Three more letters on the Aust. Med. Assoc. position statement
Translate: FROM English | TO English
Translate: FROM English | TO English
Dear Dr Hambleton, Prof Dobb & members of the AMA,
We have read your statement regarding Wind Farms & Health 2014 and are left astounded & dismayed that a medical organisation with such high standing as the AMA, has seen fit to diagnose people as ‘suffering’ from nocebo without any obvious personal consultation.
Our question to those of you who have written this statement is; how many of the impacted people & families have you actually taken the time to speak to?
As someone who has a proposed Windfarm due to be built next door to our home & workplace (ie farm), we are concerned with the negative impacts about to be foisted upon us (possible health effects, lowered property values etc) with no consideration to how we may feel about it.
We have made the effort to travel over east to meet people who are living with this scenario firsthand and have been saddened & shocked to see the destruction & torture they are having to put up with on a daily basis. The lack of action & compassion being shown by the governing & authoritative bodies who can do something to stop the suffering, concerns us greatly.
We have met people who were in favour of wind power, who are now living with the consequences.
Prof Dobb, you treated a very sick family member of ours a few years ago, & your compassion & caring helped us through a difficult time. We have always been so thankful & appreciative for you & appeal now to your compassion & that of your AMA colleagues, to do the right thing & retract the statement that has been made, take the time to speak to those so adversely affected, encourage the Government to finally do the research that is necessary & help bring the suffering to an end.
Narelle & Alan Goodall.
Dr. Steve Hambleton, AMA President
Professor Geoff Dobb, AMA Vice President
Members of AMA Federal Council:
Given what we know, and more important, perhaps, what we do not know, it is impossible to believe that persons in the medical profession can possibly make a statement backing up the developers and the governments supporting the industrial wind turbine agenda. This, in appearance, if not, in fact, is what you have done through your AMA Statement regarding wind turbines.
I found your statement to be somewhat disconcerting. Is your area of expertise human health or the measurement of infrasound and low frequency sound?
It is inconceivable that persons in the medical field would, without proper proof that the industrial wind turbine does not negatively effect human health, continue to support wind technology. You support this destructive technology by your selective silence and by not demanding to be allotted the funding to prove, beyond doubt, that industrial wind turbines are not hazardous to one’s health and well being,
What difference does it make to you that wind turbine technology is “considered” (a very vague word), comparatively, inexpensive and that “available” Australian and international evidence does not support cautions about infrasound and low frequency sound. The only consideration should be that there are victims, but there are no answers and so-called available information is inadequate.
Because you rely on “available” evidence, I must surmise that you have not done your own research and you have not, intentionally or otherwise, answered why people have health issues and why there are victims. You use the word “may” rather than emphatically stating that there are no ill effects to humankind because of industrial wind turbines.
Your vagueness and your tentativeness is all the more reason for mankind, around the world, to be concerned about those in the medical profession who turn their back on a world wide issue instead of taking the necessary steps once and for all to prove that there are no negative effects to humans’ health.
You have made it sound a mass hysteria or imagined or sympathetic or psychosomatic issue rather than do the appropriate research to prove your “theory” that there are no health impacts. Until you prove your theory, industrial wind turbines are, in fact and proof, harmful to persons’ health.
Until you prove your theory, you must rescind your statement and say simply that because of lack of research to the contrary you have no proof or reason to believe that industrial wind turbines are not harmful to humans.
I say once more and most sincerely rescind your statement until you have proved beyond reasonable doubt that industrial wind turbines have no negative health impacts to humans.
The comments I have made above are in response to the AMA Statement below.
Quincy, MA 02171
March 24, 2014
Subject: FW: AMA statement on wind farm – A need for an official enquiry into corruption
To: The Hon. Tony Abbott, MP
CANBERRA ACT 2600
Cc: Federal Senators and Members of Parliament
RE: AMA statement on wind farm – A need for an official enquiry into corruption
Dear Prime Minister,
Firstly I thank you for showing the care and concern for rural Australia by recently announcing a study into wind farms and health impacts – a position clearly mandated by the research gaps identified by the recent NHMRC Draft Information Paper: Evidence on Wind Farms and Human Health.
I am writing to you to bring to your attention two documents that unfortunately hint of widespread collusion between the wind industry and members of the medical profession: https://ama.com.au/position-statement/wind-farms-and-health-2014 and https://ama.com.au/media/no-evidence-wind-farms-harm-health-ama
Both AMA position statements reflect an abstract position that does not examine reality. The authors make it clear that they are in total sync with the opinions and “research” of Professor Simon Chapman of Sydney University, but ignore significant peer reviewed published literature, the abundance of anecdotal reports of harm to human and animal health and the ongoing litany of controversy that continues unabated.
Should any medical practitioner take the AMA position statement seriously and try implementing its recommendation, they will have to show disregard for clinical observation, tell any of their patients living around wind farms and complaining of wind turbine related symptoms that they are victims of scaremongering, and perhaps report the incident to authorities for action. It seems that the AMA perceives information and open discussion as a threat to the mental wellbeing of the modern Australian. The prime target of the AMA appears to be one of its own: Sarah Laurie, the CEO of the Waubra Foundation.
I feel enough is enough. The blind eco-fascist fanaticism displayed by many is ever evident. The colours of corruption, lunacy and patent stupidity are becoming apparent amongst the highest echelons of academia and professionals.
The wind industry appears to be well aware that these large pieces of mega machinery are prime and unique sources of infrasound and low frequency noise – they are also atmospheric air blenders, sources of turbulence and disruption to local microclimates.
The harm wind turbines can cause has been described by NASA scientists in the 1980’s. The response by Sarah Laurie to the AMA is very comprehensive and makes the case clear: http://waubrafoundation.org.au/resources/open-letter-ama-their-position-statement-wind-farms-health-2014/
I urge you to consider calling for a Royal Commission (or at the least, some form of Parliamentary inquiry) into why we are so painfully rediscovering what was evident back in the 1980s. As a result, billions of dollars have been wasted; community after community is being divided, turned upside down and subjected to the same sonic torture reported elsewhere. Some of the least fortunate rural residents have spent almost two decades of their lives campaigning. And while all this is happening, government departments and authorities to date sit back like lame ducks, confused and disorientated while a few shrewd academics and professionals do their job to ensure confusion continues so that the wind industry may continue to proliferate.
23 March 2014
This article is the work of the source indicated. Any opinions expressed in it are not necessarily those of National Wind Watch.
The copyright of this article resides with the author or publisher indicated. 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. Send requests to excerpt, general inquiries, and comments via e-mail.
|Wind Watch relies entirely
on User Funding