Is this a health study, or a sick joke???

ThumbsDownUNIVERSITY OF WATERLOO- Quality of Life and Renewable Energy Technologies Study
Read Survey

– Contact Form
– Information Letter
– Survey

Some examples from this survey:
How well do the following statements describe your view of renewable energy technologies in Ontario?
1. Ontarians have an obligation to reduce energy consumption.
2. Ontarians have an obligation to generate cleaner electricity.
3. Building wind farms to produce energy is acceptable if they are situated far away from homes.
4. Building biogas plants to produce energy is acceptable if they are situated far away from homes.
5. Building solar farms to produce energy is acceptable if they are situated far away from homes.
6. Wind farms should be owned by people in the community.
7. Biogas plants should be owned by people in the community.

In your opinion, what is an appropriate setback (minimum distance from the closest home) for wind farms in Ontario?
_____ metres OR _____ miles _ I don’t know _ I don’t care

The most recent time you looked for information about energies (such as wind turbines, solar, biogas) and health, where did you go to first? (check only one in this box)
_ Books
_ Internet
_ Brochures, Pamphlets, etc
_ Library
_ Community association
_ Magazines
_ Family
_ Newspapers
_ Friend/Neighbour/Coworker
_ Telephone Information Number
_ Doctor/Health care provider
_ I don’t know
_ I’ve never looked for such information
_ Other (please specify): _____

In general, how much would you trust information about renewable energies (such as wind turbines, solar, biogas) and health...
41. From a doctor or another health care professional?
42. From government health agencies?*
43. From a family member or friend or neighbor? (sic)
44. From newspapers or magazines?
45. From the television?
46. From the internet?
47. From community organizations?
48. Other (please specify):

The following statements about some things in your community that you may notice when you are indoors. Please indicate whether you have noticed these and whether they annoy you only when you are indoors in your home. Pick N/A if you don’t live near or have any chance to have contact with the exposure.
1. Odour from industries.
2. Odour from manure.
3. Flies and/or gnats.
4. Flicker from wind turbines
5. Vibrations from a railway
6. Vibrations from wind turbines
7. Sound from agricultural machinery
8. Sound from airplanes
Read Full Survey

58 thoughts on “Is this a health study, or a sick joke???

  1. This isn’t about wind – it’s about bio-gas/methane. I’m sure of that. The whole thing is a huge container of pig manure – I can smell it from here.

  2. These questions are absolutely preposterous !! where do they get these people that write this pig manure ! !If I received a survey with these questions, I’d burn it and ask the people involved with it to go back to the planet they came from…

  3. A least keep a few copies for historical purposes as no one in the future would believe this was a government funded health study done by a university.

    • They are spreading a lot of nonsense around the universities nowadays. Free thought is no longer encouraged, as a matter of fact, it is sternly frowned upon. The provincial government will tell them what to think. Not at all like the rebels of the sixties and seventies. Too bad.

      • Silly you. The flies in your house are only annoying because you didn’t get your information about flies from a reputable source. If only you had went to CANFEA (Canadian Flypoop Energy Association) instead. Than you would have learned that flies really aren’t annoying and flypoop energy is just an affordable source of new electricity and is continuing to improve its cost-competitiveness.

      • Yes, Dan. ….and the fly-poop is not ugly. It’s beautiful….and soothing. Very soothing. Say it with me now…..

  4. Dear energy companies of the World: Thank you for your participation in the human experience. Without you, we may have a more peaceful World where equality is a birthright; but there is always time for healing. With you, we have made your controllers quadrillions of dollars in “profit”. The time has come for us to bid farewell to your corrupted policies, unethical practices, shallow decisions, and compromised integrity. Shove your questionnaire were the sun never shines

  5. The whole purpose of these questions, is to allow them to put you into one of their pre-ordained slots for anti-wind “receptors”. They want to tell you that you have searched for information in all the wrong places, you have believed people and institutions you should not have. You should feel OBLIGATED to live near a turbine, and “do it” for the greater good. Turbine noise is no different than the flies that bother you in your house….(do these idiots know what we do to those flies?) And by the way, do the vibrations from that train that runs 24 hrs. per day, 7 days per week, cause any noticeable vibrations? It is obvious this “survey”, and I use the term loosely, was designed for no other purpose, than to discredit, the victims that have had the nerve to speak out about this unjust abuse of rural communities. We need to make this sorry excuse for a medical questionnaire, public. This is the reason why they can deny the health effects. They are denouncing the word of the victims, before the issue has been investigated. They don’t want the truth, they want a way to cover it up!

  6. A Top University? Designed either by a first year undergrad or someone in the commercial arm, definately not an independent, academic trained in research. Bet that didn’t go through Ethics Committee. Suggest someone contact Ethics Committee at Waterloo and check out the panel’s view?

  7. If this is ‘real’ research run with University approval, it would have gone through the Ethics Committee first. Suggest someone check this out?

  8. This looks like job App. For CANWEA !!! Go figger !
    When do you think that we should help the people that are under distress from IWT’s?
    (Sorry wrong question!)

  9. Looks like an attitude / opinion survey designed to get the answer the Government wants. It’s not even “thinly-disguised”; it’s blatantly obvious. Next we’ll hear that the majority of surveys will be distributed in Toronto, because that’s where the majority of Ontarians live.
    The University of Waterloo appears to have sold it’s soul and it’s reputation for a few $. Complete lack of intellectual integrity and technical competence. Nobody should complete the survey. Just return it with an explanatory note, in ink.

  10. Come on, people. Don’t you get it? You’re supposed to be obedient sacrificial lambs. You’re supposed to Love the source of your illness.

    It’s not the turbines making you sick. You’ve just gotten your info from the wrong places (not CanWEA)…..you have flawed ideology, that’s all!

  11. I’d like to know how many versions of the same survey they have on the go. This one is different from the one I saw. U of Waterloo had an opportunity to do something with teeth to address the nightmare from turbine toxic homes people are trying to deal with. Instead they flop around like a fish on land, offer a Samsung TV to any who will participate and ask incredibly insulting questions like:”How satisfied are you with how your body looks?” Are you F kidding me?

    • Hey Lorrie,
      Yikes!
      ”How satisfied are you with how your body looks?”

      ‘[excerpt] Health Minister Deb Matthews, at the Toronto Centre Rosedale Ontario Early Years Centre Monday for the report’s release, said she will chair an inter-ministerial working group that looks at implementation of its recommendations.’
      http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Politics/2013/03/04/pf-20627546.html

      Secular Humanism – anything for your love – baby.

      Welcome to Ontario!

      • I’d rather take health advice from the svelte Iona Campagnolo than the “lissome” likes of Deb Matthews and Arlene King. Do as I say, not as I am. Jus sayin’.

      • Gord, you wrote, “I’d rather take health advice from the svelte Iona Campagnolo than the “lissome” likes of Deb Matthews and Arlene King. Do as I say, not as I am. Jus sayin’.”
        Could we stick to content and avoid commenting on appearances? You can be large and healthy, you can be skinny and unhealthy. Do you also criticize people with glasses – like me, or does appearance only matter when it’s women?

      • Advice to children of Ontario from Deb Mathews: Do as I say….not as I do.
        Advice to people of Ontario from all Liberals: We want you to believe everything we say, while we cover up what we do. Words…with no wisdom, straight from the den of iniquity.

      • Nor would George Hamilton be the best choice to lecture teenage girls on the dangers of tanning beds …

  12. Junk science, they forgot to ask about how I like the way my newspaper is being delivered

    IMHO, complete this at your own peril or just mail it back blank with a hunk of your choice of farm animal sh$t attached.

    Mailed a copy to my MP and MPP and asked if they would please respond and let me know if they would participate in this kind of survey. Hmmmm…Wonder if I’ll get a response?

    Keep your stick on your sign

  13. In Marketing 101 we are taught that you design the questions on a survey so that the answers you obtain give you the answers you want. Surveys are only carried out to reinforce the position you want to take. That’s why surveys always ask Motherhood type questions..e.g., Do you want to live in an unpolluted world? Of course we do. Everybody does.

  14. OK This type of Surety is widely used. Go here for a “Replication” of the Lewandowsky Survey:

    Here is how to view the similar survey — it is much much worse — take it if you like!

    http://ascottblog.wordpress.com/lewandowsky-survey-replicated/
    PASSWORD is the word REPLICATE
    Just type it in in all caps and SUBMIT. [grin]

    There has been considerable discussion about the methodology and data regarding the recent paper “Lewandowsky, S., Oberauer, K., & Gignac, C. E. (in press). NASA faked the moon landing – therefore (climate) science is a hoax: An anatomy of the motivated rejection of science” (copy here)

    Just so people can see…

  15. I would guess that no one who lives within a wind project will participate in this “survey.” The whole thing drips with condescension and arrogance.
    I would also guess it will be tweeted all over, just like NexTerror’s eagles nest fiasco – lots of Blackberry hits.

  16. Some of the leading questions are similar to the ones in the Ont survey looking at FIT regulations. Many of us participated, but I’m sure our comments didn’t make it into the final report.
    This is worse than useless.

  17. Sooooo many folks with Ph. D’s and THIS is what they come up with?
    Are we sure they are not all Liberals? The disconnect with this group and your everyday average Joe rural citizen is palpable, just like McWynnty and her colleagues.

  18. We need a direct email to the one who is responsible for this survey so we can all give them a piece of our minds!!!

  19. Professor Siva Sivoththaman
    Faculty of Engineering
    Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering
    University of Waterloo
    200 University Avenue West
    Waterloo, Ontario N2L3G1, Canada.
    Email: sivoththaman@uwaterloo.ca

  20. University of Waterloo Renewable Energy Technologies and Health Research Group

    Phil Bigelow, PhD
    Steve McColl, PhD
    Laurie Hoffman-Goetz, PhD
    Jane Law, PhD
    Shannon Majowicz, PhD
    Siva Sivoththaman, PhD
    Mahtab Kamali, PhD
    Veronique Boscart, RN, PhD
    Leila Jalali, MD
    Susan Yates, MSc, RN
    Tanya Christidis, MSc
    James Lane, MSc Candidate
    Samriti Mishra, MSc Candidate
    Claire Paller, MSc Candidate

    Tanya Christidis (Project Coordinator) at the University of Waterloo 1-519-888-4567 ext. 31342 or tchristi @uwaterloo.ca

    Should you have any comments or concerns resulting from your participation in this study, please contact Dr. Maureen Nummelin, Director of the Office of Research Ethics, at 1-519-888-4567, ext. 36005 or maureen.nummelin @uwaterloo.ca

    • I think that this route (Ethics Complaints) is a steep uphill battle. If you look at my posts above you will realize that many of the questions came right out of World Health Organization (WHO) surveys on health.

      So first you would have to prove that the World Health Organization is unethical. That is a tough one. Who is going to take that seriously — even if it is true?

      If you want to complain I know they will listen. Make your complaints about specific questions and what you find to be problematic. Suggest another way to get the data. Suggest other wording suggest specific questions to be dropped.

      No health studies completed? More turbines. It’s that simple.

      Would you like the Doctor who wants to study our genes running the survey? How close to George Orwell’s future do we want to go?

      Everyone complains that there are no credible studies. Wonder why?

      We are all working at cross-purposes.

      • Can you post some of the WHO questions as many people will not bother to look them up to find out what’s going on? Seeing is believing!

      • Barbara:

        If people are being affected by wind turbines it may not be too much to ask them to do a little work. If people find it too much trouble to follow the link it is their decision.

        People may want to review the questions in this publication: The similarity is striking.
        http://www.who.int/substance_abuse/research_tools/en/english_whoqol.pdf

        Just one example of the standard surveys… There are lots more.

        ************************************
        For an example…
        How would you rate your quality of life?
        To what extent do you feel that physical pain prevents you from doing what you need to do?
        To what extent do you feel your life to be meaningful?
        How satisfied are you with yourself?
        How satisfied are you with your personal relationships?
        ******************************
        If they don’t use the standard questions and techniques — other academics, doctors and politicians ignore them. If they do use the question we vilify them. Can’t win…

      • Thanks, this also provides proof for those who want to deny that this information is true.

      • Have a look through the search functions as well — here is one search:
        http://search.who.int/search?q=health+survey+questions+pdf+energy&ie=utf8&site=default_collection&client=_en&proxystylesheet=_en&output=xml_no_dtd&oe=utf8

        Lots of surveys. Lots of descriptions of surveys. All remarkably similar.

        I mm not suggesting that people should be happy with the survey. I an not suggesting that we not complain.

        I am suggesting that we complain in a way that will get things fixed; to get a survey done; and, to defend this rather irritating and useless social experiment called Industrial Wind Turbines. It’s not going to happen without this style of work being done.

        Spending time on “ethics” when it is clearly not going to go anywhere is a waste of time.

        I spent the time digging into this because I wanted to know if I was told the truth about the questions on the U of W survey were of a standard form. OK! — apparently so. So now let’s do something worthwhile with our time.

        I do a lot of stats work — but of a much “harder” form — not this soft social sciences stuff — I do not have the domain knowledge so I had to start looking — it won’t hurt other people to do the same.

        Now, we can fix things or we can bellyache. Your call.

      • This “survey/study” is little more than a copy of work done 10 years ago. We don’t need more surveys to examine the inner turmoil persons/receptors are experiencing. Eja Pedersen and others identified the problem 10 years ago.
        To do such a survey now is like pulling the wings off a fly to observe its behaviour.

  21. One more question for the test is , how many university reps doing this test love green energy??

    No more questions needed…….

    • The only “Green Energy” I know of is the sun shining on the earth — on green leaves, plankton, animals etc. Everyone I know loves that — even windies. Is that what you mean?

      Beyond that I am not aware of any human created energy source that I could agree is “Green Energy”. Feel free to suggest what might be “Green Energy”. I know of nothing.

      Not river dams, not pumped storage, windmills, IWT’s solar cells, hydrocarbons (including ethanol). Nothing.

      Maybe someone could provide a definition of “Green Energy” — it would help us all.

      • Another “put down” …………WillR 10 ….. Bloggers 0 give it a rest already

  22. Or equally disturbing–collect data to build less complaint causing turbines.
    Never mind anything else. Rural Ontario — get used to them.
    What a joke!

    • Sandra:

      That is exactly the intent of the survey and the medical studies. To find a way to reduce complaints — whether the research groups realize it or not — and some do. It is the only reason I can find to oppose the surveys.

      The IWT’s are an economic disaster and should never be built on those grounds. If they aren’t built they cannot be a nuisance.

      It is a black joke! — and until our government masters learn some fundamental economics the IWT’s will continue to be built on the basis that our political masters are assisting in the religious movement to save the planet. All praise GAIA! We build in her name! All praise Gaia!

      Some politicians watched Star Trek far too often in their youth and did not understand the difference between propaganda and science.

      Yes, get used to them!

  23. Pingback: Waterloo and Nissenbaum - Wind Farm Realities

Comments are closed.