The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions The place for students, instructors and charter guys in Oz, NZ and the rest of Oceania.

Windfarms 4

Old 29th Jun 2015, 07:19
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Close
Posts: 234
Windfarms 4

Probably not too aviation related this time however some might find the following very interesting........

The select committee into Windfarms continues on and today has provided some very interesting evidence from witness Simon Chapman who is a exceptionally highly qualified Professor of Public Health from Sydney University. Aside from his oral evidence,

His Submission (No.369!!!!) provides some very interesting insights into the medical rationale behind windfarm complaints and is quite thought provoking in many regards as evidenced in the following couple of quotes from the submission.....

Currently there are 244 different diseases and symptoms that have been made about wind turbines. I do not believe there is anything in the whole of health and medicine which has attracted such a large and often bizarre and frankly often absurd range of claims (eg: lung cancer, skin cancer, hemorrhoids, herpes, alcoholism, disoriented echidnas
We found that the large majority of complainants in Australia were concentrated at just 6 of the 51 wind farms and that most had occurred after 2009.
I am unaware of any medical practitioner who has ever diagnosed any patient in Australia with “wind turbine syndrome”. Those claiming to have been made ill by wind turbine exposure are all self-diagnosed. This “syndrome” is not a diagnosis recognized by any authoritative diagnostic classification scheme anywhere in the world.
Many of the most common symptoms attributed by complainants to wind turbine exposure are symptoms commonly found in all communities, regardless of the presence of wind turbines. (see For example, 35% of people experience fatigue and headaches and 26% sleeping problems in the last 7 days.

These symptoms are often symptoms of anxiety, stress and anger. It is understandable that some people who do not like wind farms, who would rather that they did not have them in their locality, who resent neighbours earning considerable rent from hosting turbines when their own adjacent properties may be topographically unsuitable, or who have “negative”, complaining personalities, may “worry themselves sick” via the nocebo effects described in my 2104 publication in Frontiers of Public Health (full reference above). Sir Simon Wessely, current President of the Royal College of Psychiatrists, has also published a review on nocebo effects and wind turbines (see;aulast=Rubin] which reached broadly similar conclusions.
Go figure!
Stikybeke is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2015, 10:15
  #2 (permalink)  
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Sydney NSW Australia
Posts: 3,049
seams to be like the Noise complainers, funny how the noise complaint numbers drop off to non existent during the night when you cant see the aircraft.

a recently wrapped up case down the south coast was the Jaspers Brush action group effort to have the airfield shut down on noise issues, so, the council, and the action group agreed on independent noise assessments being done randomly over the period of a few months,
The aircraft noise reading couldnt be taken over the noise of the motorway, and railway lines. and when traffic, or no trains were passing, no noise registered above the background noise.

seamed to be more a visual issue..
Ultralights is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2015, 11:21
  #3 (permalink)  
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,179
via Stickybeke:
...witness Simon Chapman who is a exceptionally highly qualified Professor of Public Health from Sydney University...
Eh! where did yer get that bunk from. Them ABC clowns perhaps..

Gerard Henderson to Tim Latham – 18 February 2015


I am not surprised by your response. ABC types rarely admit errors.

These are the facts:

On Monday, Paul Barry declared that Simon Chapman was an “expert” on the health effects of wind farms. This statement was not correct – since Professor Chapman has no qualifications in medicine, science or engineering.

Today, you wrote to me that Simon Chapman has a post-graduate qualification in “medicine”. This is not correct – since Dr Chapman’s PhD is in sociology. Dr Chapman has no qualifications in medicine.

Yet Media Watch will not correct Paul Barry’s error of last Monday – while the Media Watch team constantly calls for full transparency.

How about a bit of transparency concerning Simon Chapman’s undergraduate and post-graduate qualifications?

Best wishes

Gerard Henderson

Issue 258 | The Sydney Institute

Flying Binghi is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2015, 11:40
  #4 (permalink)  
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: DSS-46 (Canberra Region)
Posts: 734
You were right. This is "not too aviation related" 😊
Tidbinbilla is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.