Remarkable that the Donegal Daily is working as a mouthpiece for dubious anti wind energy organisations.
Originally Posted by Decadance
Dr Michael Cooke (they can't even spell the name correctly) is not only biased and cherry-picking out of the journals he is mentioning, alternatively there is no such evidence found in these journals. I couldn't find any article about health impact of noise of wind turbines in The Lancet or The New England Journal of Medicine.
In the British Medical Journal we can read: Wind turbine noise
17 reviews on wind turbines and health ... and not a single one referenced.
There is generally a lack of peer-reviewed studies for the claims of a few doctors and self=named specialists that the noise of wind turbines would have a negative impact on health.
But let's take a look behind the scene.
Who is the Waubra Foundation really?
Why would the Landscape Guardians (LG) and the IPA contrive to fool the public into thinking that the Waubra Foundation was an independent organisation; an important-sounding “Foundation” no less?. Becasue the IPA is funded by and works in the interest of:
- BHP Billiton
- Western Mining
- Esso Australia (a subsidiary of Exxon)
- Shell and Woodside Petroleum
- The Murdoch Press: News Ltd.
Waubra Foundation's strategic aim is to undermine green energy projects by:
- Gaining a place at the table amongst the “medical experts” whenever there is a public debate on health issues relating to wind farms.
- Running an aggressive campaign to convince locals they have “Wind Turbine Syndrome”.
- Preventing competition in the energy sector by undermining State Government project approval
Liberal whistleblower and one-time ministerial adviser to the Howard Government, Dr Guy Pearse, revealed that millions of dollars from Big Carbon were laundered through trusts like the Cormack Foundation to buy Howard’s climate action agenda.
Anti windfarm astroturfers exposed in Parliament
The Victorian Department of Health indicated that it had examined both peer-reviewed and validated scientific research and concluded that ‘the weight of evidence indicated that there are no direct health effects from noise.’
Dr Sarah Laurie’s evidence included evidence from Nina Pierpont, an American general practitioner who claims to be an authority on wind turbine syndrome. Pierpont is the author of a self-published book containing descriptions of the health problems of merely 10 families—that is, 38 people—in five different countries who once lived near wind turbines and who are convinced that turbines made them sick. Medical experts in Australia have said that, given that there are about 100,000 turbines around the world, her sample is too small to have any scientific value. There were no scientific controls, and the symptoms described were common in any community. Dr Laurie also tried to appeal against a proposed wind farm at Allandale East in South Australia. Her appeal failed on the basis of the same evidence from the medical community. Gary Wittert, a professor of medicine at the University of Adelaide, said there was no credible evidence that wind turbines have adverse effects on health. A recent parliamentary inquiry into wind farms in New South Wales dismissed Pierpoint’s study, particularly since her findings were not published in a peer reviewed journal. In its submission to the Senate inquiry the group Doctors for the Environment also agreed ‘there is no convincing evidence in the scientific literature of direct physiological effects occurring at sound levels commonly associated with modern wind turbines’.