Confusing and contradictory results from Health Canada wind turbine noise study

Health Canada recently released a summary of results from its study of Wind Turbine Noise and Health.  Findings were confusing and apparently contradictory.  From the Health Canada report:

The following were not found to be associated with WTN exposure:

• self-reported sleep (e.g., general disturbance, use of sleep medication, diagnosed sleep disorders);
• self-reported illnesses (e.g., dizziness, tinnitus, prevalence of frequent migraines and headaches) and chronic health conditions (e.g., heart disease, high blood pressure and diabetes); and
• self-reported perceived stress and quality of life.

The following was found to be statistically associated with increasing levels of WTN:

• annoyance towards several wind turbine features (i.e. noise, shadow flicker, blinking lights, vibrations, and visual impacts).

Further down in the report:

5.3 Annoyance and Health

• WTN annoyance was found to be statistically related to several self-reported health effects including, but not limited to, blood pressure, migraines, tinnitus, dizziness, scores on the PSQI, and perceived stress.
• WTN annoyance was found to be statistically related to measured hair cortisol, systolic and diastolic blood pressure.

Huh? WTN exposure IS NOT associated with a bunch of bad health effects but WTN annoyance (caused by WTN exposure) IS associated with the same bunch of bad health effects and then some.

Any guesses how this will be received by the wind industry and its media supporters and by the people who have to live near wind turbines?

Here's the angry reaction from North American Platform Against Wind Power (NA-PAW).

Windfarm victims speaking out

Watch this trailer for a one hour documentary, An Ill Wind, in which people living near wind turbines are interviewed by Dr. Nina Pierpoint:

...we didn't know the full effects,
...it's been sheer hell,
...cattle bleeding out of their noses,
...stray voltage,
...an empire of lies,
...gold rush mentality,
...people are afraid to speak up,
...Obama's Chief Economic Advisor is the principal of First Wind; before that, he was president of Harvard University, until he was fired,
...there is definitively this element of the con artist, the snake oil salesman, the evangelist; the con is alive and with us.

And then there's the the huge added cost to consumers, the unreliable and inefficient energy production, the visual pollution on landscapes and the killing of birds by the millions.  All thanks to "climate change" fanaticism and its accompanying "green energy" fetishism.

[Via FOS]

On the road to "if it isn't forbidden it's mandatory"

Via Blazing Cat Fur - the NDP wants to put cancer warning labels on cell phones.

That makes three consecutive posts on creeping statism.  Brison's mandatory voting, the 2,4D ban and now cell-phones which, as the story above notes, is about more than just cell-phones:

"It’s WiFi, baby monitors and cordless home telephones, which all operate at 2.4(gigahertz)," 

We gotta get a grip! It's time to break out the tar and feathers and do a few "activists".

Enough is enough. “I’m outta here!”

Victoria has become a city (like many I’m sure) run by scolds and control freaks. Regional "Authorities" (they do seem to love ‘authority’ around here) police everything from the cleanliness of recycled cans to water restrictions (needed or not) and draconian anti-smoking bylaws.

Recently, a privately owned and operated sports and entertainment centre, encouraged by the health Nazis' attitude, decided to take things a step further and conduct searches and seizures of patrons’ tobacco products ...

Which prompted this excellent letter:

Re: Save-On centre butting out, News, Sept. 17, 2008.

Has the Capital Regional District and Save-On-Foods centre gone completely insane?

You will not be confiscating any of my tobacco products or infringing on my rights, as I never plan to return to the land of the over-regulated and bylaw-saturated non-personally responsible hell that is being created in Victoria region and Canada as a whole by silly self-serving bureaucrats trying to justify their existence by telling me how to live.

Anarchy works for me. That is why I moved to Mexico. I write you as I enjoy a beer and a smoke in a public shopping mall, just ahead of commute back home in my vehicle, while not wearing a seat belt, watching smiling families riding in the back of pick-up trucks whiz by me at 110 kilometres per hour.

Guess what will happen if I crash? They will say it was my own fault. No one to blame but myself. How liberating. Adios!

Sean Randall
Formerly of Langford

Great letter, Sean! I know exactly where you’re coming from.

Liberal fascism: search and seizure of cigarettes

From the front page of my local rag this morning:

Smokers will no longer be allowed to scurry in and out of Save-on-Foods Memorial Centre for a cigarette break during hockey games and concerts. And coming soon -- patrons will be prohibited from bringing cigarettes into the arena.

Smugglers will have their cigarettes confiscated in the same way drugs or alcohol would be following a random search.

A provincial law that came into effect March 31 prohibits smoking within three metres (or 10 feet) of doorways ...

The moves were based in part on warnings from the U.S. surgeon general that there is no safe level of exposure to second-hand tobacco smoke. [No safe level? It’s the same as saying that someone lighting up 20 (or even 1000) miles away is endangering your health. That’s completely irrational.]

Victoria's arena was in compliance with the B.C. law ... [but] arena staff found policing the in-and-out privileges, as well as the smoking areas, to be a logistical nightmare.

Draconian laws banning smoking became too onerous, so the management enforces even more draconian measures to compensate. Does that bother the ‘authorities’? Nah. Quite the opposite:

Richard Stanwick, Vancouver Island Health Authority chief medical health officer [chief health and safety Nazi], is elated by the news. "That's great,"

Provincial and regional bylaws "don't preclude businesses or municipalities
or regional districts from going further." Rather, it's encouraged, he said.

First it was seatbelts; then it was motorcycle and bike helmets; next came smoking in restaurants and smoking in restaurant outdoor patios and then smoking anywhere within 10 feet of buildings.

Now they’re searching people and confiscating their (perfectly legal) cigarettes. What next?

Give the health and safety fascists an inch an they’ll take a mile. They ALWAYS go too far. And there’s no end of things to ban or to their demands for absolute safety.

No one can be allowed to decide for themselves what’s best or worth risking. The growing nanny state and its fanatical cheerleaders know best. And, for the most part, few complain.

The people of Victoria weigh in:

Junk Food? There's NO SUCH THING!

Recently there's been a lot of hype surrounding so-called 'junk food'. Headlines - "Childhood Obesity - Junk Food to Blame"; books and movies - "Fast Food Nation" and "Supersize Me!" Socialist busy-bodies, trial lawyers and opportunists of every other stripe are trying to get a piece of the action.

Well, IMHO, there's no such thing as junk food. All food has a useful place in a healthy diet. Potato chips, chocolate bars, soft drinks as part of any balanced meal are all good for you. And you can wreck your body by eating too much of any food. The problem, if there is one, is junk DIETS, junk eating habits. But with all the media hype and political posturing one thing seems near certain - the nanny state will step in to slap a tax on the latest scapegoat - food.

There are so many ways this seems wrong it’s hard to know where to begin but here's the short list:

One, it’s unlikely to work. Since poor eating habits are the problem, those few who may be deterred by ‘junk’ food taxes will more than likely shift their overeating to other foods. Or, in accordance with the law of unintended consequences, they’ll sacrifice ‘healthy’ food to enable them to afford their ‘junk’ food habit.

Two, it’s a regressive tax that hits the poor the hardest. One more simple pleasure under seige by government.

Three, it’s doubly unfair because while it targets overeaters, a minority, it penalizes everyone. Why should everyone, including the poor, suffer a penalty aimed at deterring people with poor eating habits?

Four, the scientific basis for assumptions about weight and health is murky at best. Mortality is a reasonable measure of health and the results of at least one study showed that "Overweight was not associated with excess mortality." Statistically overweight people live no shorter lives than do those of normal weight. Only for the obese and the underweight is there an effect. Perhaps the 'junk' we need to be most concerned with is the ‘junk science’ being peddled to support ‘junk’ food theory.

Five, but not least, this is nanny-statism taken to a new height. Even assuming it were workable, it’s still an arrogant, totalitarian, one-size-fits-all measure. It’s state interference with one of our most basic personal responsibilities - eating habits. And children’s diets are parents’ responsibility.

People should be outraged by the gall of politicians and government bureaucrats attempting to micro-manage their lives, and with the media for its over-enthusiastic hype. Following this path to its ultimate conclusion will lead to government regulation of every aspect of our lives - everything being decided for us - everyone treated like an errant adolescent or serf - what isn’t forbidden is compulsory. In the broadest sense of the health of the citizenry, this is can hardly be a healthy state of affairs.

And, please, let’s not hear the tired argument that this is the government’s business because of the supposed $billions ‘junk’ food consumption costs the health care system. If anything this is one more strike against state monopoly healthcare which is being used to justify ever more interference in our personal lives.