Reviewers never consulted people or their family doctors


North Gower, Richmond residents not swayed by wind project report

North Gower and Richmond residents worried about a proposal for industrial wind turbines near the villages are not reassured by a report on health effects from the noise produced by turbines.  The report, released last month and sponsored by both the Canadian Wind Energy Association and the American Wind Energy Association, is titled Wind Turbine Sound and Health Effects. Continue reading

A Critique of the CanWEA – AWEA Report

The CanWEA “review” works very hard at looking authoritative and scientific.  CanWEA and AWEA apparently are betting that for their intended audience the appearance itself will suffice, regardless of the actual (or rather, lack of) content. This review is fatally compromised, and shame on those panel members who took part in this charade.

Wind Turbine Sound and Health Effects – An Expert Panel Review

 by Wayne Gulden   dated December 19, 2009

As Industrial Wind Turbines (IWTs) get installed closer to homes, the reports of significant health problems suffered by neighbors have continued rolling in, now numbering in the hundreds, if not thousands.  They come from all around the world, and are quite consistent.  This issue has the potential to adversely affect the interests of the wind energy industry, so their lobbying groups – in North America the Canadian Wind Energy Association (CanWEA) and the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA) – joined forces to commission a Review, with the aims of convincing the powers that be that there is no need to proceed with an independent rigorous study of the health effects of IWTs. Continue reading

Response to CanWEA/AWEA Study

Co-authored by Dr. Robert McMurtry & Dr. Michael A. Nissenbaum
Studies commissioned by Wind Energy Associations containing paid for results should not be considered independent. No original research was conducted, based on review of the literature a clean bill of health has been awarded. It is a low order of scientific evidence. It has not been peer reviewed.
The evidence may also be of questionable veracity since the recent revelations of evidence of the altering of scientific papers by Hayes McKenzie(UK). Just this week it has been reported that these very noise issues were suppressed in the UK to enable wind turbines to be placed closer to human habitation. Continue reading

QMI News Agency: Dr. Colby’s “Weak Defense”

Study needed to measure effects of wind turbines

Dr. Colby, CanWEA-paid "Yes Man"

Colby’s statement to QMI Agency that “there’s no evidence to indicate that money should be wasted on such a study, which will never satisfy people anyway” is a weak defence.
Health issues are being reported by some individuals living near wind turbines.  Because the technology is relatively new to Ontario, the government needs to undertake a study now so that data can be gathered from the past two or three years in areas where the turbines have been in use.
To fully satisfy the public, the province should commission an independent study to find out if there are any health effects related to wind turbines.
Continue reading

CanWEA Study: Don’t believe the ‘yes-men’

I share your concern about the potentially serious effects of wind turbine generated pressure changes at significant distances from the site. The problem is similar to the premature application of 750 kV lines (for which I was a consultant) and the various U.S. Navy projects (e.g, Sanguine, Seafarer) that resulted in significant health problems because political and economic enthusiasm eclipsed perspicacious and informed decisions.

Professor Michael A. Persinger

National Post

by Professor Michael A. Persinger, Behavioural Neuroscience Program, Laurentian University, Sudbury, Ont.

Professor Persinger’s detailed comments on the study available here

The comment by a wind industry-paid panel that the sound of wind turbines are an “annoyance that may be a frustrating experience for people, [but it is not] an adverse health effect or disease of any kind” is a classic example of the commercial tradition of paying academics from “prestigious” institutions to be yes-men. Until multiple, carefully controlled experimental studies are completed that accommodate individual differences in sensitivities and their synergistic effects with these amplitude fluctuations in sound pressure, the statement that they are “not harmful” is premature.

As the only Canadian scientist on the Overhead Power Lines Panel for the State of New York during the 1980s, I saw the same strategy employed when concerns about 765 kV Ontario-Quebec-New York power lines were masked by the dismissive rhetoric of profit-driven power companies. However, objective and balanced studies by researchers — not funded or connected to power companies — showed the complex and sometimes adverse effects of power frequencies.

A similar independent group, accountable to the public and not to the wind industry, should be created in Canada.

Health “Study” Nothing But Spin


Like the turbines themselves, a group of North Gower residents say a recent study about wind energy is nothing but spin.

The report, sponsored by both the Canadian Wind Energy Association and the American Wind Energy Association, concluded there is “no evidence that audible or sub-audible sounds emitted by wind turbines have any direct adverse physiological effects.”

But North Gower Wind Action Group chairman Gary Chandler doesn’t buy that. Continue reading

Acoustic Ecology Institute blasts CanWEA funded study

Wind industry study says no health effects – but “omits” any mention of sleep disruption

A report issued by the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA) and the Canadian Wind Energy Association (CanWEA) purports to assess all currently available research on the health effects associated with exposure to wind farm noise, and concludes that there are no such problems.  The report centers on the symptoms of the reported “wind turbine syndrome,” and offers a robust critique of the idea that low frequency noise from wind farms can cause direct health impacts; meanwhile, however, the report minimizes the levels of annoyance and impacts on quality of life reported in other studies, and completely omits any assessment of the most widely reported health-related impact of living near wind farms, sleep disruption.

Read entire critique here

So who does CanWEA handpick to lead their “study”?

Why did Dr. David Colby appear as a representative of Skypower in Picton which is 5.5 hours away from Chatham-Kent and yet he has not talked to anyone suffering in Chatham-Kent area?

From the College of Physician and Surgeons of Ontario Investigations Committee concerning Dr. Colby’s close involvement and ties with the Wind Industry: 

Futhermore, the Committee observes, Dr. Colby expertise is in medical microbiology and infectious disease, an area quite distinct from audiology or other fields related to the physical impact of wind turbines on human health. Thus, the Committee wishes to remind Dr. Colby, going forward, of the importance of fully disclosing the extent of his qualifications in a field in which he has been retained as an “expert” and also to ensure that he fully disclose to the public the organization or corporation by whom he has been retained as an expert. Such actions on Dr. Colby’s part may help prevent additional, similar complaints being lodged against him. ~ November 6, 2009, College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario, Investigations Committee

More here   and here

Wind Industry Under Scrutiny by Health Canada

“Health Canada advises that this statement be revised to indicate that there are peer reviewed scientific articles indicating that wind turbines may have an adverse impact on human health.”

Source:  Health Canada’s response to the Digby Wind Power Project Addendum,
Digby, Nova Scotia. Author: Safe Environments Program, Regions and Programs Branch, Health Canada

Despite overwhelming worldwide evidence and hundreds of health impact statements from victims of wind turbine syndrome, the wind industry likes to tell people that “there is no peer-reviewed scientific evidence indicating wind turbines have an adverse impact on human health” (this statement is taken directly from actual applications for approval to build industrial wind turbines).

Health Canada disagrees.  Furthermore, Health Canada provides specific references to these studies.  Health Canada also identifies statements in these applications which they deem “misleading.” Continue reading

Dr. Colby Not Looking at Evidence in His Own Backyard

Chatham Daily News

Sir:  A recent article on Dr. Colby, who is being quoted as saying that health concerns are not a factor for those who are living near industrial wind turbines is not coinciding with the reality presently happening right here in Ontario. Continue reading

An accurate report should have substance behind the glossy covers

 The Daily Observer – Ontario, CA

I am compelled to respond to Kevin O’Kane’s letter to the editor that appeared in a recent issue of this paper.

Mr. O’Kane writes that “if she (Cheryl Gallant) is concerned about relative health issues she should consult the 2008 Information Report issued by the Municipality of Chatham-Kent: “The Health Impact of Wind Turbines, A Review of White, Grey and Published Literature.”

Mr. O’Kane obviously believes that this document is an authoritative report. And that’s where his argument falls apart. Let me explain: Dr. Colby, the acting medical officer for Chatham-Kent, has been credited with writing this document. However, he has stated that the health unit wrote it and he supervised and approved it. He has also stated that he is no expert on wind turbines and has not conducted any of his own research on the subject. This document does not address the reports of worldwide health effects, nor does it take into account current medical research. It is an incomplete literature review. Continue reading