For
 many years, an unfounded assertion about wind power has thwarted the 
best of debunking efforts. That is the claim that wind turbine sound--in
 particular "infrasound," which normally cannot be heard, but which can 
come from turbines as well as many other sources in the natural and 
human environment--has some mysterious characteristic causing a wide 
variety of illnesses.
Government studies in the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, and the 
U.S.--many of which you will find in the list of references below--have 
all found no evidence of any mechanism by which wind turbine sound could
 actually have a direct physical effect on the human body. Instead, as 
an independent panel of expert acousticians commissioned by AWEA and the
 Canadian Wind Energy Association (CanWEA) reported in late 2009, the 
evidence suggests that a person's own psychological concerns (annoyance,
 fear, anger, etc.) are responsible for the symptoms reported by some 
wind project neighbors.
Now, two new studies--one from New Zealand appearing in a 
peer-reviewed journal, one from Australia released for comment prior to 
publication--have strongly bolstered this suggested explanation. In so 
doing, they point toward the conclusion that the power of suggestion, in
 the form of the spreading of unscientific, poorly documented "studies,"
 rumors about them, and anecdotal information, is far more likely to be 
responsible for the ailments complained of than wind turbine sound.
Taken together, the studies provide strong evidence that the maladies
 ascribed to wind turbine sound result from what is called the "nocebo" 
(like placebo) effect, in which individuals who are led to expect 
symptoms from some stimulus experience those symptoms whether the 
stimulus is actually present or not. 
The first study, published in Health
 Psychology, a journal of the American Psychological Association, by 
Crichton et al., examined the question of whether symptoms could result 
from information given to subjects about wind turbine infrasound. The study's abstract summarizes the procedure and findings:
"Method: A sham-controlled double-blind provocation study, in which 
participants were exposed to 10 min of infrasound and 10 min of sham 
infrasound, was conducted. Fifty-four participants were randomized to 
high- or low-expectancy groups and presented audiovisual information, 
integrating material from the Internet, designed to invoke either high 
or low expectations that exposure to infrasound causes specified 
symptoms. Results: High-expectancy participants reported significant 
increases, from preexposure assessment, in the number and intensity of 
symptoms experienced during exposure to both infrasound and sham 
infrasound. There were no symptomatic changes in the low-expectancy 
group. Conclusions: Healthy volunteers, when given information about the
 expected physiological effect of infrasound, reported symptoms that 
aligned with that information, during exposure to both infrasound and 
sham infrasound. Symptom expectations were created by viewing 
information readily available on the Internet, indicating the potential 
for symptom expectations to be created outside of the laboratory, in 
real world settings."
The second
 study, by Simon Chapman, a Professor of Public Health at the University
 of Sydney, examines the timing and number of health complaints 
registered by neighbors, about turbine sound, over a 20-year period (1993-2012) at all of the 49 wind farms in Australia. Among Mr. Chapman's findings:
- The number of those complaining amounted to just 1 in 272 residents within a 5-kilometer radius of the wind farms.
- Complaints were highly concentrated (81 of a grand total of 120 
complaints filed) around five wind projects which have been heavily 
criticized by anti-wind groups.
- No complaints at all have been made about 31 of the 49 wind farms. 
According to Dr. Chapman's report, "The 31 farms with no histories of 
complaints, and which today have some 21,530 residents within 5km of 
their turbines, have operated for a cumulative total of 256 years."
- Complaints escalated sharply after 2009, when anti-wind groups 
began stressing health concerns in their publicity about proposed 
projects.
Slate columnist Keith
 Kloor, in a recent article on the two studies and others, provides a 
number of useful links and examples of other cases in which the nocebo 
effect appears prevalent, such as the long-running scare about 
electromagnetic field (EMF) radiation. Concludes Mr. Kloor, "In the 
United States, paranoia over EMF seems to have died down in recent 
years, though there are plenty of dead-enders who still flog the issue. 
Those who might have been inclined to fret about the danger of power 
lines may now instead be focusing their fears on cellphones. (This 
subset of chronic worriers should know that everything gives you 
cancer.)"
The studies also help to explain:
- Why one self-published author, who coined the term "wind turbine 
syndrome" to describe the various physical complaints some neighbors of 
wind farms reported, has been unable to narrow the symptoms down to a 
specific list, as is commonly done with other medical conditions so that
 they may be diagnosed.
- Why the list
 of ailments, both human and animal, ascribed to turbine sound is so 
vast.  Mr. Chapman maintains an ongoing list, with the number now 
topping 200.  It's a remarkable range of allegations, given that 
hundreds of thousands of people around the world work and live within or
 near wind farms without reporting ill effects.
The studies also provide a clear rationale for urging that anti-wind 
groups tone down the apocalyptic rhetoric they often employ and that 
media use more caution in their reporting on wind farm controversies. 
 They may be unwittingly causing and spreading not only distrust, but 
physical illness.  As the New Zealand study's lead author Fiona Crichton
 says in an article, "How the power of suggestion generates wind farm symptoms," about her work, "Arecent study has
 shown that media reporting about health effects and wind farms in 
Ontario, Canada, contain factors likely to induce fear, anxiety and 
concern. Thus the media must take particular care that they are not 
creating and perpetuating health complaints attributed to wind farms."
Further coverage of the studies:
Sydney Morning Herald, Wind turbine sickness 'all in the mind': study
Metro Toronto, Wind farms don't make you sick, anti-wind-farm activists do, researcher says
DeSmogBlog, Research Finds Wind Farm Health Concerns Probably Caused by Anti-Wind Scare Campaigns
EarthTechling (blog), Wind Farm Illnesses Linked to Anti-Wind Farm Lobbying
Environmental Defence (Canada) (blog), Why fear-mongering about windmills is bad for our health
Re-post from AWEA's blog by Tom Gray
Friday, March 22, 2013
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
 
