Two weeks ago, Nina Pierpont testified (teleconference) before the Australian Federal Senate’s Community Affairs Committee, as it holds public hearings on wind turbines and health (among other matters).
During the course of the interview, the Senators referred to a report by the Government’s National Health and Medical Research Council. The ”Wind Turbines and Health: A Rapid Review of the Evidence” (July 2010) report, which loftily dismisses Wind Turbine Syndrome as simply anecdote.
The Senators asked Pierpont if she had read the report. ”Yes, I have,” she replied.
And what do you think of it, they pressed? ”I consider it pitiful and dubious science.”
The next day, “Wind turbines report ‘pitiful’” was headline news.
Pitiful and dubious? Is this possible—from the government’s chief medical and health agency? You could almost hear the Senators gasp! Would Dr. Pierpont be kind enough to write a rebuttal to this “pitiful” report, they gingerly asked?
[By courtesy of windturbinesyndrome.com.]
This material is the work of the author(s) indicated. Any opinions expressed in it are not necessarily those of National Wind Watch.
The copyright of this material resides with the author(s). As part of its noncommercial effort to present the environmental, social, scientific, and economic issues of large-scale wind power development to a global audience seeking such information, National Wind Watch endeavors to observe “fair use” as provided for in section 107 of U.S. Copyright Law and similar “fair dealing” provisions of the copyright laws of other nations. Queries e-mail.
|Wind Watch relies entirely
on User Funding