Apologies for relatively content-free blog entry, but I needed somewhere people could find this information and this seemed like the best chose at the moment.
I recently completed a report on the evidence supporting the claim that wind turbines cause health problems for some nearby residents. The report was submitted to the state of Wisconsin and can be found here. There is something odd about that page, however (I could download it using Safari but not Firefox) so I will note that you can find it reposted here (and, I believe, other places; note that the reposting does not represent any relationship between me and those who have reposted it other than me agreeing to their request to let them repost it in a better file format). Also, the oral testimony I gave in that case is recorded here.
It was pointed out to me that the last page of the report is missing, which was probably my fault. It contained references. Since I cannot add errata to the the original posting, I will post it here. Missing were the following:
Roberts M, Roberts J. Evaluation of the scientific literature on the health effects associated with wind turbines and low frequency sound. Exponent Inc. Prepared for Wisconsin Public Service Commission Docket No. 6630-CE-302 (the identity of the actual client for whom this was prepared is not disclosed in the document). October 2009.
Waye K. Effects of low-frequency noise on sleep. Noise and Health 6(23):87-91, 2004.
Also, minor typo that was pointed out to me by an attentive reader: page 23 in the 3rd line of paragraph #3: the word "as" should be "has"
Should any other errors or need for clarifications be identified by or to me, I will update this entry. I recognize that this is the not the most prominent place to post corrections, but at least it is better than the practice of most people in the field (to never post any corrections of their mistakes anywhere).
The 5% sugar guideline is not evidence-based - Last June I wrote an article for *Spectator Health* in which I promised a follow-up article to explain why the UK's new(ish) sugar guidelines have no basis...
1 hour ago