Mike Crawley, President
International Power Canada Inc.
105 Commerce Valley Drive West, Suite 410
Markham, Ontario L3T 7W3 Canada
May 7,2010
Dear Mr. Crawley,
I am writing on behalf of XX, Harrow, Ontario. Mrs. X informs me that her home has nine (9) 1.65 MW V2 Vestas wind turbines within 2 km of her home. Three of these are within 1 km. Indeed, all 24 turbines (for this project) are within 5 km.
Mrs. X tells me that she and her neighbor are motion sensitive (see below). She likewise tells me that 3 of the neighbors suffer from migraine disorder. Mrs. X’s son has a history of ear infections. A second cousin, living 1 km away, has documented tinnitus. Two children in the neighborhood have autism-both living within 1 km of the turbines. One young man (27 years old) living within 2 km of the turbines has epileptic seizures.
Mrs. X and her husband are over 50 years of age (see below), and her in-laws (living immediately across the road) are over 80 years old.
With this as background, permit me to speak plainly. To build these turbines next to these people is a reckless and violent act.
The evidence for turbines producing substantial low frequency noise and, worse, infrasound, is no longer in dispute. I quote from one of numerous studies demonstrating this: “Wind turbines and wind farms generate strong infrasonic noise which is characterized by their blade passing harmonics (monochromatic signals)” (Ceranna et al., p. 23). In this instance, the authors are referring to a single 200 kW Vestas V47 at 200 meters-a peashooter compared to the turbines adjacent to Mrs. X’s home.’
Second, the clinical evidence is unambiguous that low frequency noise and infrasound profoundly disturb the body’s organs of balance, motion, and position sense (called “vestibular organs”).2
Third, the case studies performed by me and other medical scientists have demonstrated unequivocally that many people (especially 50 years old and older) living within 2 km of turbines are made seriously ill, often to the point of abandoning their homes.3
Fourth, there is no doubt among otolaryngologists and neuro-otologists who have studied the evidence that wind turbine low frequency noise and infrasound seriously disrupt the body’s vestibular organs, resulting in the constellation of illnesses I have called Wind Turbine
The cure for Wind Turbine Syndrome is simple: Move away from the turbines or shut them off. The prevention of Wind Turbine Syndrome is even simpler: Don’t build these low frequency/infrasound-generating machines within 2 km of people’s homes.
Governments and corporations who violate this principle are guilty of gross clinical harm. Such governments and corporations should be taken before whatever level of court is necessary to stop this outrage.
These are strong words. They are carefully chosen. They are strong because governments and the wind industry stubbornly-l would now add, criminally-refuse to acknowledge that they are deliberately and aggressively harming people. This must stop. The evidence is overwhelming.
Some weeks ago I was contacted by the editor of a leading peer-reviewed American clinical journal to write a special article on Wind Turbine Syndrome. The journal is published both online and in hard copy and aimed primarily at audiologists, otolaryngologists, and neuro-otologists.
I accepted the invitation. The article will be peer-reviewed before publication and should appear online in the next few months. Following that, it will be published in the hard copy edition of the journal. This means, of course, that my research and my findings are being accepted by the clinical medical community. Wind developers may not take this research seriously-but medical experts are.
So is the international community of otolaryngologists and neuro-otologists. My research was presented in March 2010 in a paper at the annual meeting of the Meniere’s Society, in Austria. It was widely praised. The presenter was Professor Alec Salt, PhD, internationally acclaimed neuro-physiologist specializing in inner ear diseases, from the Department of Otolaryngology at the Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
I have interrupted my writing the above journal article to compose this letter to you. The handwriting is on the wall for wind developers and their wholly inadequate setbacks. Legal proceedings have begun in several states and nations. You would be unwise to proceed with installation of these turbines if you are planning on setbacks less than 2 km.
I repeat, <2 km setbacks must stop.
Nina Pierpont, MD (Johns Hopkins), PhD (Population Biology, Princeton)
Fellow of the American Academy of Pediatrics
Former Clinical Assistant Professor of Pediatrics,
College of Physicians & Surgeons,
Columbia University
cc Valerie M Garry, Attorney at Law
6 comments:
Over two years later, Ms. Pierpont continues not to e published in any peer-reviewed journal anywhere.
Mike Barnard should read this before he attempts to trash Dr. Pierpont for not publishing in a peer reviewed journal:
Carl V. Phillips, “Properly interpreting the epidemiologic evidence about the health effects of industrial wind turbines on nearby residents,” Bulletin of Science, Technology, and Society, vol. 31, no. 4 (August 2011), pp. 303-315.
Anonymous points to an article by Carl V. Phillips in a non-indexed journal as somehow mitigating the fact that Dr. Pierpont's work was rejected by a credible, peer-published journal despite her 2010 promotion of this publication in many forums.
I'll let the words of Professor Simon Chapman speak about Mr. Philips and the Bulletin from his BMJ response to a Hanning anti-wind guest editorial: http://www.bmj.com/content/344/bmj.e1527/rr/572780
-------
In their editorial [1] Hanning and Evans cite three papers from a non-indexed journal, the Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society which in August 2011 published an issue dedicated to papers opposed to wind farms. The journal was indexed between 1981-1995 by the Web of Science, but after 1995 indexing ceased, generally a sign that indexing services regard a journal as having fallen below an acceptable scientific standard.
The eight papers in the special Bulletin issue were written by 12 authors. Of these, 7 had given papers at the “First International Symposium: The Global Wind Industry and Adverse Health Effects: Loss of Social Justice?” The conference was an overtly anti-wind farm meeting.
A paper by Krough [6] provides an indication of the abject quality of the papers in that issue. The paper contains no methods section, so fails to conform to the most basic requirement of scientific reporting: that it contain details of how the research reported was undertaken. Instead, the author says that she “began investigating reports of adverse health effects made by individuals living in the environs” of wind turbines in Ontario, Canada for “more than two years”. Instead of describing any research, the author has written a paper which mixes up statements somehow apparently made to her by informants about negative effects of exposure to turbines with similar examples from other parts of the world, from websites and submission to enquiries. We are told nothing about the process by which her informants were interviewed, how they were selected and whether her “study” was approved by any institutional research ethics committee. There is not a single example of any informant reporting anything but adverse effects of exposure to windfarms, when it is widely acknowledged that a large majority of those so exposed report no adverse effects nor complain about turbines.
Hanning and Evans refer to Carl V Philips as an expert epidemiologist. Web of Science shows Philips has published just 10 cited papers (total cites 251). Philips today runs a private “Institute”, the Populi Health Institute, apparently consisting only of him. He testifies on behalf of complainants about wind farms.
Barnard. So we know you've got your thirty pieces
Are you now going to trash all these doctors researchers and experts too: everyone who confirm unlike your pro turbine lobby, that low frequency noise exists in turbines and is killing us:
Møller, Henrik; Pedersen, dr hanning Steffen; Kloster Staunstsrup, Jan; and Sejer Pedersen, dr Alves-Pereira and Dr Branco, Christian , dr Pierpoint Philips Rand Ambrose Swinbanks, dr Salt , McMurtry, Nissenbaum and dr Amanda Harry, and countless others say YOU LIE
Based on the best available science the following conclusions can be made
· The main conclusion of peer reviewed scientific studies state noise from wind turbines is more annoying than noise from most other sources at comparable sound levels. This annoyance is predominately attributed to the unique sound characteristics of wind turbine noise.
· Noise induced annoyance is an adverse health effect which can result in stress, sleep disturbance and an increased risk of regulation diseases.
· Possible symptoms of wind turbine noise induced annoyance include distraction, dizziness, eye strain, fatigue, feeling vibration, headache, insomnia, muscle spasm, nausea, nose bleeds, palpitations, pressure in the ears or head, skin burns, stress, and tension. These symptoms are consistent with international research and media reports documenting subjects exposed to wind turbines who are reporting adverse health effects.
· The audible sound from wind turbines, at the levels experienced at typical receptor distances is expected to result in an unacceptable percentage of persons being highly annoyed.
· Exposure to wind turbines may also visually induce adverse health effects. It is acknowledged wind turbine shadow flicker may cause annoyance and/or stress.
· Wind turbines must be sited to protect humans from the adverse health effect of visually induced annoyance as well as noise induced annoyance.
Pierpont, a leading New York paediatrician, has been studying the symptoms displayed by people living near wind turbines in the US, the UK, Italy, Ireland and Canada for more than five years disagrees
Dr. Alec Salt, of the Dept of Otolaryngology,
Washington University School of Medicine St. Louis, Missouri states: The idea that infrasound doesn’t or can’t affect the ear is just flat-out wrong.”
The Bruce McPherson Infrasound and Low Frequency Noise Study
Adverse Health Effects Produced By Large Industrial Wind Turbines Confirmed" ) by Stephen E. Ambrose, INCE (Brd. Cert.) Robert W. Rand, INCE Member Dec 2011.
Their study confirms that large industrial wind turbines can produce real and adverse health impacts and suggests that this is due to acoustic pressure pulsations, not related to the audible frequency spectrum, by affecting the vestibular system especially at low ambient sound levels. The study results emphasize the need for epidemiological and laboratory research by medical health professionals and acousticians concerned with public health and well-being.
What about from "Impact of infrasound on the human cochlea"
Hensel, J., Scholz, G., Hurttig, U., Mrowinski, D., Janssen, T.
"The results show clearly that infrasound enters the inner ear, and can alter cochlear processing."
Even Leventhall a fully paid up member of the turbine industry is quoted as saying
" LFN CAUSES EXTREME DISTRESS
"There is overwhelming evidence that wind turbines cause serious health problems in nearby residents, usually stress-disorder-type diseases, at a nontrivial rate. Proponents of turbines have sought to deny these problems by making a collection of contradictory claims...The attempts to deny the evidence cannot be seen as honest scientific disagreement and represent either gross incompetence or intentional bias.". In fact it reminds me of the CIGARETTES DO NOT CAUSE CANCER mantra we used to hear. How did that work out for the tobacco lobby?
he goes on to say: "there is a core list of symptoms – sleep disorders, headaches, mood disorders, inability to concentrate, tinnitus, vestibular (balance) problems – appearing in most reports. The commonly reported problems all exist at the border of the psychological and physical, and can all be caused by either of two very plausible effects of wind turbine exposure: stress reactions or vestibular disturbance."
What about peer reviewed papers by the likes of Moller and perdesen et al who had already told us that ever larger turbines create evermore low frequency noise. Now this:
Assessment-of-low-frequency-noise-from-wind-turbines-in-Maastricht " Author: Møller, Henrik; Pedersen, Steffen; Kloster Staunstsrup, Jan; and Sejer Pedersen, Christian : posted: April 15, 2012 • Netherlands, Noise, Regulations.
Prolonged exposure to audible low‐frequency sound may cause fatigue, headache, impaired concentration, sleep disturbance and physiological stress as indicated by increased levels of saliva cortisol.
We are reminded that the effects on the body of AM/LFN is not yet completely understood yet the applicant and others plough on regardless.
Surely unless and until a full appraisal of the effects of such are undertaken and peer reviewed not just accepted verbatim by dodgy government officials we should not be building ever more powerful turbine farms anywhere near residential properties!
Post a Comment