There is proof, the people effected have physical damage as shown by radio imaging.
If you look at something like transcranial magnetic stimulation, it doesn't seem like the kind of brain tweaking that you could do without someone noticing. Anything energy-based (electromagnetic or sound) strong enough to affect the brain should be quite detectable. I suppose there could be chemical ways of doing it but I would think they could be detected as well.
I also remember an interview with one of those suffering from Havana Syndrome who talked about how tough his job was and how he could stand up to nearly any pressure so there's no way this could be a manifestation of anxiety. Which makes me think that it is anxiety in someone whose belief system doesn't allow them to admit (even to themselves) that it might be a possibility.
Just because one doctor says it we have to believe them? Doctors are not at all infallible and are flawed like everyone else. I mean just a few years ago, doctors were heavily subscribing opiates. I’ll remain skeptical until actual evidence is presented.
In fact I'd take anything they refute as proof of existence.
To answer your 'question'- because he is actively going against the CIA narrative.
Since you obviously didn't read the article let me enlighten you with a quote from it '"The narrative just was going the wrong way. And no matter what I did or said to people, that just continued," Andrews said. "In fact, to this day, a lot of things that were done seemed not appropriate to my standards." Some officers who were impacted didn't want to report for fear of damaging their careers, Andrews said.'
This shouldn't need to be said, but let me do so anyways to avoid you muddying the waters further: one doctor from the CIA going counter to his higher-ups' narrative is why I believe 'a CIA doctor'. One doctor blowing a whistle is not the same as the entire CIA.
They sowed this distrust themselves, and your comments are far from helping their current PR push.
Projecting much? You were the one saying don’t trust the CIA (except this CIA doctor). Definitely seems consistent.
Waste of my time.
The only imaging I saw in the subsequently linked case series was conventional structural MRI … that is to say the imaging cited is evidence of absence (granting other aspects of linked assessment demonstrated a symptom burden which could be attributed to CNS dysfunction).
Modern imaging modalities are amazing. Look forward to having the radio imaging finding highlighted.
Here's a mention of it in this article. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/world/article-blood-and-bure...
Another report, or is it the same one as referenced above?
Until a completely new sample of victims with no relation is taken and the study replicated against a completely new control group with no relation, it has very little value. And even if it did, it still wouldn't be conclusive - psychosomatic illness can have physiological effects.
The only way is to prove the mechanism of the attack - which for microwave attacks is readily done with wearable RF devices - and to find a physiologically plausible mechanism for that exact observed attack. Which should be pretty easy to do, and which the CIA hasn't done.
Would make sense if it was an own equipment malfunction.