representative — but has met with opposition from conservative groups, especially evangelical Christians, who have gained influence since religious freedoms were expanded in the 1990s. In recent weeks, five evangelical churches released a joint statement opposing the proposal, prompting protests by L.G.B.T. activists.
It is widely expected that the draft constitution will be approved in the coming months, making Cuba one of the most progressive nations in the Americas in its protection of L.G.B.T. rights. The country has come a long way since the 1970s, when, as in other socialist countries, gay men were routinely harassed, barred from government jobs and even sent for re-education at labor camps. Many gay Cubans were forced into exile in the 1970s, and one of them, the novelist Reinaldo Arenas, wrote "Before Night Falls," a chilling memoir of the repression he suffered before leaving in the 1980 Mariel boatlift.
The repression of gay men caused international outrage and eventually stopped. By the 1990s, Cuba began to reflect on its treatment of L.G.B.T. citizens. In 2010, Fidel Castro recognized that an injustice had been done to gays in Cuba and admitted his own responsibility in a widely publicized interview. But it was not until Mariela Castro was appointed director of Cenesex that a radical change in Cuban society began to take place: In part thanks to her initiatives, the government funded campaigns to fight homophobia and transphobia, started educational programs aimed at the prevention of H.I.V. and AIDS and, in what is surely a first in the history of homosexuality, opened gay cabarets and discothèques and even a beach. Today, Cuba is the only country in the world where the state owns and operates gay bars, some of them livelier than similar, privately owned locales in New York or London.
These days Cuba is one of the most tolerant societies in the world when it comes to sexual difference. During a recent afternoon visit to Coppelia, a popular ice-cream parlor in Havana, I saw a group of trans friends, dressed to the hilt in tight miniskirts and high heels, casually sharing tables with families, heterosexual couples and schoolchildren. The country's official gay-friendly policy has also made it a popular destinationfor L.G.B.T. travelers. Over the years I have met dozens of older European gay men who have bought property and settled permanently in the capital, many of whom can be seen on weekend nights sitting in the park on 25th Street in Vedado, socializing with Cubans. This newfound tolerance is one of the surprising results of the current transition, in which elements of the socialist past — like the rejection of religion, especially in attitudes toward sexuality — coexist with a new cosmopolitanism.
Critics of the government argue that the increased protection of sexual minorities must be considered in the larger context of freedom of expression, where Cuba lags behind most of Latin American, and peaceful activists are routinely harassed and even imprisoned for voicing their discontent with the system.
Just a few weeks ago, several artists were arrested after protesting, on the steps of the Havana Capitol, against a recent law requiring artists to secure government permission for all performances and against penalties for works that use pornography or violence or that denigrate "the nation's symbols."
It is true that much work remains in terms of civil and cultural rights, but one should not forget how much Cuba has changed since those dark years in the 1970s: Today, artists and writers use the internet and other alternative forums to participate in debates — including weighing the pros and cons of the new constitution and the proposal to legalize same-sex marriage — that would have been unimaginable even a decade ago.
The proposed constitution is a welcome and necessary reform, one that will introduce a legal framework to guarantee the permanence of the many achievements that Cuban society has attained in the past decades.
Cuba could capitalize on the progress it has made over the years. It could export its innovative approaches to L.G.B.T. rights and sex education in the same way that, earlier, it disseminated its revolutionary ideology through the use of culture. With a bit of creativity, Cenesex could do the same with its magazine, devoted to gender and sexuality issues. If in the 20th-century Cuba was a model for leftist governments from Chile to Algeria, in the 21st it could be an example for lawmakers seeking to make their countries more livable for their L.G.B.T. citizens.
The next time I hear a friend say, "I want to go to Cuba before things change," my response will be: "Things have already changed, but that is precisely why you should go: to see the new Cuba. And if you hurry up, you might even get to see the first same-sex marriage on the island."
Rubén Gallo is a professor at Princeton University and the author, most recently, of "Teoría y Práctica de La Habana," a memoir of life in Cuba during the current transition.
Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter (@NYTopinion) and sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter.
Mr. Gallo is a Mexican scholar who has written extensively about Cuban culture and society. He lives in Havana, Paris and Princeton, N.J. 

jueves, 14 de junio de 2018

Españoles y soviets

Por: Alfredo Prieto
Según Alejo Carpentier, el español que llega al Nuevo Mundo no es un hombre del Renacimiento. Tipo segundón, sin herencia ni fortuna, transpira y vehicula el imaginario de la Contrarreforma. No tiene como referente, si alguno, a Erasmo de Rotterdam, sino a San Ignacio de Loyola. Convencido de su Verdad, la única posible, se dedica entonces a lo previsible. En su nombre practica la intolerancia, construye su catedral encima del Templo Mayor e impone sus convicciones y cultura. Excluye y margina: la diferencia no tiene, de ninguna manera, derecho a un lugar bajo el sol. También practica la pureza, empezando por la de la sangre, un bluff muchas veces levantado sobre bolsas de maravedíes destinadas a limpiar ancestros. Y expulsa de sus dominios a quienes no comulguen con su credo, enviándolos afuera, a la lejana Ceuta o, con suerte e influencias, a la Universidad de Zaragoza.
En Cuba tenemos ese tipo de españoles. El reconocimiento del gobierno cubano como un actor legítimo, y la negociación en términos de igualdad y reciprocidad --dos de los rasgos distintivos del proceso de normalización de relaciones con los Estados Unidos, hoy interrumpido--, no fue para ellos, en modo alguno, motivo de celebración. Convirtieron el hecho en un ejercicio de barricada; y lo que debió haber sido fiesta o jolgorio lo transfiguraron en una suerte de funeral con tulipanes negros. Cuando se les escuchaba, sonaban como las tubas de Tchaikovski, no como el flautín de Lennon y McCartney en "Penny Lane", mucho mejor para acompañar nuevos desafíos. Cuba, sin embargo, los ha estado enfrentando con éxito desde sus orígenes como nación.
Una de sus prácticas predilectas proviene del nominalismo: lo que no se verbaliza, no existe. Si, por ejemplo, viajar a la Isla se pone de moda en los Estados Unidos, no le dan (o casi no le dan) visibilidad social a personalidades como Usher, Smokey Robinson, Madonna… El procedimiento estándar consiste en confinarlos en sus predios, aplicarles la lógica del Quijote: "mejor es no menearlo". Fábrica de Arte, Casa de la Música, Hotel Saratoga, algunos contactos sociales puntuales. No mucho para el público en grande. Y poco o nada dicen sobre el impacto de esas interacciones culturales y humanas a su regreso a los Estados Unidos, que en muchísimas ocasiones funcionan como un boomerang. Les aplican la expresión clásica: "bajo perfil". La prensa extranjera los reporta; la cubana, si acaso, solo en esos términos. Llega entonces la hora del absurdo: acudir a Internet para enterarse de lo que hicieron en La Habana o al Paquete para ver, digamos, un desfile de modas en el Paseo del Prado que para la prensa cubana nunca existió.
El problema radica, al menos en parte, en dar como válidas las presunciones de una política que, como todas, se basa en constructos. Uno consiste en propagar alto y claro la idea de que los norteamericanos que viajan a Cuba son "los mejores embajadores de nuestra política y nuestros valores", algo que no se sostiene en una sociedad donde la diversidad y la contradicción son norma. En este caso, tal vez valdrían la pena preguntas como las siguientes: ¿Los valores conservadores? ¿Los liberales? ¿Los de Donald Trump? ¿Los de Bernie Sanders? ¿Los de la izquierda norteamericana? ¿Los de gays, lesbianas, la comunidad LGTB? Ni la libre empresa, ni el libre mercado, ni las libertades individuales --incluyendo la de expresión y la democracia--, son en los Estados Unidos templos universalmente concurridos, y sin embargo esos españoles, como Timba, caen en la trampa.  
También pueden volverse de vez en cuando contra publicaciones on line, movida destinada a la aceptación acrítica de la idea de que todos los gatos son pardos. Han llegado incluso a urdir una "cronología", batido en el que se acusa hasta el totí de formar parte de un engranaje para lograr, al fin, el cambio de régimen. Para seguir con imágenes felinas, en este texto lo usual consiste en dar gato (opiniones) por liebre (hechos). Para los periodistas, reservan su mejor argumento acusándolos de cobrar por sus colaboraciones, práctica estigmatizada aun cuando el financiamiento no provenga de fuentes oficiales como la USAID. Las amenazas de despedirlos de sus empleos vuelan si se empeñan en hacer lo que, lamentablemente, no pueden hacer en los medios oficiales, aun cuando estos lleguen a vestirse de colores: un periodismo de ideas, no de consignas. Los españoles y los soviéticos funcionan con certezas; las dudas y cuestionamientos les producen urticarias.
 Asimismo, expulsaron de su cátedra a un joven profesor de Derecho cuyo izquierdismo le viene prácticamente de los genes, dejaron sin trabajo a un periodista radial holguinero por colgar en su bloc personal las palabras de la subdirectora del órgano oficial del Partido en un evento, y hasta llegaron a acusarlo de tener segundas intenciones y de promoverse a sí mismo para poder hacer su carrera en Miami, el típico modus operandi a fin de estigmatizar al otro y dejarlo fuera del juego.
Igual la emprendieron contra un periodista uruguayo, insertado de larga data en la cultura cubana y conocedor de las realidades nacionales, con independencia de que no siempre se esté de acuerdo con todo lo que escriba o diga --esto es lo natural, no una anomalía--, ni con sus percepciones y representaciones sobre la variedad de asuntos que aborda en sus textos, algunos muy complicados como para dirimirlos en una columna, riesgo del oficio en cualquier tiempo y lugar. Aquí la movida fue tan abierta como mostrenca. Primero se vistieron con los colores del PRI: llegaron a pedir su expulsión del país, como si se tratara de un asunto de seguridad nacional o de sexo con menores de edad en el Parque de la Maestranza. Después un corifeo de muy bajo costo rebasó cualquier límite de decencia apelando desde la oscuridad a romperle los dientes ("¡Múdate de país o habla fino!, recuerda que a tu edad los dientes no vuelven a salir y los implantes de piezas dentales son carísimos"). Por último, por H o por B no le renovaron su condición de corresponsal extranjero (los de flauta, dicen pito, y los de pito, flauta).
Pero el componente soviético-estalinista acciona también en estos españoles como el musguito en la hiedra. Los problemas del país siguen estando ahí mientras el barco de los medios continúa a la deriva. En lugar de prescindir del modelo autoritario-verticalista y de remplazarlo por prácticas comunicacionales horizontales y participativas, lo siguen reforzando. Eduardo Galiano lo escribió una vez: "la Revolución cubana es una obra de este mundo, pero con una prensa que a veces parece de otro planeta y una burocracia que para cada solución tiene un problema". Evidentemente, ese esquema mediático resulta hoy más disfuncional que nunca ante el impacto de las nuevas tecnologías, llegadas para quedarse y extenderse. Antes, ese modelo tenía el poder de determinar qué era la realidad; ya no.
"Entre nosotros quedan muchos vicios de la Colonia", escribió José Antonio Ramos en 1916 refriéndose a España. Pero también, hoy, de la Unión Soviética. Es como para levantarse con una pregunta romana en la cabeza: Quosque tandem abutere, Catilina, patientia nostra?