Doctors say enough evidence of wind farm harm to use Precautionary Principle

Telling the truth, the whole truth
Telling the truth, the whole truth

Report on Environmental Review Tribunal Hearing on White Pines Wind Project‏‎

November 18


Paula Peel, Alliance to Protect Prince Edward County (APPEC)

APPEC’s health case proceeded​ on Day 8 with two experts providing evidence to the Environmental Review Tribunal (ERT) on the White Pines wind project: Dr. Alun Evans and Dr. Robert McMurtry.
Dr. Evans, Professor Emeritus at Queen’s University in Belfast, Northern Ireland, has studied cardiovascular disease for 30 years.  Dr. Evans told the Tribunal that his involvement in wind turbines is tangential to his interest in noise, sleep disturbance, and cardiovascular disease.  But he has also met many people severely impacted by wind turbine noise.
Citing published studies, Dr. Evans explained that the major adverse health effects of wind turbines seem to be due to sleep disturbance and sleep deprivation, mainly from loud noise and low-frequency noise (LFN), particularly infrasound.  Dr. Evans finds the “impulsive, intrusive and incessant nature” of wind turbine noise a particularly troublesome feature that is highly discernible in rural areas.  LFN, which is inaudible, is propagated over long distances and penetrates buildings where it can be amplified by insulation and closed windows.  Dr. Evans noted that sleep deprivation is associated with increased likelihood of developing a range of chronic diseases, including Type 2 diabetes, cancer, coronary heart disease, and heart failure.  His recent systematic literature review  found 18 published studies establishing an association between wind turbine noise and human distress.
While agreeing with James Wilson, counsel for WPD, that “human distress” is not a medical term Dr. Evans said that human distress needs to be taken seriously nonetheless.  He also agreed with Wilson that the results of observational studies do not constitute “proof”.   But what is important about these studies is the strength of the associations, which are certainly enough to point to the Precautionary Principle. 
Robert McMurtry, MD and Emeritus Professor of Surgery at University of Western Ontario, has studied adverse health effects from industrial wind turbines since 2008.  His public engagement includes   a 2009 Deputation to the Ontario legislature’s Standing Committee on the proposed Green Energy and Green Economy Act; expert witness testimony at the 2011 ERT on the Kent Breeze project; 2011 publication of “Toward a Case Definition of Adverse Health Effects in the Environs of Industrial Wind Turbines”; 2014 publication (with Carmen Krogh) in the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine of “Diagnostic criteria for adverse health effects in the environs of wind turbines”; 2014 invited commentary by the Canadian Medical Association Journal (CMAJ) on the Health Canada Study; 2015 literature review, “Do wind turbines cause adverse health effects?” presented to the Acoustical Society of America; and 2015 Response to “Invitation to Submit” from the Senate of Australia.
When asked by Wilson to confirm statements in the Health Canada Study Dr. McMurtry clarified that he does not accept the findings because of many problems with study design and participation.  Among these are the principal investigator’s ongoing work for the wind industry and evidence of communications between Health Canada and the industry, including disclosure of the study prior to public release.
In contrast, Dr. McMurtry cited Dr. Cooper’s Cape Bridgewater study showing there is an indirect pathway for adverse health effects.  Dr. Cooper visited people’s homes and found that emissions from wind turbines could be detected without hearing them.
Dr. McMurtry stressed the fact that no wind farm monitoring has even been done in Ontario.  “It would be possible, as cited since 2006,” he said, “to reduce or eliminate the boundless discourse of dueling experts by conducting appropriate third-party research.”  The MOECC regulations are based upon out-of-date standards that fail to evaluate LFN and infrasound.
Both of today’s health experts emphasized that White Pines would harm a significant number of people. Eric Gillespie noted the importance of APPEC’s witnesses. He told the Tribunal that this is the first time the link has been established at an ERT hearing between wind turbine noise and those who are afflicted. 
What's your reaction?


  • Lynda
    Posted November 20, 2015 8:34 am 0Likes

    Who are the White Pines experts in the health vs turbine field? We need names, not just ‘Health Canada’. Does James Wilson have the credentials to question such highly qualified medical witnesses? Shouldn’t a WPD expert have to testify and be cross examined? These confrontations between sides are a farce.

  • Henk Daalder
    Posted November 21, 2015 10:30 am 0Likes

    Many people in the world live near wind farms, and stay happy and healthy, eg hundreds of Dutch farmer families tha have a big turbine near the farm hous, on about 100 m from where they live.
    They show no signs of any illness or regret to build their own turbine near the farm house.
    This proves thayt it is not the turbine or its environmental impact that infulences people.
    But anti wind turbine propaganda may have influence, just as the billions of advertising in the media have some influence.
    So, those who want to beleive the anti wind turbine lies, may be harmed by the things they beluieve are annoyable.
    It is the anti windturbine propagandists themselves that do people harm

    • Wind Concerns Ontario
      Posted November 21, 2015 6:46 pm 0Likes

      Mr Daalder, we doubt very much that the turbines you speak of within 100 metres of a house are the 500-foot, 2.5 or 3-megawatt variety, as is being installed in Ontario. Your comments on an experience across the ocean are not appropriate and do not match the experience in Ontario communities. Please read the posting from the last two days on expert evidence being given by physicians and acoustics experts: that is science, not “propaganda.” As a wind power executive, your real concern must be for your conscience and your livelihood, not the truth. (For anyone wishing to learn who Mr Daalder is, go here: )

  • Tracy
    Posted November 24, 2015 10:52 pm 0Likes

    Two words come to mind Henk…

  • Tracy
    Posted November 24, 2015 10:55 pm 0Likes

    Where’s the media

Add Comment

© Copyright 2022 | WCO | Wind Concerns Ontario

to top