About the Post

Author Information

Australia: Research council calls for further study into ‘wind turbine sickness’, sets aside $500,000 in grants

Sarah Phillips — ABC (Australia) — February 11, 2014

The National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC), Australia’s premier health research body, has called for Australian scientists to look into so-called “wind turbine sickness”, saying that very few scientifically rigorous studies have been done.

The council has set aside $500,000 in funding grants for the research.

Wind turbine sickness is a list of medical complaints that includes headaches, nausea and anxiety and depression. It is said to be caused by proximity to wind turbines, as well as the sound and inaudible “infrasound” they produce.

After a comprehensive review of publications about wind turbine sickness, in which it amassed more than 4,000 documents from across the world, the council concluded there was “no direct evidence that exposure to wind farm noise affects physical or mental health”.

But Professor Warwick Anderson, chief executive of the NHMRC, said it was “terribly hard to prove a negative”.

Concerns about wind turbine sickness led to the Victorian Government’s introduction of a two-kilometre buffer between new wind turbines and houses in 2011.

The New South Wales Government later followed suit.

Few studies focus on health issues associated with wind farms

Of the 4,000 documents collected by the council, only 13 were included in the study. The rest did not meet the council’s criteria.   Continue reading here….


Tags: , , , ,

One Comment on “Australia: Research council calls for further study into ‘wind turbine sickness’, sets aside $500,000 in grants”

  1. Mike Jankowski February 11, 2015 at 3:00 pm #

    Cautiously optimistic.

    But when I see a government body act on this topic, they miss the mark, employing outdated methods, making the study too big and not listening to people as one input to direct their efforts. This may or may not be intentional.

    They keys in studies which “resonated” (Pardon the pun) with my experiences had two things in common: 1 – They focused on the problem – homes where people reported such health issues – and – 2 – They were open minded, employing techniques to consider IFLN and narrow band analysis, not discarding criotical information and trusting people enough to look in depth.

    I do not ask if pulsating IFLN is present around large Wind Turbines – I know they are. Hoping the link is nailed.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: