Does Noise From Wind Turbines Cause Cancer?

1. 86

   crankaliciousposted 5 years ago

   President Trump said this the other day. He didn't necessarily say that he believed it, but he said in public that people say that the noise causes cancer. Here's a link:
   
   https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/03/politics … index.html
   
   Is this really true? Because if it is, I live pretty close to some of these turbines and I'm thinking I might have to move.

   replyreport
   1. 96

      wildernessposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      According to the link, insomnia and dizziness are real.  But there is no health risk - apparently lack of sleep is not harmful and stumbling into the path of oncoming traffic is not dangerous.
      
      Why can't we ever just get the whole story without a built in bias one way or the other?

      replyreport
      1. 86

         crankaliciousposted 5 years agoin reply to this

         Where's the bias exactly? He said the noise causes cancer. I'm asking, does wind turbine noise cause cancer or not?

         replyreport
      2. 88

         MizBejabbersposted 5 years agoin reply to this

         Not sure who you are referring to with a "built-in bias" but Trump's whole statement seems to be a bias of his since he brought it up unsubstantiated.

         replyreport
   2. 60

      Live to Learnposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Let's think. Wilderness read the article. (Thanks wilderness.) If insomnia and dizziness are real side effects (surprised me) then you could say they contribute to cancer. Lack of sleep pushes you down a path of being more susceptible to a multitude of health risks, which could be contributing factors for the problems culminating in cancer. Studies have shown a possible link between lack of sleep and cancer.

      replyreport
      1. 86

         crankaliciousposted 5 years agoin reply to this

         So he's right then! Wind turbines cause cancer.

         replyreport
         1. 60

            Live to Learnposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            In as much as anything contributes to cancer, I guess.

            replyreport
            1. 84

               GA Andersonposted 5 years agoin reply to this

               Color me disappointed. Because in some instance, in some world, in some universe of circumstances, wind turbine noise could be claimed to cause cancer--you "guess."
               
               BS is BS no matter who is shoveling it. In this response, your hand is on the shovel Live to Learn.
               
               GA

               replyreport
               1. 60

                  Live to Learnposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                  Not in my opinion. I don't think it makes sense to claim 'wind turbines cause cancer' but I go by a philosophy that everything contributes to everything. If any outcome is influenced (even by a small percentage) by something it does play a part in the outcome. Kind of a seven degrees to Kevin Bacon style approach.

                  replyreport
               2. 86

                  crankaliciousposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                  I think it causes cancer in the same way Trump's father was born in Germany.

                  replyreport
      2. 93

         Tim Truzy info4uposted 5 years agoin reply to this

         Especially, if the wind mill is blowing secondhand smoke. lol

         replyreport
         1. 60

            Live to Learnposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            It's silly, true. If that specifically was said. Trump gets taken out of context so often, kind of like AOC.

            replyreport
            1. 93

               Tim Truzy info4uposted 5 years agoin reply to this

               George Washington said in one of his speeches that we should always have a little skepticism about our leaders, do not follow them blindly, that's all we are doing.

               replyreport
               1. 60

                  Live to Learnposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                  I'm not following anyone blindly. If that is the gist of your statement. I follow a 'don't believe anything you read and only half of what you see' philosophy with national news and hub pages posts.

                  replyreport
                  1. 93

                     Tim Truzy info4uposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                     General observation from a respected source for governing our democracy, applicable to all Americans.

                     replyreport
      3. 84

         Don Wposted 5 years agoin reply to this

         "Lack of sleep pushes you down a path of being more susceptible to a multitude of health risks, which could be contributing factors for the problems culminating in cancer."
         
         I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic or not. If not, then by the same token some people lose sleep over Donald Trump's policies.
         
         So by your logic, Donald Trump causes cancer.

         replyreport
         1. 60

            Live to Learnposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            Makes sense. But, you don't have to listen to the speeches. So you can easily prevent getting cancer from that source.
            
            You people really take yourselves way too seriously.

            replyreport
            1. 96

               wildernessposted 5 years agoin reply to this

               When universities have to set up "safe zones" and hire additional counselors to comfort students that saw "VOTE TRUMP" scrawled with sidewalk chalk, it is a reasonable comment. 
               
               Not that I had any sympathy for those poor, poor students, but their stress levels must have been tremendous to require psychiatric counseling and areas where nothing to do with Trump was allowed to intrude on the sensitivities.  All because of the notion that someone would vote Republican.

               replyreport
               1. 60

                  Live to Learnposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                  Definitely agree. And, good point.
                  
                  I think it is interesting that some of those who think it's ludicrous to imply that a very tenuous thread could be created in a very round about way to back up a claim that something causes cancer are the same individuals who argue that biological gender does not exist and it's a social construct.
                  
                  I find the idea that a wind turbine can case cancer about as likely as some of the other fruit loop ideas some in society are currently floating.

                  replyreport
                  1. 89

                     lobobrandonposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                     Biological gender does not exist, biological sex exists. Gender and sex are used interchanably by some, but those people are wrong if you want to follow the rules of the language. There is a reason you say gender roles and not sex roles.
                     
                     For example, It was not males who fought in war and females who cooked food, it was women in the kitchen and men on the battlefield. Any reputable dictionary from the past will say the same.

                     replyreport
            2. 84

               Don Wposted 5 years agoin reply to this

               I said some people lose sleep over Donald Trump's policies, not speeches. Escaping the effects of his policies is much more difficult.
               
               But if it "makes sense" that Trump causes cancer, let's take that through to its logical conclusion just for the hell of it.
               
               1 Turbines cause cancer.
               2 Cancer is bad
               3. Wind turbines should not be installed (from 1 and 2).
               4. Trump causes cancer.
               5. Therefore Trump should not be installed in the White House (from 1, 2, 3, 4).
               
               The logic seems valid.

               replyreport
               1. 96

                  wildernessposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                  Can it not be said about any person, past, present or future?  Obama, Bush, Reagan, Lincoln, etc. as well as anyone that sits in the chair in the future? 
                  
                  And, of course, it should be extended to anyone in congress that might open their mouth at all.  We must abolish all forms of government, leaving anarchy to cause cancer.  As that will cause stress as well (when will my neighbor break down my door?), that leaves simply killing everyone on earth in order to prevent cancer.
                  
                  At least it would work!

                  replyreport
                  1. 84

                     Don Wposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                     I don't think that goes far enough wilderness. By the logic in this thread, the existence of the universe causes cancer. Only its total destruction can rid us of the threat.

                     replyreport
               2. 66

                  JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                  Actually, Mr. Trump is the CANCER according to many CONservatives: Rick Perry is WRONG most of the time but he hit it on the head with this:
                  
                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=479SOJDXzak

                  replyreport
   3. 0

      RTalloniposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Hmmm.  Do doctors live and work in the area? If so, it may be that there is no real health risk. That's not a sure fire test because some docs participate in some real risky behaviors. It's the good ones that get irritated with people who live unhealthy lifestyles and then want the medical system (or government) to fix them.  Oh wait. That's off topic... So, is this area known for high cancer rates? Who could you ask? The neighbors? A cancer clinic? Does wildlife thrive there? Lots of questions could lead to the answer.

      replyreport
   4. 93

      Tim Truzy info4uposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Of course, step in front of the wind turbine - it'll blow you away, to a new home, before you catch cancer. lol

      replyreport
   5. 80

      peterstreepposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Why is the president of the United States saying this?
      My guess is, as Trump is a climate change denier and against green energy he wants to plant a seed of doubt and mistrust against green energy.

      replyreport
2. 83

   psycheskinnerposted 5 years ago

   In which case dogs, sex, roads, and storms all cause cancer/

   replyreport
   1. 0

      PrettyPantherposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      And babies!
      
      It all makes sense now....
      
      This discussion has taught me SO much. Who knew we had such a wise President, and smart people to explain the wind turbine/cancer connection!?
      
      LOL

      replyreport
      1. 89

         IslandBitesposted 5 years agoin reply to this

         Right?
         
         Hey! Welcome back!

         replyreport
         1. 0

            PrettyPantherposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            Thank you.
            
            The first thread I happen to read is so damned dumb. Maybe I should rethink my return....

            replyreport
      2. 84

         GA Andersonposted 5 years agoin reply to this

         I don't know where you have been Ms., but I am glad to see you back!  I was running out of Liberals to argue with.
         
         GA

         replyreport
         1. 0

            PrettyPantherposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            I had major surgery followed by some complications,but I am now on the mend.
            
            Glad to see you insert some sanity into this insanely stupid discussion.

            replyreport
            1. 84

               GA Andersonposted 5 years agoin reply to this

               Best wishes for a speedy recovery. You were missed. I recently had some surgery myself.
               
               Had to have a foot removed from my ass. When my wife asked how she looked in a new dress--in a moment of insanity--I told the truth. When she said, "Get out!" I didn't take her seriously. My bad.;-)
               
               GA

               replyreport
               1. 89

                  IslandBitesposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                  Ay, GA! LOL
                  
                  
                  Yes, you were missed, PP. I hope you get well soon!

                  replyreport
               2. 0

                  PrettyPantherposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                  Ha ha, you crack me up.

                  replyreport
      3. 93

         Tim Truzy info4uposted 5 years agoin reply to this

         Nonsense, P.P. Those wind turbines might be near tobacco fields, toxic spills, nuclear power plants - blowing all of that stuff towards us hundreds of miles away. It could happen. big lol to the tenth power

         replyreport
         1. 0

            PrettyPantherposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            I hope you're being facetious.
            
            If not, LOL.

            replyreport
            1. 96

               wildernessposted 5 years agoin reply to this

               Like you, I hope he's being facetious.
               
               But it does bring up a thought - when we take such massive energy amounts from the wind we have to be affecting that air movement - that's simple physics as you don't get something for nothing.  And every time we mess with nature we lose - are we doing something that will cause great grief a few years from now? 
               
               Are those countries building wind farms in the ocean slowing the movement of air, air that carries the moisture that fills rivers, lakes and reservoirs?  Are we affecting the vegetation and environment in ways we don't even recognize?

               replyreport
               1. 0

                  PrettyPantherposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                  Now, those seem like reasonable questions, from a layman's point of view anyway, though I imagine a wind farm would have to be gargantuan to have much of an effect.
                  
                  But, I'm ignorant on this subject and should probably stop typing before I say something really dumb. :-)

                  replyreport
                  1. 96

                     wildernessposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                     Well, I'm nothing but a layman here as well. 
                     
                     But consider; if all of the energy being produced by windmills was used to power fans instead (reverse the operation) what would be the effect on our climate OR weather?  I certainly don't know and have never seen any speculation either.  I just know it would move an almighty lot of air!

                     replyreport
                     1. 0

                        PrettyPantherposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                        Where is lobobrandon? I bet he could address these questions. Has he been absent lately?

                        replyreport
                        1. 96

                           wildernessposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                           Don't know, but he might at that.  Of course, projections (and that's all it could be at this point) are notoriously faulty when it comes to climate.

                           replyreport
                           1. 89

                              lobobrandonposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                              Definitely, all we can say right now is that wind turbines or any other source of energy (other than fossils) cannot add energy to the short term (few millennia) cycles of the Earth. So having wind turbines replace fossil-based fuels cannot be a bad thing even if it does affect climate and it definitely does because the butterfly effect is true and a butterfly does influence climate as well. The scales are what differ.

                              replyreport
                        2. 89

                           lobobrandonposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                           Yup, I can answer this and there have been studies out there that address this, but I cannot link you to any papers other than this one that I just Googled https://www.pnas.org/content/101/46/16115.full because I am bad at remembering names of authors and so can't look up their work right now.
                           
                           But from what I have seen and heard at conferences as well as this paper, the effects are negligible. In fact, they may benefit us with mixing of the atmospheric layers due to increased turbulence.
                           
                           But, if you look from a flight or on Google Earth you will see that even in the North Sea, the highest density zone of wind turbines, they are just tiny specks in a vast blue sea. Further considering that wind turbines have a max efficiency of 59% due to the Betz limit and the conservation of momentum all the KE is not taken away. Tiny cities cause more damage than wind farms. Let's not talk about large cities along the coasts (most major global cities).
                           
                           It is a very good question, but in the same sense you can argue that solar panels are taking away direct heat, buildings with white roof tops reflect sun rays, etc. Increased clouds and water vapour from factories and nuclear plants increases the amount of sun rays being reflected back into space and so on.
                           
                           The kinetic energy of the wind is due to solar radiation and the energy from the sun, so anything that reduces this (clouds, buildings, solar panels, etc) is reducing the amount of wind, too. Of course this is not how it actually works, but it's just me trying to say all the wind energy is due to the sun, the rotation of the Earth helps spread this energy in the form of wind but is not the only nor major source of wind. The Coriolis effect on wind is a lot smaller than the other N-S and Up-Down movements. See this image: http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_q8kQPMI5s4o/R … +belts.gif the rotation only causes the deviation not the actual wind.
                           
                           Almost 2am, I hope the reply makes sense and is not written crazily.
                           
                           P.S: Yes, I have been away for a bit from the political forums, was busy trying to get a model to work, had some computer issues.

                           replyreport
            2. 93

               Tim Truzy info4uposted 5 years agoin reply to this

               Surely, we both know that. Besides, should everyone move away from living near interstates? Or down-towns? Or airports? All are noisy environments.

               replyreport
               1. 0

                  PrettyPantherposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                  Forgive me for not being sure. At least one Trumpeter offered a hilariously tortured explanation for how wind turbines could cause cancer.

                  replyreport
                  1. 93

                     Tim Truzy info4uposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                     That's o.k., p.p. lol

                     replyreport
               2. 96

                  wildernessposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                  Interesting question, and one I don't have an answer for.
                  
                  But I DO know that airports that are overtaken by residential growth fight a continual battle with residents about noise.  The Concord was barely allowed in the country because it was noisy.  There was a tremendous fight in my county when the Navy wanted to bring in the F-22, because of noise.  It was my understanding years ago that planes coming into National Airport (downtown DC) had to follow the windings of the Potomac to keep noise down over residences.
                  
                  I know I wouldn't live near an interstate or a railroad.  And I know that I won't live in an apartment complex because of noise.  Noise pollution is a very real problem, and windmills may (may) exacerbate it.  Particularly when they are in rural areas that had only crickets to make noise.
                  
                  Can't say about causing cancer, though - it seems far fetched to me, although it will certainly lower the bodies general health due to higher stress levels.  Hell, my grandkids staying over a couple of nights do that!

                  replyreport
                  1. 93

                     Tim Truzy info4uposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                     True, Wilderness. We live about a mile from a railroad tracks - yes, the trains coming by can be noisy, but trains are also good motivators for creativity. I love the sound of the lonesome train horn as it goes by. Willy Nelson and Cash always comes to mind. And this is a high valued area of the South Thanks.

                     replyreport
                  2. 89

                     lobobrandonposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                     I just wanted to get back to you about the Concord. The Concord was a problem not because of noise as in hearing, but noise as in the shockwave that was damaging buildings it flew over while reaching and taking off from airports.

                     replyreport
                     1. 96

                        wildernessposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                        You are correct - at least in that that was the fear.  I never did hear anything about any actual damage, though - reasonable as it did not fly over the speed of sound while near the ground.
                        
                        But I think we can rest assured that if it were a bit quieter, the fuss would have been about noise in the human ear.  It WAS considerably louder than other jets.

                        replyreport
                        1. 89

                           lobobrandonposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                           I see how that could be interpreted the wrong way. I meant that was the fear and sonic booms from a flight even if it were approaching at speeds greater than Mach 1 would not be sufficient to damage anything physically.
                           
                           It definitely was louder and today tech exists such that the boom is not loud at all, something like a car passing by to the human ear. Not sure how high up or what mach numbers they were considering though.

                           replyreport
      4. 89

         lobobrandonposted 5 years agoin reply to this

         Finally, the cat DP with common sense is back. Faith in cats has been restored.

         replyreport
         1. 0

            PrettyPantherposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            Hi lobo, I hadn't seen you since my return, so welcome back, too. :-)

            replyreport
            1. 89

               lobobrandonposted 5 years agoin reply to this

               Thanks and I wish you a speedy recovery Finally caught up with this thread, off to bed now. You have a nice day.

               replyreport
   2. 93

      Tim Truzy info4uposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Rats! lol

      replyreport
3. 66

   JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years ago

   Still wondering WHY Hupages allows ridiculous FAKE Discussions like this which was started by an orange moron: Social Media is BANNING nationalist type false narratives, I just hope Hupages "Cleans House" before they become outcasts relegated to Zero Traffic:

   replyreport
   1. 60

      Live to Learnposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      I'm impressed. Considering the fact that ' cleaning house' by your stated standards might get you permanently banned; that's incredibly big of you.

      replyreport
      1. 66

         JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this

         I'm NOT a nationalist like many around here, never was and never will be and they are the hate filled individuals unable to assimilate and who are being BANNED on major social media sites, not we the sane rational patriotic Americans who believe we are ALL God's Children:
         
         I start discussions based on FACT not Fiction like this one which is insanely ridiculous based on nothing but an oval office idiot's ignorant, mad public babblings, fake trash which just drags Hupages down into the cesspool of gutter nonsense, just like fake phony discussions started by nationalists that suggest or ask if Great American Hero John McCain is a traitor, or saying Climate Change is a HOAX or still debatable when it's not: Nationalist garbage which is finally being rooted out by social media:

         replyreport
   2. 88

      MizBejabbersposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Aw, c'mon, Earthshine, if that's the criteria, then HP would have to ban all discussions of Trump's ridiculous policies, statements, etc.

      replyreport
      1. 66

         JAKE Earthshineposted 5 years agoin reply to this

         
         
         It will SAVE Hupage's reputation in the long run: WHY would anyone start a discussion based on a FAKE Topic started by nationalists anyway? Just because we must endure and tolerate an angry ivy league certified nut case clown in the oval office hopefully not for too much longer, doesn't mean this site should be transformed into a place with a reputation for FALSE Narratives right?

         replyreport