In the last few months, a flyer appeared in the mailboxes of residents near the Plateau wind projects in Grey Highlands. Click on the image to view it full size.
Strangely enough, those types of suggestions have been proven to influence people to the point where they start to exhibit the symptoms. It's called the nocebo effect and has been observed with radio frequency sensitivity, chemical sensitivity, fluoridation, vaccination, etc.
Here's another article that shows how prevalent the effect is, even regarding the expectations of the food we eat. It also highlights a few historical examples:
● In a study in the early 1980s, 34 college students were told an electric current would be passed through their heads, and the researchers warned that the experience could cause a headache. Though not a single volt of current was used, more than two-thirds of the students reported headaches.
● Drinking water fluoridation was first introduced in Grand Rapids, Michigan in 1945. Calls began coming in to city offices from people complaining of sore gums and peeling tooth enamel. One woman even claimed that all her teeth had fallen out. These calls arrived in early January, when some press reports had stated that fluoridation would begin, but some weeks before the actual advent of fluoridation on January 25.
● Call it fear of spraying. In one study researchers spewed distilled water from planes over residential neighborhoods without telling anyone what the spray contained. The intent was to gauge public phobia of chemicals. Sure enough, the experimenters were soon deluged with complaints from frightened folks who claimed the spray was causing cows to abort, dogs to shed and children to get sick…
● A Paris household blamed three installed cell phone antennas in their area for causing headaches, nosebleeds and a metallic taste in the mouths of some residents. The one problem with this complaint—the antennas were never activated.
So, you'd think that the wind opponents would want to find a solid scientific basis on which to make their claims. The University of Waterloo has assembled a team of health professionals under the direction of Dr. Bigelow and Dr. McColl, professors at the School of Public Health and Health Systems:
“We’ve assembled a multidisciplinary team in order to carry out one of the first in-depth
clinical and epidemiological assessments on the human health effects of both audible and low
frequency sound from wind turbines,” explains Bigelow. “By including nursing professionals
and other specialized health expertise on the team, we’re hoping to use clinical and biological
markers of stress to examine the association of exposure to wind turbine noise with sleep
disturbances, fatigue, headache, depression, and other psychophysiological problems.”
This would appear to be exactly what wind opponents were looking for. However, in an email dated November 10, 2011 Ian Hanna, Chair Wind Concerns Ontario, stated:
Wind Concerns Ontario has become aware that Siva Sivoththaman PhD, the Research Chair tasked with the assignment of researching the potential adverse health effects of renewable energy mainly wind turbines, and members of his team have begun trying to survey rural Ontario residents and conduct noise measurement studies.
WCO strongly recommends that you do not participate in these activities.
Does that mean that this flyer and its results is intended to replace the University of Waterloo study? What data would you trust?