‘Wind turbine sickness’ was found to be a purely psychological phenomenon, according to a new study by a public health scientist at Sidney University.
Thousands of people around the world claim that their health is affected by wind farms. Increased blood pressure and blood glucose are just some of the symptoms triggered by sleepless nights and constant noise generated by the wind turbines.
However, Simon Chapman, a professor from Sidney University, established that 63% of the residents living in a close proximity to wind farms, have never experienced health problems due to the green energy technology.
Chapman referred to ‘wind turbine sickness‘ as a ‘communicated disease’. He stated that it is caused by the “nocebo effect,” or the belief that something causes an illness to such extent that it creates a false perception of that same health condition.
The scientist ran a series of statistical analysis to find that negative attitudes towards wind farms is highly correlated with the number of health complaints. He also reviewed studies, which show that if the illness has a name, the spread of the so-called ‘communicated disease’ is much faster. In this case, people refer to wind turbine sickness as Wind Turbine Syndrome, Vibro Acoustic Disease and Visceral Vibratory Vestibular Disturbance.
Chapman also referred to a recent study conducted in New Zealand, which uses data from volunteers exposed to ‘infrasound’, or the sound, which is considered to cause the wind turbine sickness. The study concludes that if the subjects of the experiment are told that the sound would have negative impact on their health, they are much more likely to claim that they have symptoms of an illness.
Despite the numerous concerns about the impact of wind farms on human health, and the continuous reports by residents, the studies that are currently conducted by the National Health and Medical Research Council have not found any medical evidence yet.
Vibro-acoustic disease is at best a mistake by an incompetent and at worst a workers’ compensation ploy. Norwegian studies focussed on it using helicopter crews and passengers as study and control groups found no evidence of acute or chronic changes. One also pointed out that the key physical evidence Castelo-Branco found — thickening of the pericardium — was misinterpreted as he thought the pericardium was normally 3-4 times thinner than it actually is. An Australian assessment found that 74% of all citations to VAD papers were from the VAD papers themselves, instead of the more usual 7%. http://barnardonwind.com/2013/10/04/vad-venal-arrogant-distortion/
Analysis of the 50 most commonly cited studies, reviews and governmental reports used by both sides finds that the literature used by anti-wind campaigners to claim health impacts is much, much less reliable than the evidence showing no health impacts outside of limited noise annoyance to some. http://barnardonwind.com/2013/08/06/health-studies-reliability/