Shear Wind Nearing July 30th Deadline for Response to EA Investigation

ShearWind must respond to claimed inaccuracies in their EA statement by July 30th, one of which is detailed in the most recent press release from Eco Awareness Society (see below).

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Why is Shear Wind Afraid of Dr. Pierpont?

Dr. Nina Pierpont M.D. is a graduate of the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. In the abstract to her upcoming book Wind Turbine Syndrome: A Report on a Natural Experiment, one reads:

“This report documents a consistent and often debilitating complex of symptoms … [that] include sleep disturbance, headache, tinnitus, ear pressure, dizziness, vertigo, nausea, visual blurring, tachycardia, irritability, problems with concentration and memory, and panic episodes associated with sensations of internal pulsation or quivering that arise while awake or asleep. The study is a case series of 10 affected families, with 38 members age <1>

In their November 27, 2008 addendum to their Environmental Assessment registration documents, Shear Wind Inc., in describing Dr. Pierpont’s work, misrepresents the maximum distance from a turbine as only 457 meters instead of 1.5 km; this is more than three times less than what the abstract states. In fact, there are seven homes closer than 1.5 km to turbines in Shear Wind’s Glen Dhu project. For this and five other statements of questionable truthfulness in their addendum, Shear Wind is under a Section 115 investigation by Nova Scotia Environment with a response due July 30, 2009.

Now, in their July newsletter to the community, Shear Wind again seeks to discredit Dr. Pierpont’s work, this time by claiming her view “that people living in proximity to wind farms may suffer from ‘Wind Turbine Syndrome’ … is not supported by scientists.” Shear Wind cites the Canadian Wind Energy website where links to seven articles authored by these scientists ostensibly support this claim. It is reasonable to expect that these authors reviewed Dr. Pierpont’s work and criticized her methods or “wind turbine syndrome” itself. However, a thorough reading reveals that five of the articles do not even mention Dr. Pierpont and only one article makes reference to her case series study stating, “One cannot discount the information.” Shear Wind is again misleading our community. While these authors do in fact “not support” Pierpont’s work, neither do they refute it, as Shear Wind would have us believe.

In contrast, Dr. Joel F. Leher, MD, F.A.C.S., one of the four doctors and scientists who, as referees, have peer reviewed the manuscript for Dr. Pierpont’s upcoming book, states, “This [report] addresses an under-reported facet of Noise Induced Illnesses in a fashion that is detailed in its historical documentation, multi-systemic in its approach and descriptions, and painstakingly and informatively referenced…. [It] opens up the area of low frequency vibration to the medical community….I applaud her.”

Based on the growing body of evidence, doctors, such as Dr. Pierpont, are calling for a minimum 2 km wind turbine setback or construction moratorium until an independent study can assess the full impact of wind turbine noise. However, as long as Shear Wind can create doubt through disinformation, our government and the general public will turn a deaf ear to such reasoned caution and Shear Wind can continue to site turbines based on financial convenience and to recklessly gamble with the health and well being of our rural communities.

Kristen Overmyer, M.S.M.E.

Baileys Brook