Wind farm fear mongering: It's enough to make you sick | RenewEconomy

Wind farm fear mongering: It’s enough to make you sick

New report reaffirms anti-wind propaganda such as that spread by Sarah Laurie might cause greater health impacts than wind farms themselves.


A landmark study by Fiona Crichton at the University of Auckland recently showed that propaganda linking the low levels of noise from wind to sickness is a strong cause of anxiety related symptoms. The control group, which hadn’t watched the video of health fears from anti-wind campaigners, had no symptoms.

The findings backed up previous reports in Australia showing “unwarranted fear-mongering might cause greater health impacts than the presence of any actual ‘Wind Turbine Syndrome’”.

Sarah Laurie, head of the Waubra Foundation, an offshoot of the anti-wind, astroturfer, the Landscape Guardians, is the source of a great deal of the anti-wind propaganda which is harming people’s health.

To date, Sarah Laurie’s work has been largely constrained to south-eastern Australia, however she has begun to spread her wings. We can expect a related spread of so-called ‘Wind Turbine Syndrome’, an illness that Professor Simon Chapman has famously dubbed a ‘communicated disease’. (Due to her active spreading of disinformation, she’s up for the Australian Skeptics’ annual Bent Spoon award for 2013.)

On 20 March, Ms Laurie appeared as a guest of Bill Padley on Let’s Talk on Talk Radio Europe (full transcript here) which was founded to provide the sounds of home to people from England properties on Spain’s coastline. Other guests have included well-known climate change denialists including James Delingpole and Bjorn Lomborg. For context, Spain has had one of the most ambitious and successful campaigns to implement wind energy in Europe.

Obviously, Ms Laurie has a much more sympathetic audience than during her experience under oath in the Environment, Resources and Development (ERD) Court in South Australia in 2011. So what does she say?

Quote 1: Ms Laurie invents a diaspora

‘…people are literally being driven out of their homes because of the acoustic pollution.’

Ms Laurie makes this claim regularly, but when pressed refuses to provide more than one or two examples. One is Noel Dean, who claims that his pocket phone miraculously charges when he is close to wind turbines and that the “frequencies produced by the turbines are the same as those that operate the brain” in a recent Senate submission. There are about 240,000 wind turbines operating worldwide, yet only a handful of similarly dubious examples are cited.

Quote 2: Ms Laurie keeps losing parts of the sound spectrum to blame

‘…most of the noise regulations only actually measure the audible part of the sound spectrum above 200 Hz so the regulations don’t actually measure the sound frequencies we believe are causing the problems.’

Numerous studies have measured the lower frequency sounds Ms Laurie claims are a problem. Most recently, the South Australian Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) published a study that measured down to 0.25 Hz and found that the homes nearest wind farms actually had the least low frequency and infrasound of any building studied.

The EPA also tested for low-frequency noise at homes near wind farms with so called ‘on/off testing’. Inconveniently for Ms Laurie, there was no discernible difference when the turbines were switched on and off. These results are in line with a number of other studies which show that urban dwellers are constantly exposed to much higher levels of low-frequency and infrasound than the levels supposedly causing problems for those near wind farms.


Ms Laurie incorrectly claimed the South Australian EPA report only measured down to 10 Hz during an Australian radio interview. Time and again, anti-wind campaigners such as Ms Laurie conjure up scary theories that might sound plausible to the non-scientific community, then get forced off of that patch of land into even swampier terrain. Not long ago, anti-wind campaigners were arguing that ultrasound from wind turbines was causing sickness. Perhaps she’ll be blaming negative frequencies soon?

Quote 3: Ms Laurie misremembers sick building syndrome

BP: We had something called sick building syndrome […] discovered to be misaligned air conditioning systems.

SL: Physiologically we believe it is identical, it’s just low-frequency noise from another source.

The actual cause of sick building syndrome was poor indoor air quality.

Quote 4: Ms Laurie complains that people see the Waubra Foundation for the fraud it is

‘…we are frequently misrepresented in the media of being anti-wind.’

Since the Waubra Foundation was registered three years ago, it has relentlessly attacked wind energy. Her organisation takes its name from Waubra, an Australian town with a wind farm — yet none of its six directors live within 120 kilometers of the town – a fact that outrages the local community, which objects to the town’s name being hijacked for a political and science-free agenda.

Five of the Foundation’s directors are on record as objectors to wind farms in their own back yards. The organisation is chaired and run predominantly by the anti-wind lobby group the Australian Landscape Guardians. Ms Laurie herself has admitted under oath that she became active shortly after a wind farm was proposed near her home.

Until recently, the Waubra Foundation shared a P.O. box with the Landscape Guardians and a mining investment company. This is not surprising given that all were founded by Peter Mitchell, a lifelong fossil fuel executive and investor. After taking considerable heat for its address, the foundation has now relocated its mailing address to a P.O. box just around the corner from its secretary’s home in leafy Melbourne suburbia. That secretary is Mr Mitchell’s long-time assistant.

Laurie frequently appears as an invited guest on right-wing shock-jock radio programs, comments at length on rabid anti-wind blogs, closely associates with the few anti-wind politicians and gives keynote addresses at anti-wind rallies.

Despite the overwhelming evidence that the Waubra Foundation is solely an anti-wind power organisation, created and maintained for that purpose, and that Ms Laurie as its primary mouthpiece and has been fomenting anti-wind sentiment in Australia and now world-wide for three years, Ms Laurie frequently claims that she, and the Foundation she heads, aren’t against wind energy.

Quote 5:  Ms Laurie plays the persecution card

‘I’m certainly aware of a systematic campaign to denigrate and vilify sick people who speak up and say that they are unwell and the same is occurring for professionals who advocate on their behalf.’

This is another piece of paranoid conspiracy ideation that Ms Laurie and other anti-wind campaigners trot out. What they call denigration looks to an objective observer like disagreeing with a dangerously inaccurate self-diagnoses. When objective public health professionals such as Dr David Colby and Dr Arlene King of Canada lead teams of dedicated, experienced professionals in assessing wind energy and find that there is no evidence that wind farms cause health problems, anti-wind campaigners attack and vilify them. There have been 17 reviews worldwide clearing wind energy of health impacts.

Anti-wind campaigners such as Ms Laurie have recently been stating that Professor Chapman’s and Ms Crichton’s studies, referenced above, denigrate sick people. In fact they take health complaints at face value and ask a question that anti-wind campaigners refuse to ask: what is the most likely cause of these complaints?

Quote 6: Ms Laurie is tone deaf regarding the acoustics profession

‘…it’s certainly provoking a crisis amongst the acoustics profession […] there is some evidence that there are acousticians who are being economical with the truth.’

The crisis is what to do with a rogue acoustician named Steven Cooper who is accusing Australian acousticians of being unethical, and then making claims to be representing acousticians in anti-wind statements. Here is what the Australian Acoustical Society had to say to an Australian Senate hearing in 2012:

With regard to the witness submissions made to the Committee on the above Bill, the Council of the Australian Acoustical Society (AAS) wishes it known that the Australian Acoustical Society neither supports nor endorses Mr Cooper’s statements made to the committee.


Under no circumstance can Steven Cooper claim that his article in the August 2012 issue of the Acoustics Australia journal was peer-reviewed by the editor or for publication in the journal by the journal.

The acoustician being economical with the truth is Ms Laurie’s favourite. For an example of Mr Cooper’s inability to distinguish between harmless, inaudible background infrasound and sound signature from a turbine 8 kilometres away, see Quote 11 in Barnard on Wind.

Quote 7: Ms Laurie isn’t convinced that global warming is real, and doesn’t believe that wind turbines reduce green house gases

‘There’s certainly some work that’s been done in the Netherlands, the US and in Australia that suggest there is no reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, quite apart from the debate that exists about climate change.’

There isn’t a debate about whether climate change is occurring, that it is serious or whether humanity’s emissions of CO2e are the primary cause.

As for wind farms, the words of the Director of Energy Strategy for the UK’s National Grid makes it clear based on their studies, as do all other credible studies, that each MWh of wind power eliminates 99.9 per cent of the CO2e that would have been produced by fossil fuel generation.

Quote 8:  Will the real Sarah Laurie please stand up?

 BP: You were appearing under oath before the Environment Resources and Development Court in South Australia and you said you didn’t think it was realistic to put yourself forward as an expert witness.

 SL: I’m a lot more knowledgeable now.

Here’s what Ms Laurie stated under oath.

  • “I also didn’t feel it was realistic to put myself forward as an expert witness.”
  • “I am not an endocrinologist.”
  • Q. “In the next paragraph Professor Wittert says he‘s been engaged as an independent medical expert on the basis of his broad understanding of human health and understanding of ecological methods.’ Do you claim expertise in those areas.”
    “No, I don’t…”
  • “I am not an academic. I don’t do it [review research papers and results] for a living. When I looked at this data I didn‘t do the sophisticated analysis, I don’t have access to that sort of programing that Professor Wittert says…”
  • “I’m not an acoustician….”

Ms Laurie is also not an expert in psychology, the psychology of health or other areas that overlap with the nocebo effect and its impacts. She has also agreed that she has absolutely no background that prepared her to do medical research.

None of this has changed in the months since she testified.

Quote 9: Ms Laurie’s grasp of the severity of real medical concerns is troublingly non-existent

‘I think there is enough precedents in terms of thalidomide, asbestos, tobacco, there’s plenty of examples where industry has been very reluctant to admit things that it subsequently proved later that they knew all along.’

Professor Chapman’s research has shown that less than 1 in 272 people living near Australian wind farms have ever filed a complaint. Ms Laurie — a former family doctor without research qualifications who has been unregistered and non-practicing longer than she was practicing — derives her evidence from the anecdotal and non-verifiable self-diagnosis of a tiny number of complainants and draws scientifically and medically implausible (and often untestable) conclusions.

Compare this with the history of thalidomide, asbestos and tobacco. In each one of those cases there was a long history of clear harm, diagnosed by medical doctors, proven in research, demonstrated in court cases and written up in the literature over and over.

The worst that the credible research on wind power shows is that some people find the sounds produced by wind farms annoying.

Quote 10: Ms Laurie mistakes competitive threat clauses for gag clauses

‘…in Australia and the US and in Canada and, I’m not sure about the UK, but in those three countries I’m well aware of the practice of having contracts where there are confidentiality clauses so if the turbine hosts get sick, if there’s a confidentiality clause they can’t speak publicly.’

The so-called gag clauses have turned out to be in early leasing contracts. They have standard contractual language that prevents landowners from informing competitive wind energy companies that they have entered into an agreement. These aren’t health-related clauses. Wind energy companies have repeatedly advised that these clauses do not constrain individuals from making any form of health complaint, in fact it would be impossible to contract someone out of this basic right.

Quote 11: Ms Laurie mistakes wind farms for fossil fuels when it comes to bird deaths

BP: Every turbine kills an average of 300 birds a year — often rare birds like eagles.

 SL: Look, I think that’s very disturbing and I think the suppression of that, or the historic suspicion of that sort of information and denial is absolutely appalling.

Wind farms average 1-2 bird deaths per turbine per year around the world. Every study, every energy utility and every major birding organization in the world agrees that wind energy is one of the absolute best choices for birds and wildlife in general.

The research Mr Padley is talking about took the absolute worst outlier wind turbine in the highest migration season of the biggest migration year and pretended that was the average for all wind turbines everywhere for all time. Ms Laurie not only accepted that at face value, but leapt to the assumption that it was being suppressed in some bizarre conspiracy.


Ms Laurie fit in over 2,000 words into her 15 minutes of airtime. And, in those words, she managed to get almost everything she said provably wrong and malign a broad range of professional and highly credentialled people. This is an amazing amount of disinformation, and this is what she does every chance she gets.

While this might seem just part of battle of words in an ideological war, it is much more serious than that — Crichton’s research indicates that such wind energy disinformation spread by anti-wind campaigners like Sarah Laurie is significantly responsible for the anxiety affecting the very people that it is intended to help. Sadly, there are reports of people being affected by wind turbines before they are even constructed.

A version of this story was first published in Independent Australia on 9 April 2013, reproduced with permission. An earlier version appeared in Mike Barnard’s blog Barnard on Wind

Read the investigation that made it to Parliament on the web of vested interests behind the Waubra Foundation and the Landscape Guardians in Sandi Keane’s The Ugly Landscape of the Guardians

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

  1. Sean 8 years ago

    someone talk to a lawyer and sue her for damages.

    • Mike Barnard 8 years ago

      She’s know under investigation by the NHMRC for alleged breaches of ethics related to her unsupervised and damaging ‘medical research’. It’s likely that other people doing what she is doing will also face investigations by medical ethics watchdogs.

      • Geopap8 8 years ago

        Mike, what do you mean by “strong” when you say: “Professor Simon Chapman and team of the Public Health Faculty of the University of Sydney of Australia found strong supporting evidence for the psychogenic hypothesis being the dominant factor in wind farm health complaints in a recently epublished [sic] study undergoing formal peer review and publication now”
        Who told you Sarah is being “investigated” and you told you “she WILL” face investigations by medical ethics watchdogs”? Was that the purpose of Chapman’s research? And is that why you thing is it “strong”?

        • Mike Barnard 8 years ago

          As the blog post says, Crikey published an article stating that the NHMRC confirmed that they were investigating her. The article is linked and quoted at the bottom of my post. The investigation is due to inappropriate medical research performed without oversight and by an unregistered person, as the article clearly states. Perhaps if you’d read it, you might know that?

          As for your belief that somehow Professor Chapman’s epublished (it’s on the escholarship site, hence that choice of word) study isn’t strong, you have proven yourself incapable of understanding it or evaluating it in other comments on other articles, so I’m uninterested in rehashing your failed arguments.

          If you would like to regurgitate your lack of understanding of methodology, data, findings and statistics again, please feel free to do so, but I won’t bother to respond.

          • Geopap8 8 years ago

            Mike, the art of language in Crikey says Dr Laurie is being “examined”. Any clues why?
            You also better point out to Chapman that he too is unregistered, so maybe according to the same principle he should cease doing “medical” research.

          • Dan Cass 8 years ago

            George, Prof Chapman has credibility and is a leading researcher. Its irrelevant that he’s not a registered medico – he’s not treating people! You are being nasty and its not helping your case at all.

          • Geopap8 8 years ago

            Well, guess what Sarah Laurie isn’t treating people either…

          • Lurker 8 years ago


            Have you ever considered that someone with a PhD might be far more qualified in conducting rigorous scientific research than someone with a bachelor degree?

            Have you ever considered that a Doctor with a PhD holding a Professorship at one of Australia’s most prestigious university is better qualified than a person with a bachelor degree and absolutely no chance of being offered a Professorship at any Australian university?

            A bachelor degree is just not high enough for a professorial position at any Australian university.

            I would have thought this would not need to be specifically pointed out, but I submit I was wrong.

          • Geopap8 8 years ago

            Lurker, I assume you belong to the school of infallible thrones? Have you never heard of mistakes, misconduct (or even worse) committed by people who were once considered wise, esteemed impeccable etc…

  2. John Newton 8 years ago

    Would someone please send a copy of this to Graham ‘Don Quixote’ Lloyd, the so-called environment editor for The Australian

  3. Pedro 8 years ago

    There needs to be some sort of law that these vested interest groups/individuals can be bought to account for willfully misrepresenting the truth.

    Does anybody know of any laws breached?

    • George Papadopoulos 8 years ago

      Pedro, any suggestion why wind developers refuse to co-operate with independent acousticians, particularly when it comes to handing over wind speed data?

      If you are arguing about misinformation, then the wind industry should try a little harder disproving it first, rather than burying the evidence…

      • Simon Holmes a Court 8 years ago

        Over the past 18 months I have asked Cooper to:
        a. share the presentation he gave to the Bacchus Marsh anti-wind meeting arranged by John Madigan.
        b. send me a copy of the letter he wrote about me to Nick Xenophon
        c. consider presenting his data to interested parties who would like to peer review his data.
        Cooper has refused and/or ignored me on all three counts. By all means, feel free to count him as an ally for your cause, but if you do so, his behaviour will indelibly taint your efforts. I believe he’s lost significant credibility, but if you think I’m too harsh, I’m keen to hear from him.

        • George Papadopoulos 8 years ago


          I don’t have the link handy, but Steve Cooper’s slides are available online… and so are his reports and papers on the Wind Watch website

          With regards to the behaviour of wind industry folks, Steve Cooper was hounded and harassed at the meeting you mention. Frankly I see no reason why he should oblige to communicate with such hostile personalities. Where you also at that meeting?

          • Simon Holmes a Court 8 years ago


            i was at the bacchus marsh meeting and saw steven cooper’s presentation from the front row. there were some significant issues with the presentation that left those without acoustics expertise (most present) with the false impression that other acousticians had done shoddy work. a video was taken of the evening, but i bet steve won’t let it be released.

            steve and i had a respectful conversation after the meeting, though we were clearly not in agreement. steve refused (on multiple occasions) to send me a copy of his slide deck. please send it to me if you can source it — john madigan wasn’t able to obtain it from steve, so i’d be pleasantly surprised if you can source an unedited version.

            later steve wrote a narrative of the evening for nick xenophon that, i found out about many months later, apparently references me personally. i’ve asked steve for a copy of the letter (a common courtesy for him to provide, no?), yet he refuses to do so.

            when i last saw steve (in melbourne 2 months ago) i invited him to present his work to some interested parties. he refused.

            strange behaviour for someone who wants to be considered a professional. why are the anti wind brigade so afraid of engagment?


          • Simon Holmes a Court 8 years ago

            still waiting for george to provide the links to cooper’s slides from bacchus marsh…

          • Geopap8 8 years ago

            Find them yourself!

          • Simon Holmes a Court 8 years ago

            after serious issues with the presentation from his 3-state roadshow were pointed out to cooper, he refused to release the slide deck. madigan’s office had a copy and they refused to make it public either.

            george said above that cooper’s slides were available online. i’ll eat my hat if george is right.

          • Geopap8 8 years ago

            And what were the serious issues? Were the slides a threat to the existence of the wind industry?

          • Simon Holmes a Court 8 years ago

            let the record show that nobody is able to locate cooper’s suppressed presentation from bacchus marsh, despite george’s comments to the contrary. (offer to eat hat still on the table.)

          • Simon Holmes a Court 8 years ago

            george still can’t find the slides he said were available. i even had plans on how i was going to eat my hat, but alas, it’ll stay on my head.

          • Dan Cass 8 years ago

            George – I challenge you to show where Cooper’s presentation is available!

            I’ve emailed Steve Cooper asking for his slides – no answer. I asked him in person and he told me to F*** off.

      • Pedro 8 years ago

        Hi George

        I think the acousticians have proved on numerous occasions that infra sound noise levels from wind turbines at a certain distance are below ambient levels. The science clearly shows that health effects claimed from proximity to wind turbines is wrong. If it were true many more people would be sick.

        If Ms Laurie is claiming that wind turbines are making people sick, she needs to do a far better job of proving it. Where are the 1000’s of sick people with consistent symptoms? A small number of anecdotes from people with symptoms living near wind turbines does not mean that wind turbines caused the symptoms.

        • George Papadopoulos 8 years ago

          Pedro, the research has shown that the infrasound levels in dBG are higher at the beach than at the wind farm. The research also has shown that wind turbines produce a different pattern of infrasound with peaks at around 1 hertz, and frequency about 20 hertz.

          The room for comparison is a screeching baby vs car traffic noise – which of the two is likely to cause annoyance? Certainly not the traffic!

          There are also two studies of Nissenbaum et al 2012, Shepherd et al 2011, that link wind turbines with harm to human health.

  4. Simon Holmes a Court 8 years ago

    I have met Sarah Laurie on a number of occasions and I honestly believe that she means well. She genuinely believes what she says, which I don’t believe is the case with the majority of the leadership behind the Waubra Foundation.

    I have been deeply involved with a small wind farm project for almost 6 years and have seen first hand the damage done as the anti-wind Waubra Foundation / Landscape Guardians lobby groups work very hard to spread misinformation, promote bad science and break down trust in small communities. (Perhaps this is not their conscious M.O., however they appear to take an ‘end justifies the means’ approach.)

    Sarah has made claims that people near our wind farm are being made sick by it. We have repeatedly asked her to meet with us so that we can understand he claims and work with her to get to the bottom of them. If we are indeed making people sick, we want to know and address it. Sarah has repeatedly refused to meet or even to provide clarification of her claims. This is not the behaviour of a medical professional who seeks to help communities, but of an anti-wind lobby group that exists only in the media, at public meetings and government inquiries.

    The anti-wind lobbyists are increasingly retreating from scientifically testable positions and shying from scrutiny, paralleling the anti-climate change contingent of society — unsurprisingly, given the significant overlap. Their followers are becoming more shrill and shouting inside their ugly echo chamber.

    When was the last time you had a calm and rational discussion with an ‘anti’? If you meet one, please send them my way.

    • George Papadopoulos 8 years ago


      If you question what Sarah Laurie believes, then I would like you to help me question what I experience.

      Last night, like many nights since early 2011, average of 1-2 per month, there was an intense LFN noise that made living almost impossible.

      The closest turbines are 35km away, at Gunning. This problem started once they went up. There are no coal mines or other industries in the area.

      So what is going on?

      • Simon Holmes a Court 8 years ago

        I’m keen to experience what you are experiencing. There must be 400,000 people within 35 km of Capital Wind Farm and presumably thousands who are likewise affected. I would genuinely like to know more about them and meet you with an open mind.
        Please invite me to visit you in Yass and experience it first hand. One question, how will we subtract the infrasound from the Hume Highway which passes by your house?

        • George Papadopoulos 8 years ago

          Simon you are more than welcome to visit. Here is my e-mail “geo pap” (@) – remove the spaces and other bits.

          • Simon Holmes a Court 8 years ago

            thanks george. i’m not in yass very often, but next time i am i’ll drop you a line. any thoughts on why you are affected by a wind farm 35km away, but not the highway much closer? any predictions of how many within 35km of capital wind farm are likewise affected? do you think you are especially sensitive?

          • Geopap8 8 years ago

            Simon, you’re certainly aware from your windy friends that I live “close” (14km away) to a highway, and I have answered this question over and over again. Strangely your friends don’t share my answers
            The highway was there when I purchased the property in 2005, The closest wind turbines went in early 2011. That was when the horrors started.

          • Dan Cass 8 years ago

            Are you actually claiming that infrasound from turbines 35km away is harming your physical health?

          • Geopap8 8 years ago

            Dan, what does noise nuisance constitute?

          • Dan Cass 8 years ago

            You claim that a wind turbine can hurt someone, 35km away?

            You also claim that a wind turbine can be heard by a human being and is a nuisance, 35km away?

            Also, George, is this you:

          • Geopap8 8 years ago

            Dan, where did I say that ONE wind turbine can be heard 35km away? Where did I say that ONE wind turbine can hurt someone 35km away?

            On a different note, Chapman seems to think that a tiny wind turbine at Cooper Pedy is comparable to mass of monstrosities at Capital Wind Farm…

            Here’s a quote from my email to him with regards to his “research” in his nocebo hypothesis:

            “Lastly I note your paper mentions that there 21 592 people living within 5km of “their turbines”. Isn’t a little peculiar that you decided to include 3500 people living around a tiny wind turbine at “Coober Pedy” [sic] SA which given its size of only 0.15Mwatt it is unlikely to annoy most people even at a distance of 500m!”

          • Lurker 8 years ago

            To the casual lurker it seems that Professor Chapman is absolutely credible. Unless someone provides credible evidence to the contrary, I will go with Dr Chapman’s research findings.

            I read every single comment and noticed that you posted more comments than anyone else.

            Quantity might be effective in advertising to a less than perfectly informed audience, though I doubt it will work here.

            “Here’s a quote from my email to him with regards to his “research” in his nocebo hypothesis:”

            I noticed the word “research” with quotes.

            Do you have better research credentials than Professor Chapman?

            He has a PhD and his research is focusing on an area, where he is a world renown capacity.

            I just had a look at your web site and it seems you have studied pharmacology, which means your studies would involve drug administration, the stepping up or stepping down of potent substance application.

            I can not find any information that shows that you have professional credentials regarding wind turbines.

            Last year, Australia received a visit from someone with a diploma in journalism, and this person seems to think he can lecture PhD qualified scientists on global warming.

            He also seems to like titles. Titles to which, according to some, he is not entitled to.

          • Geopap8 8 years ago

            No Chapman calls the work of other academics “research” so I am simply mirroring his “infallible” style.

  5. Martin Nicholson 8 years ago

    Gee! It so sounds like all this nonsense we hear about the danger of nuclear power and radiation leaks. Much hysteria and little scientific understanding.

    • David Boxall 8 years ago

      The window of opportunity for nuclear technology has closed. It’s neither needed nor wanted.

  6. Alan Baird 8 years ago

    I heard an interview with Ms Laurie and what a crock of egregious codswallop it was, eagerly accepted by the parrot from 2GB. The bovines beneath the spinning blades seem to be completely free of ‘mad cow disease’ but I’m not so sure about Ms Laurie or her shock jock friend.

  7. George Papadopoulos 8 years ago

    Mike, you could have done better than this: “Inconveniently for Ms Laurie, there was no discernible difference when the turbines were switched on and off.”

    Did you note than in the report, wind turbines 7km away on a different wind farm were still functional???

  8. Bruce 8 years ago

    This bloke speaking above is reading from a script, not from experiances of livimg twenty four seven near industrial turbines, so he would not what he is talking about. There is a fellow that lives in Sydney who calls him self a professor, & he would not know any thing about health living around industrial turbines because he lives in Sydney, as there are no turbines near where he lives. The best study these dills can do, is go, and live next to above for a few months were these turbines are causing people health problems.

    • George Papadopoulos 8 years ago

      Bruce, Chapman in the past has compared his noisy Stanmore home to wind farms, and insists he “sleeps like a baby”

      Chapman claims he is under a flight path, that has a post 11pm curfew on it, he also claims he can hear the train, but they go dead after midnight.

      Clearly we are dealing with a professor who uses his mental faculties more in the service of the wind industry than the interests of public health…

      • Mike Barnard 8 years ago

        George, Bruce was maligning me as author of the article not Professor Chapman. Your obsession with Chapman — and your merely vague acquaintance with observable reality — is showing through.

        Do get at least the target of your inaccurate and childish insults right. If you were throwing darts you’d be off of someone else’s board with this set, never mind your own.

  9. Simon Holmes a Court 8 years ago

    I have met Sarah Laurie on a number of occasions and I honestly believe that she means well. I think she believes what she says, which I don’t believe is the case with the majority of the leadership behind the Waubra Foundation.

    I have been deeply involved with a small wind farm project for almost 6 years and have seen first hand the damage done as the anti-wind Waubra Foundation / Landscape Guardians lobby groups work very hard to spread misinformation, promote bad science and break down trust in small communities. (Perhaps this is not their conscious M.O., however they appear to take an ‘end justifies the means’ approach.)

    Sarah has made claims that people near our wind farm are being made sick by it. We have repeatedly asked her to meet with us so that we can understand he claims and work with her to get to the bottom of them. If we are indeed making people sick, we want to know and address it. Sarah has repeatedly refused to meet or even to provide clarification of her claims. Yet she frequently leaves comments on anti-wind blogs and references anti-wind websites. This is not the behaviour of a medical professional who seeks to help communities, but of an anti-wind lobby group that exists only in the media, at public meetings and government inquiries.

    The anti-wind lobbyists are increasingly retreating from scientifically testable positions and shying from scrutiny, paralleling the anti-climate change contingent of society — unsurprisingly, given the significant overlap. Their followers are becoming more shrill and shouting inside their ugly echo chamber.

    When was the last time you had a calm and rational discussion with an ‘anti’? If you meet one, please send them my way.

    • Geopap8 8 years ago

      Simon, the key words to your comments include “damage”, “misinformation”, “bad science”.

      Do you understand the basic problem with wind turbines as researched by Pedersen et al? They are the second most annoying source of industrial noise.

      Maybe this explains why so many people listen to and relate with DR Sarah Laurie (not Ms), and fewer continue to believe what wind industry folk tell them.

      • Geopap8 8 years ago

        Simon, given the very negative way in which you describe DR Laurie, I have asked her to clarify why she allegedly refuses to deal with you. It appears that your refusal to hand over wind mast data and power output data to the sick and exhausted residents, as they have been requesting for over a year now, is a stumbling block for any co-operation.

        Simon, if your wind “farm” really is compliant with the current noise pollution regulations, why wouldn’t you want to prove that by handing over the data for independent acoustic assessment, to the resident’s acoustician? Or perhaps the concerns of the residents about Hepburn Wind’s two turbines regularly being exceeding the current noise guidelines have some substance? Wouldn’t this make it illegal for you to be collecting Renewable Energy Certificates, Simon? Is that why you don’t want to hand it over? Why are you not being “transparent” on this issue?. Do your shareholders know about your refusal to hand this data over? What reasons have you given to them?

        If this is true, and I have no reason to doubt Sarah’s words, your behaviour is VERY consistent with wind industry salesmen, and not so consistent with an individual concerned about the health of his environment and running “community” projects.

      • Blair Donaldson 8 years ago

        George, speaking of “damage,” “misinformation” and “bad science”, I found you on your Geomantica pseudoscience page! For the readers:

        (I’ve dumped the entire site to my hard disk for future reference, there is a goldmine of pseudoscientific garbage in there – so you can’t tell another fib by saying it was never on the net)

        You really aren’t very discerning about the rubbish you believe or promote? Magic pillows, EMF radiation, shielding, magic paint and one that really intrigues me, the (patented?) spinal pressure relief system. As a quadriplegic of 36 years, I’ve never heard of it. Do you get a cut for every gizmo, potion and worthless bit of pseudo-technology you flog to the unwary? Please enlighten me, what is Geopathic Stress – other than a parody of your name?

        I’m a little disappointed that among the products you flog, aluminium foil hats aren’t listed. I’d have thought they’d be your top seller? You should think about stocking them, you’re missing out on a goldmine I reckon.

        Don’t worry though, your promotion of pseudoscience isn’t entirely wasted. Wading through the unbelievable dross on your multilevel marketing website has promoted peals of laughter.

        For instance, the little rant under the misnamed “information” tab about Smart Meters is a classic. Did you write any of that? You’d make a great fiction writer.

        Isn’t it lucky you just happen to have a cure for those troublesome smart meters in the form of the trusty “Geovital Shielding paint T98 Alpha” handy to keep the old smart meter radiation safely cooped up? Sounds pretty impressive! George, you’re the gift that just keeps giving.

        • Dan Cass 8 years ago

          Blair, you are hilarious! OMFG.

        • Geopap8 8 years ago

          Blair, did it miss your attention that the Geovital Academy is approved by the Austrian Health Ministry? Did you have a look at the fact that the methods of the Academy are based on a doctoral thesis?
          Amazing how those pillow are “magic” for your poor brain. They follow very basic laws of physics – similar to the traction used in orthopaedic wards!
          But if one wants to know what narrow-mindedness is, look no further than pro-wind turbine investors and activists who believe wind turbines can make any meaningful reduction in CO2 emissions without destroying all the land mass of Australia with spinning monstrosities.

      • Blair Donaldson 8 years ago

        George, let’s apply your appeal to authority logical fallacy for a minute to something else like, say, HIV AIDS?

        The South African government opposed appropriate medications and safe sex practices to prevent the spread of AIDS because the sensible preventions were deemed to be a white, Western government attempt to rid Africa of blacks.

        It had to be true, after all, the South African government supported the Minister of health who promoted these claims. She promoted the notion that good old lemon juice copiously applied to your unmentionables would knock the old virus for six. Imagine that? Stupid governments around the world spending billions of dollars on a cure for AIDS when a bloody lemon tree in the backyard was all you needed? Incredible!

        But let’s return to the magical mystery tour which is your website, replete with its pseudoscience and very uncritical science sounding claptrap.

        There are so many areas you’re missing out on for an easy kill where you could be making millions without even trying. Applying your grasp of physics as a guide, a couple of innovations spring to mind – what about a radiometric measuring device for creationists? They think the world is only 6000 years old while those silly old fuddy-duddies in white coats who have repeatedly shown the world to be 4.7 billion years old are sadly mistaken.

        What about a home user psychic reader device so people don’t need to travel out to some cold reader freakshow, sorry, psychic convention/body, mind spirit festival? Punters could just pop themselves down into a comfortable chair in front of the “device” (with flashing LED lights for effect and faux-credibility) while a random generator chip asked them a series of pre-recorded, mindless, unconnected questions for the subject to answer? It doesn’t matter if the device doesn’t make sense, the user will feel loved and make up appropriate answers in any case.

        It’s interesting you flog all sorts of quaint ideas and dubious products for EMF radiation. Pity you didn’t know about Michael Faraday, he dreamt up the cage which shields the unwary from EMF radiation back in 1836 or thereabouts. Your new-age cons aren’t even original. It’s pretty clear you work on the “ignorance is bliss” principle and actually practice it yourself.

        To believe all the nonsense you warn about on your website must make you worried sick and constantly stressed I imagine? I guess you spend a little time at one of your health retreats to recharge your magnetically aligned, ionic hyper phases? If you don’t, you should.

        On a final note, I thought of another product you could be flogging to the unwary. What about your very own, psychically designed anal probe? It would help alleviate all those unnecessary alien abductions and unethical medical experiments. Think of it is your humane gift to mankind for a not quite gift-like $5000 per unit, or thereabouts. Skilfully designed, it could help you with that bowel impaction that is obviously putting severe pressure on your brain.

        And you think I don’t care. Pffttt

    • David K Clarke 8 years ago

      Simon; At one time I would have agreed with you about Sarah meaning well and believing what she says, but after reading claims by her such as
      “I’m certainly aware of a systematic campaign to denigrate and vilify sick
      people who speak up and say that they are unwell…”, which is quite obviously false, I have abandoned that opinion as too charitable.

      • Geopap8 8 years ago

        David, if I understand correctly you have claimed to find wind turbine noise mesmerising. Given that the research of Pedersen associates wind turbine noise as the second most offensive source of industrial noise, then there is something very odd about you

        • David K Clarke 8 years ago

          I believe the word I used was ‘restful’. If you want to call me odd, that’s fine. I’ve been called far worse by wind farm opponents.

  10. Simon Holmes a Court 8 years ago


    you are mistaken if you believe that we have refused to cooperate with the few concerned neighbours we have in relation to noise compliance.

    the record shows that we have previously offered to reimburse neighbours for the costs of auditing our independent noise survey process and we have even arranged for the EPA to audit our noise processes. (in both cases neighbours withheld consent.) sarah is aware of this history.

    we have been trying to meet with those concerned for almost two years and there are positive signs that we will be meeting soon. ill-founded suspicion and uninformed public comments, such as can be found in your message, only serve to undermine the relationship between wind farm operators and their neighbours, to the detriment of all wanting to get on with their lives.

    our wind farm has been determined to be complaint by both the responsible authority and the EPA. evidence for the same is available on our website.

    however the above has nothing to do with sarah laurie’s claims. it must be nice for you to have a hotline to sarah, but i can assure you that the same is not true for those who wish to investigate her claims. i have called sarah to discuss and she has hung up on me twice. i have written multiple times for clarification, yet i am met with, alternatively, silence and rehashes of propaganda from anti-wind websites and activists.

    the claim that our wind farm is making people sick is an extraordinary claim. to quote the late carl sagan, “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence”. the onus is on sarah to back up her extraordinary claim with extraordinary evidence.

    i believe that the damage sarah has wrought on communities around the country is significant and ongoing and that her actions are inconsistent with the behaviour of a health practitioner bound by the hippocratic oath.

    • Geopap8 8 years ago

      So Simon, you do confirm that you won’t hand over raw data, but only allow it to be audited on behalf of complainants by an “independent” party of your choice? You really must think the world is so stupid to believe anything you say!

      • Simon Holmes a Court 8 years ago

        george, putting aside the very nasty and somewhat offensive tone in your email, not to mention the fact that you have ignored the content of my post: no, your summation is not an accurate reflection of the facts.
        if you can engage in rational and respectful discussion, i’m happy to converse, otherwise, goodbye.

        • Geopap8 8 years ago

          Yes, Simon good bye, discussion with you seems like talking to an wind industry salesman

  11. Mike Barnard 8 years ago

    George, it’s unclear why you are defending Ms. Laurie so strenuously.

    This article and the behaviours and beliefs of her organization — see this material — make defending her a matter of selecting tiny nuggets where she has a shred of a defence from among the steaming piles of ordure.

    If there was a sense that you were defending her because she is so much on the wrong side of reality that you felt pity for her I could understand it.

    Instead, you seem to believe that her behaviour, beliefs and statements would be somehow defensible en masse if you could find one thing where her behaviour is irreproachable and above board. Even there your defence seems to be that she’s just a petulant child stamping her foot and refusing to share because — in her version — Hepburn Wind doesn’t share with her.

    Frankly, given the data from this article and the linked article in this comment, I know which party I would trust. Hint: his initials wouldn’t be SL.

    • myview1872 8 years ago

      There you go again, promoting your self-serving web site. Are you still attempting to drum up traffic? Is it the truth because you wrote it?

      It seems that this article was written for the sole purpose of trashing Dr. Laurie. Has anyone here actually considered that maybe wind opposition groups formed BECAUSE of negative health effects caused by IWT?

      Why don’t you tell everyone that you are a pro-wind blogger from Canada (I am Canadian as well) who doesn’t give a damn about what happens in Australia? BTW, I have asked you many times for real proof that IWT actually do any good at all. Still nothing.

      • Mike Barnard 8 years ago

        For those unfamiliar with hisviewisintherearviewmirror, he follows me on Disqus — apparently the only person who follows anyone on Disqus — solely for this purpose: to add zero-content, zero-reference comments claiming I’m wrong whenever I comment on any article anywhere. Kinda creepy and stalkerish, but there are worse things.

        For his sake, I’ll point out that I’m the author of the article this comment thread is attached to (he apparently didn’t notice), that I am a regular contributor to RenewEconomy (he probably doesn’t know what site he is commenting in) and that it would be redundant for me to repeat what is self-evident to anyone who has bothered to read the article, follow the links or look at my profile. I’ll also point out the amusing irony of hisviewisarchaic complaining about a Singaporean-resident Canadian commenting on a Spanish interview with an Australian. He probably didn’t realize that either.

        • Geopap8 8 years ago

          Mike, you and your narrow company of friends do a much more efficient job at making your opinions present on the international scene than anyone else…

        • myview1872 8 years ago

          Just as I thought. Lots of insults but no evidence that IWT actually do any good at all.

          • Geopap8 8 years ago

            “myview” they certainly have a peculiar art form of insulting others, but have a very sensitive nature to insults. They do take issue and demand apologies if you put them on the spot. Precious darlings, aren’t they?

          • myview1872 8 years ago

            Yes they are. Mike certainly doesn’t like it when I challenge him.

            Both Mike and I are from Ontario, Canada. Scenic rural areas have been devastated by the wind turbine developments and their related infrastructure. Residents face ever-rising electricity bills while excess power from wind is sold to neighbouring areas at a loss. Government legislation stripped municipalities of their democratic right to decide when ‘green’ developments are involved. This is what Mike supports.

            He has never, ever provided evidence that IWT do any good for the public.

    • Geopap8 8 years ago

      Mike, if you haven’t guessed, I defend Sarah Laurie because she is a whistle blower who has exposed a systematic cover up.
      With reference to the rest of your comment, it reminds me of inquisitional style blindness. I can hear the “Supreme Wind Pontiff” uttering “nocebo effect”, and you and others particularly Blair, chanting out “anathema, anathema, death to the heretics”…

  12. Blair Donaldson 8 years ago

    George, once again you kick an own goal by making accusations which are proven to be false. Will you ever learn? The evidence to date, suggests not.

    If you want your comments to be respected, how about demonstrating some yourself and apologising to Simon for your gross misunderstanding regarding the noise compliance issue?

    Are you adult enough to admit you’re wrong or are you so driven by your anti-wind hypochondria that no amount of evidence will ever convince you that your entire opposition to wind farms is built on hysteria and denial of evidence?

    • Geopap8 8 years ago

      Blair, sorry if this perturbs you, but I will mention the following names associated with research on wind turbines, noise and health: “Cooper, Nissenbaum, Shepherd, Thorne, Rand”. The list can go one. Are you familiar with their papers?

      • Blair Donaldson 8 years ago

        George, once again you demonstrate your naivete and lack of objectivity. You do realise the bulk of those authors are known anti-wind fanatics don’t you?

        Your hypochondria is getting in the way of any sound reasoning you might have possessed. Because a few people have convinced themselves windfarms make them sick doesn’t mean it’s true. Like your hypochondria, their problem appears to be mostly too much focus on themselves.

        And let’s not forget that the Waubra foundation and a few other anti-wind groups are financed by right-wing climate change denial cranks who conveniently have an interest in fossil fuels. No doubt you’ll deny that too.

        By all means keep your head in the sand but don’t be surprised if one day you get a nasty surprise from another quarter.

        As much as you continue to dismiss it, the facts are that millions of people and animals live quite happily with wind turbines, the fact you cannot deny unless you’re blind to reason. Unless or until you can account for that inconvenient fact, you’re only peddling daily scaremongers who are intentionally frightening the uninformed.

        PS. Your short-term memory loss is as bad as your ability to reason. You said in another forum that you wouldn’t respond to my posts any more. I wish you would keep your word.

        • Geopap8 8 years ago

          Ok Blair, I won’t respond any further but just reminding you that you are a wind energy investor – hence your “alignment” with objectivity…

          • Blair Donaldson 8 years ago

            Yes, I have committed the anti-social crime of investing a little money in a community and wind farm. So hang me. At least I’m not ripping off gullible people with homoeopathic remedies and other forms of alternative medicine.

          • Geopap8 8 years ago

            Ah, just when you thought I wouldn’t respond! Blair you behave more like a out of control bulldozer that doesn’t hesitate to attack personalities, science, evidence etc for the sake of your petty financial interests…

          • Blair Donaldson 8 years ago

            George, you just don’t understand science. If you did you would understand why your claims are pure fiction, or the imaginings of a fevered mind obsessed with itself – hence your hypochondria.

            I think William of Occam had people like you in mind when he devised his simple principle for finding the truth. You should learn it and better still, practice it. But as you have painted yourself into a corner and don’t quite have the courage to publicly admit you got it terribly, sadly wrong, I suspect it will take a few more years for reality to register with you.

            PS homoeopathy isn’t science, it’s magical thinking which you have demonstrated time and again, you excel in.

          • Geopap8 8 years ago

            Blair, can you demonstrate with any evidence the following claim: “homoeopathy isn’t science, it’s magical thinking which you have demonstrated time and again, you excel in”
            If you can’t, maybe time to say enough is enough and make you pay for defamation!

          • Blair Donaldson 8 years ago

            George, your claims can easily be found on Google.


            From a crank anti-wind website no less. Here are your own words reporting without any shred of criticism or objectivity. You fail to demonstrate even a smidgen of scepticism because you believe your own propaganda.

            Then we have your nonsense promoted on a homoeopathy website which you would presumably have requested be removed if you didn’t think there were some credibility in a homoeopathy.


            We’ve already been here before George, I’ve pointed out time and again your apoplectic commentary is all over the web for anyone to find.

            I can easily find more if you would like the readers to see more evidence of your casual grasp on reality. Those two links took about 30 seconds. So you tell us George, would you like me to post more of your own words for all to see?

          • Geopap8 8 years ago

            You mean the many nights that the place resonates like hell and leaves no visitor unimpressed…

          • Blair Donaldson 8 years ago

            George, I simply don’t believe anything you say. Your cute anecdotes are always self-serving but they don’t constitute credible evidence.

          • Blair Donaldson 8 years ago

            George, let’s not forget the following claim you made demonstrating your batlike sensory abilities…

            Where does the problem stop?

            This is a difficult question to answer. On two occasions when the ILFN nuisance was at its worst, I travelled out west. On one occasion I discovered that it appeared to have dissipated at Wee Jasper, 70km away from the closest turbines. On another occasion, and by far the worst of all days, the problem had dissipated when arriving at Young about 100km from the closest turbines.


            Amazing that you can sense (supposedly) the gentle swishing of a wind turbine almost 100 km away when thunder cannot be heard more than about 30 km away when the surrounding landscape is flat.

          • Geopap8 8 years ago

            Blair, your evidence says nothing about my beliefs in homeopathy. The letter on the homeopathic website is an open letter and anyone is free to host it.
            As far as your lightning bolt analogy, what does one wind turbine and lightning bolt have in common?
            I prefer to talk about 200 wind turbines in the Southern Tablelands and compare them to seismic activity which is sometimes audible even hundreds of kilometres away.

          • Blair Donaldson 8 years ago

            George, you have either misread or ignored what I said. I didn’t mention lightning, I said “Thunder”.

            Maybe that’s your problem, inattention to detail?

            How is comparing seismic activity in any way related to wind farms? It’s a real pity you have no grasp of basic science, particularly physics. Had you been informed you would understand why your claims are simply nonsense.

          • Geopap8 8 years ago

            Ok Blair, let talk about thunder. What do you know about thunder (please note that I have never claimed to hear thunderbolts 100km away from the source)? What are the typical sound waves it produces, and do you ever get 200 thunder bolts working in sync in a region under conditions of atmospheric inversions? What is the specific density of thunder bolts? Do thunder bolts cause any meaningful displacement of air, or do they cause significant air turbulence? Do they cause a compression stroke? Do they spin at 240km/hour? Are they a common source of LFN as discussed by Leventhal in his 2004 paper? How much dBG does a thunder bolt produce in comparison to 200 wind turbines? Are you aware that low frequency sound dissipates at rates as little as 0.1dB/km?

          • Blair Donaldson 8 years ago

            George, stop pretending you know what you’re talking about. You and I both have little real knowledge about sound propagation. Unlike you, I’m honest enough to admit I know my limits, why can’t you?

            All I can go on is personal experience. There are many times I have witnessed lightning off in the distance but I haven’t been able to hear the thunder.

            Typically when you get caught out, you change the subject or introduce some new red herring to cover your ignorance. You aren’t fooling anybody but you are demonstrating how desperate you are to ignore conflicting evidence.

          • Geopap8 8 years ago

            Blair, I’ve written up a paper on low frequency noise and I don’t think you have.

          • Blair Donaldson 8 years ago

            Anybody can write a paper George, it’s whether or not it’s accepted, peer-reviewed and appears in a recognised journal that counts.

            So please forward the URL to your paper, the journal it appears in etc.

            If you fail to do so, we’ll be once again left to conclude you live in fantasyland.

          • Geopap8 8 years ago

            OK, Blair, I might decide to now apply to have my paper published in the Lancet – just for you!

          • Blair Donaldson 8 years ago

            So when the truth comes out, your imaginary paper hasn’t been published? You’re full of it George.

  13. Andja Mitric-Andjic 8 years ago


    I asked you months and months ago for :
    1.Wind speed and direction data from 24 of December 2011 to 26 of March 2012

    2. Power output for each turbine at Leonards Hill over the same period (these data are usually available in 10 minutes interval blocks and would already have been compiled by the consultants working for Hepburn Wind

    Yet I have not received anything apart from emails from Taryn Line requesting meeting in person while ignoring my request even if I have agreed to meet you in person once you provide me with data.

    Is that what you call “transparency”.
    Dr Mitric-Andjic

    • Simon Holmes a Court 8 years ago

      andja, as you know, we have been trying to meet with the small number of concerned residents for some time to help them build trust in the wind farm and there are signs that we will soon have an opportunity to do so. even though our council and the EPA have determined that our wind farm is compliant, we are very willing to assist bona fide experts in assessing our project, and we look forward to collaborations in this regard.

      from your comments elsewhere, i’m sure you’ll agree that heath concerns, not data, is the core issue. following your adverse comment about our project to the senate last year, we wrote to the committee:

      “We find it difficult to understand, given the seriousness of Dr. Mitric-Andjic’s claims, why she has been unable to find time to sit down with us at any time over the past 15 months to discuss her claims. We cannot reconcile her apparent concern with her continued refusal to work towards resolution.”

      you’ve been consistently dodging our approaches for 20 months now. if you genuinely believe that our wind farm is making people sick, then please meet with us and help us understand:
      x the exact nature of the sickness you have observed
      x the reasons why you attribute this sickness to our wind farm.

      • Geopap8 8 years ago

        “Lovely” reply Simon. It reminds me of the way the local wind rep behaved towards the locals for months – avoided organising meetings, answering questions.
        Yet when I got a little feisty and circulated my concerns to the local general practitioners and copied in the NSW Dep’t of Health, I was given the honour of organised visit post haste.
        Sometimes people like you need to be hit in that spot down below in order to get any meaningful response!

      • Andja Mitric-Andjic 8 years ago


        I am more then happy to meet with you once you provide me the data I have been requesting unsuccesfully for over the last ten months from Hepburn Wind.

        I am sure that you are aware of my communications with Taryn Lane which I had to stop because of her ignorance in answering my questions.

        In summary, I asked for wind speed and direction, and power output for each wind turbine at Leonards Hill over a period of 4 December 2011 through to 26 March 2012.

        The data is normally available in 10 minutes average blocks and would already have been compiled for a consultant working for Hepburn Wind to prepare a compliance assessment that they were doing in the same measurement period.

        I am glad that you have finally accepted that there is a problem with wind turbine noise pollution in relation to human health and are prepared to talk about it openly.

        Once you have provided me with the information and my acustician analyses and compares this data, we will sit and try to find the best solution.

        In regards to your post scriptum, you can provide our communications to various statutory bodies and the media, but you are not aloud under any circumstances to change or interpret my comments, but to give them complete content of my emails.

        Kind regards,


        • Simon Holmes a Court 8 years ago


          as you know from our earlier communication, despite having proven compliance to the responsible authority, we have been attempting to work with concerned residents and trustworthy experts to address any remaining concerns around noise compliance. we are committed to transparency and we’d be more than happy for you to participate in these discussions. surely it is in our community’s interests for you to match our willingness to engage in meaningful dialogue?

          your comment about our thoughts on wind turbine noise and possible heath effects is disingenuous and undermines your credibility. on the basis of our understanding, we believe it is irresponsible to make a connection between wind turbines and negative health, however we remain open to meeting with you to understand your concerns.

          thank you for consent to publish our shared communications. i will send you a copy for your reference.

          we remain keen to work with you should you be genuinely interested in the welfare of our community. the first step is to meet face to face.


    • Blair Donaldson 8 years ago

      Andja, have you ever diagnosed anyone with wind turbine syndrome?

      • Geopap8 8 years ago

        Blair, you desire respect, but you show none to those who have left their homes because of wind turbines…

        • Blair Donaldson 8 years ago

          George, it’s interesting that you construe a sincere question as an attack. Your paranoia is showing… again.

          I have already stated on numerous occasions that I’m certain some of the people who believe wind turbines make them ill are sincere just as I’m sure some practitioners of homoeopathy think it works. Unfortunately in both cases, cause and effect don’t match reality and more importantly, conflict with science and available evidence.

          So a reasonable conclusion might be that those who claim to be affected by the farms have been misled because of misinformation, they are victims of propaganda – just as people who believe in homoeopathy have fallen for a delusion. Get it?

          PS. You keep responding even though you say you won’t. Can’t help yourself?

          • Geopap8 8 years ago

            Can’t answer basic questions Blair – especially when you opened up the topic!
            Why then talk about thunder. Is it because YOU have something common with it?

    • Blair Donaldson 8 years ago

      Speaking of transparency, could you answer my question please regarding the number of people you have diagnosed with WTS? If the problem is as severe as some would allege, it would be good to have some idea of the magnitude.

      • Geopap8 8 years ago

        Andja, could I play my part before you make any diagnosis. There is Chapmanian WTS where the victim may suffer from 200+ diseases and symptoms. There is Pierpontian WTS which involves less time on search engines and “amusing oneself” and more clinical thinking about patterns of symptoms. There is also Georgian pro-WTS, this is specific malady which strikes the brains on pro-wind activists.

    • Blair Donaldson 8 years ago

      Dr Andja, after a little investigation I discovered your letter in The Courier voicing your concerns about alleged effects from wind farms and the need for studies by an independent body. Further, you claimed you had been treating two patients with symptoms similar to what you experienced.

      In your December 22, 2011 letter to the editor, you raise concerns, you question the integrity of consultants, you include concerns about infra-sound and audible sound and you reject findings that infra sound measured at beaches and in cities is higher than that measured at around 100 m from turbines. Do you have any qualifications in the study of sound?

      You state there are “so many unanswered questions” and I’ve discovered people from Hepburn wind have made many offers to meet with you, with a moderator if you so desired, but you have refused to meet with them and discuss your concerns?

      If you are so concerned about health impacts, why are you so reticent to meet with the windfarm operators and have an open discussion to better explain your chief complaints? Can you not see this undermines your alleged concern for the health and well-being of your patients?

      Again I’d like to know how you determine what symptoms qualify as wind turbine syndrome and how you diagnose this condition? Finally, how many patients have you diagnosed with WTS?

      I look forward to your answers.

      • Geopap8 8 years ago

        Blair, is this your comment? The style of writing reminds me of that professor at Sydney University…

        • Blair Donaldson 8 years ago

          Thanks George, I appreciate the compliment. There is hope for you yet.

          • Geopap8 8 years ago

            Well Blair, it sounds like a very well deviously constructed question, that in my humble opinion was set up in a way to bait Andja into a response that will have her “being examined” by the Medical Board for using the wrong buzz words.

          • Blair Donaldson 8 years ago

            George, you construe every straightforward question to anyone opposed to wind farms as having some ulterior motive. It says a lot about your paranoia.

            I don’t care what you want to read into my questions to the doctor, I would just like her to explain why she won’t meet with windfarm representatives on a matter she claims is an urgent health issue? Her public claims in comparison to her actions read more like anti-windfarm activism rather than any genuine concern for her patients.

            I’d also like to understand what constitutes WTS in her mind and the symptoms she identifies as demonstrating WTS.

            If the doctor really has solid evidence, why can she not answer these very basic questions?

    • Blair Donaldson 8 years ago

      Andja, how would having the data you seek help the patients who you allege have WTS? Are you looking for some correlation between illness and wind direction or turbine operation?

      I can’t understand why you aren’t prepared to quantify the number of people you claim have wind turbine syndrome, surely the larger the number, the more severe the problem? And, if you believe such a serious problem exists, don’t you have a public duty to notify relevant authorities and provide essential details to the public?

    • Blair Donaldson 8 years ago

      Andja, I’m not sure why you’re unprepared to answer my very straightforward questions? Are you having second thoughts about the cause of the illnesses of your patients?

      Of those you believe have WTS, did any or many of them have psychological issues before the windfarm was constructed?

      It really would be good if you could give an indication of the number of people affected. I’m just surprised you are not prepared to quantify that number if the threat to human health is as great as you claim.

      • Simon Holmes a Court 8 years ago

        blair, andja won’t answer your questions. we’ve asked her much simpler questions over the past 20 months, but she refuses to meet over what she professes is a major issue. i would have thought that anyone who is happy to be on sarah’s big list of experts would be banging down the doors of anyone wanting to understand the claims.

        • Blair Donaldson 8 years ago

          Simon, it would seem so. Considering she believes WTS is real and an urgent health issue, you’d think she’d be doing everything in her power to assist her patients – even if that required her meeting with the “dark side”? Maybe her alleged concern come second to her pseudoscience?

    • Blair Donaldson 8 years ago

      It’s interesting that you criticise Simon for not providing certain data yet you refuse to set an example by answering two simple questions, how many people have you diagnosed with wind turbine syndrome and how do you make that diagnosis?

      • George Papadopoulos 8 years ago

        Blair, you’re sounding very desperate for an answer…

        • Blair Donaldson 8 years ago

          Of course George, I’m desperate for the truth from any of you windfarm opponents and pseudoscientists. Unfortunately you are so wrapped up in yourselves, you don’t let the real world intrude on your supposed magnificence.

          As the good doctor claims to be concerned about the health of people, I cannot see why it should be too hard for her to type in a couple of digits on her keyboard, it’s a far less challenging task then trudging off to meetings to make anecdotal, unscientific and dubious claims based on her misunderstandings.

          PS you keep telling me I’m not worth responding to but you seem incapable of helping yourself. Is that another example of your lack of willpower and propensity to make up stuff and forget it a nanosecond later? A yes or no will suffice.

  14. DanWrightman 8 years ago

    Here are 19 peer reviewed articles regarding adverse health effects and industrial wind turbines:
    1)The Problems With ”Noise Numbers” for Wind Farm Noise Assessment
    Bob Thorne
    2)Evaluating the impact of wind turbine noise
    on health related quality of life
    by Daniel Shepherd, David McBride, David Welch, Kim N. Dirks, Erin M. Hill
    3)Mitigating the Acoustic Impacts of Modern Technologies:
    Acoustic, Health, and Psychosocial Factors
    Informing Wind Farm Placement
    Daniel Shepherd and Rex Billington
    4)Public Health Ethics, Legitimacy, and the Challenges of Industrial Wind Turbines:
    The Case of Ontario, Canada
    Martin Shain
    5)Infrasound From Wind Turbines Could Affect Humans
    Alec N. Salt and James A.Kaltenbach Infrasound
    6)Responses of the ear to low frequency sounds,
    infrasound and wind turbines.
    Alec N. Salt and T.E. Hullar.
    Department of Otolaryngology,
    Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, 63110, USA.
    7)Occupational Health and Industrial Wind Turbines: A Case Study
    Robert W. Rand, Stephen E. Ambrose, and Carmen M. E. Krogh
    8)Properly Interpreting the Epidemiologic Evidence About the Health Effects
    of Industrial Wind Turbines on Nearby Residents
    Carl V. Phillips
    9)Toward a Case Definition of Adverse Health Effects
    in the Environs of Industrial Wind Turbines:
    Facilitating a Clinical Diagnosis
    Robert Y. McMurtry
    10)Low-frequency noise from large wind turbines
    Henrik Møller and Christian Sejer Pedersen
    Section of Acoustics, Aalborg University,
    Fredrik Bajers Vej
    11)WindVOiCe, a Self-Reporting Survey: Adverse Health Effects,
    Industrial Wind Turbines, and the Need for Vigilance Monitoring
    Carmen M.E. Krogh, Lorrie Gillis, Nicholas Kouwen, and Jeffery Aramini
    12)Industrial Wind Turbine Development and Loss of Social Justice?
    Carmen M.E. Krogh
    13)Wind Turbines Make Waves:
    Why Some Residents Near Wind Turbines Become Ill
    Magda Havas and David Colling
    14)Literature Reviews on Wind Turbines and Health : Are They Enough?
    Brett Horner, Roy D. Jeffery and Carmen M. E. Krogh
    15)Editorial Wind turbine noise Christopher D Hanning and Alun Evans
    British Medical Journal,
    16)Wind Turbine Noise
    John P. Harrison
    17)The Noise from Wind Turbines: Potential Adverse Impacts on Children’s Well-Being
    Arline L. Bronzaft
    Response to:
    The Northumberland County Council Core
    Issues and Options Report Consultations
    Dr Christopher Hanning
    19)Effects of industrial wind turbine noise on sleep and health
    Michael A. Nissenbaum, Jeffery J. Aramini1, Christopher D. Hanning

    • Geopap8 8 years ago

      Dan, you should be aware of how much psychological harm you are doing to some people when you make informative postings such as this one.
      Better watch out they will accuse you of causing mental breakdowns, hyperventilation, panic attacks etc. They already appear to suffer from severe nocebo.
      It is all because they must see their idols all over the land, the sea, and perhaps even the moon, creating energy to save the Earth from an inevitable meltdown, whilst killing as many eco-systems as possible and subjecting swathes of communities to sonic torture.
      You must show their precious masculine natures a little understanding and mercy, even though they show absolutely no hesitation to pour their vitriol on DR Sarah Laurie.

  15. Giles 8 years ago

    Hey, I’ve been letting this run, but what’s the chance we can cut out the personal barbs – from both sides. Limit it to WTS is real/not real and the evidence therein. Otherwise the conversation will be closed, starting to sound like a couple of blokes in a bar near closing time. Not that that wouldn’t be entertaining, but …..

    • DanWrightman 8 years ago

      I agree about the personal barbs, unfortunately the personal tone of the comments was set by the article.

Comments are closed.

Get up to 3 quotes from pre-vetted solar (and battery) installers.