“Heart-Jamming” Wind Turbines …New Medical Research Confirms Infrasound Negatively Impacts Heart Health!

Share this...
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter

While German activists are growing hysterical over fine particle emissions from today’s relatively cleaner diesel automobiles, the German Allgemeine Zeitung here reports that researchers have determined that low-frequency infrasound from wind turbines indeed do have a negative impact on the human heart.

Infrasound from wind turbines can affect heart health, new findings show. Image: DrJanaOfficial – CC BY-SA 4.0

But no German court or regulatory agency seems at all concerned about it.

Recently a working group specializing in cardiac, thoracic and vascular surgery of the Mainz-based University Medical Center provided for a surprise with their research results from studies looking at infrasound’s impact on heart muscle.

Impacts human health

Infrasound has a frequency under 20 Hz and thus is not audible to the human ear. However the low frequency sound is physically perceptible at high sound pressure and lead to health consequences, a German medical researcher said.

Wind turbines convert 40 percent of the wind’s energy into power and 60 percent into infrasound, thus making them a real potential threat to human health.

The problem with wind turbines is that the infrasound exposure is long-term and can travel great distances.

Journalist Michael Bermeitinger interviewed Professor Christian-Friedrich VahlDepartment of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery (HTG) of the University Medical Center Mainz, on the subject.

Prof. Wahl became interested in infrasound and its impact on health after a friend who lived near a wind park had complained of feeling continuously sick. It is known that all around the world people living near wind parks often experience health issues – some being severe.

The group led by Prof. Vahl conducted an experiment to find out if infrasound has an effect on heart muscle strength. Under the measurement conditions, the force developed by isolated heart muscle was up to 20 percent less.

The strength of the heart muscle is important in the event the aortic valve becomes caked up and thus more narrow. According to Dr. Vahl: “This changes the blood flow and the flow noise.”

Now researchers are discussing whether these changes can pose an additional risk to the function of the heart, the Allgemeine Zeitung reported.

Citing the results, Prof. Vahl said: “The fundamental question of whether infrasound can affect the heart muscle has been answered.”

Infrasound a “heart jammer”

The next step for researchers will be to conduct measurements on humans, Dr Vahl told the Allgemeine Zeitung.

The researchers conclude: “We are at the very beginning, but we can imagine that long-term impact of infrasound causes health problems. The silent noise of infrasound acts like a heart jammer.”

Share this...
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter

32 responses to ““Heart-Jamming” Wind Turbines …New Medical Research Confirms Infrasound Negatively Impacts Heart Health!”

  1. Bitter&twisted

    Where’s the Precautionary Principle”, cited ad nauseum by Alarmists, when you actually need it?

    This is yet another disastrous outcome of erecting 1000s of unreliable, bat- bursting, bird-bashing, ecocrucifixes to assuage the virtue-signallers.

    Each and every one of these monstrosities needs destroying.💥
    And sooner rather than later.

    1. SebastianH

      Wow, you have a strong opinion about wind turbines … are you maybe suffering from the Wind turbine syndrome?

      Our expertly qualified blogger writes above:

      researchers have determined that low-frequency infrasound from wind turbines indeed do have a negative impact on the human heart.

      Which is not what that article says about the research. The researches have found out that a 3 mm heart tissue sample is influences by infrasound coming from very closeby industrial speaker. Nothing more, nothing less.

  2. dodgy geezer

    The next stage is fairly straightforward. Survey people living close to turbines for increased cardiac issues. Should be a simple study…

  3. John F. Hultquist

    The problem with wind turbines is that the infrasound exposure is long-term and can travel great distances.

    I wonder what “great distances” means.
    Does the effect drop off with distance in a linear or power law relationship. There are large towers 10 mi. west and another set 15 miles east. There are several small (home style) units much closer.
    Also, this seems to be one of those things that people experience differently.
    I’ll guess this doesn’t get much traction.

    1. beowulf

      John
      Don’t forget infrasound can travel over VERY great distances via micro-seismicity through rock, far better than through less dense air. It depends on the geology of your area. The sound travels from the base of the turbine tower, through denser rock and can reappear in your home which then acts as a sound-box to amplify the effect, rather like the body of a guitar. Just another possible vector for infrasound we need to worry about.

      1. SebastianH

        Maybe this paper will help you compare the infrasound level of wind turbines to other sources of infrasound:
        https://www.acoustics.asn.au/journal/2012/2012_40_1_Turnbull.pdf “MEASUREMENT AND LEVEL OF INFRASOUND FROM WIND FARMS AND OTHER SOURCES”

        Results: the sound level is less than near a gas fired power station and comparable to living near a beach or a major road.

        I don’t know about minimum distances of wind turbines to settlements in your country, but in Germany the distance is quite large.

        1. Phil Cooper

          Hi Sebastian
          It is state dependant, in Baden-Württemberg it is 700M, In my mind this is not quite large, considering ice throw has been recorded at 800M. In Bavaria it is 10X the turbine height..

        2. Kurt in Switzerland

          Seb,

          Please do some original research of your own.

          Let us know the nearest large-scale wind farm in your region, apply to pitch a tent there for a week, take the opportunity to actually “walk the walk” and then get back to tell us about your experience.

          It’ll be a proverbial win-win: you can do something for ‘carbon-free’ energy, earn some genuine credentials as a field researcher and we can have a week off from your incessant whining.

        3. 4TimesAYear

          Why is that talking about “audible” infrasound? It’s that that you can’t hear that does the damage. http://en.friends-against-wind.org/health/infrasound-and-lfn

  4. Patrick Swords

    This effect was known about and researched in an industrial setting in the DDR and elsewhere long before populace went into mass hysteria again in Germany (Klimaangst):

    Wysocki, K. ; Schultz, K. ; Wieg, P. (1980) Experimentelle Untersuchungen zum Einflul3 von Infraschalldruck auf den Menschen (Experimental studies of the influence of infrasonic noise on the human organism). Z. f. die ges. Hyg. und ihre Grenzgebiete 26 (6): 436 – 440.

  5. sasquatch

    I was looking through a history website and found an interesting ditty from merry old England.

    It reads: The British Parliament invoked a law that made it a crime, punishable by burning at the stake, to forecast the weather.

    You can’t make this stuff up.

    The year was 1649. Might cause some heart failure, the fright of it all, for the AGW crowd. Especially after they are tied to the stake while the wood is being stacked around them, that’s when they can begin to worry. just kidding, can’t do that, wouldn’t be prudent.

    You know how those English blokes can be rather tenacious when it comes to meting out just punishments. lol

    The heretic Climate Alarmists need to be recanting their crazy climate models that didn’t come true, all fabrications, fake climate predictions, ersatz, bogus, a fraud.

    The Arctic Ocean is still in sea ice mode, so that is one strike too many right then and there.

    There is a judgment day for the Climate Alarmists, the sentence can be commuted, though. The guilty can be pardoned of all charges, acquitted convicted, after the apostasy and recanting are all down on paper. Can’t be too tough on them, they can use some sympathy these days.

    Then after the freeing of the guilty, they can be assigned the task of decommissioning all 347,000 wind turbines that are trashing ecosystems everywhere they go.

    The pious AGW fake greens and all of their yelling and screaming, crybullying their way to get their way and greenwashing everybody and their brother, has caused this mess. They can clean it up and can get to work right now.

    Be good for their hearts, everybody’s for that matter.

    1. SebastianH

      Interesting comment. So you want to punish climate scientists and at the same time not punish them but they should decommission wind turbines.

      I’m afraid you are one of those who have it backwards. Models get refined constantly and the mess we are in was greated by not acting for decades despite knowing that we inevitably have to act. As on smaller scale, mankind is all about getting the immediate fix instead of working on a longterm fix for problems.

      Let’s clean up coal power plants first. Looks like we are at peak coal anyway.

      1. Kenneth Richard

        the mess we are in was greated by not acting for decades

        And what if the “acting” that we are doing now or that we could have done then is so inconsequential that its subsidization, its wrecking of our natural landscapes, its forestclearing and habitat-destroying implementation…do more harm than benefit to the environment?

        1. SebastianH

          And what if the “acting” that we are doing now or that we could have done […] do more harm than benefit to the environment

          It’s not. Go ahead and cite a random study of spending money only causing a 0.x °C reduction in global temperature in 2100. We are not talking about the kind of acting from the Paris agreement. We are talking about almost complete decarbonization and negative CO2 emissions level of “acting”.

          its wrecking of our natural landscapes, its forestclearing and habitat-destroying implementation

          Oh, you mean the large scale extraction of fossil fuel?

          1. Kenneth Richard

            We are talking about almost complete decarbonization and negative CO2 emissions level of “acting”.

            Which is not even remotely possible. It’s fantasy.

            http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/11/21/renewable_energy_simply_wont_work_google_renewables_engineers/
            “Two highly qualified Google engineers who have spent years studying and trying to improve renewable energy technology have stated quite bluntly that renewables will never permit the human race to cut CO2 emissions to the levels demanded by climate activists. Whatever the future holds, it is not a renewables-powered civilisation: such a thing is impossible.”

            “Both men are Stanford PhDs, Ross Koningstein having trained in aerospace engineering and David Fork in applied physics. These aren’t guys who fiddle about with websites or data analytics or ‘technology’ of that sort: they are real engineers who understand difficult maths and physics, and top-bracket even among that distinguished company. The duo were employed at Google on the RERenewable energy technologies simply won’t work; we need a fundamentally different approach.”

            Oh, you mean the large scale extraction of fossil fuel?

            No, I meant wind turbines. Did you really not know this, or were you just being dishonest again by pretending like I meant fossil fuel extraction? I assume the latter.

          2. SebastianH

            Which is not even remotely possible. It’s fantasy.

            It should make you very skeptical when something like that requires a paragraph praising their qualifications like this 😉

            The whole comment over there sounds questionable and very much like something one of you guys could have written.

            Assertions that using renewables would require even more energy or that even just powering the electrical grid with renewables seems impossible are undermined by countries which already go for days or months on renewables and countries that vastly increased their usage of renewables while at the same time reducing their primary power consumption.

            Kenneth, I am not a “not possible” kind of guy. I don’t find engineering problems impossible and I don’t find AGW impossible. The only limits are the laws of physics. And the surface of this planet receives more energy from our central fusion reactor than we can possibly “consume” in the foreseeable future.

          3. Kenneth Richard

            The whole comment over there sounds questionable and very much like something one of you guys could have written.

            We didn’t write it. It was written by “stalwart environmentalists” who believe in AGW alarmism and cite Dr. James Hansen in saying “we must move rapidly not just to lessened but to zero carbon emissions”. And these Ph.D scientists (a physicist, an aerospace engineer) disagree with you that this can be done.

            “…stalwart environmentalists like Koningstein and Fork – and many others – remain convinced that the dangers of carbon-driven warming are real and massive. Indeed the pair reference the famous NASA boffin Dr James Hansen, who is more or less the daddy of modern global warming fears, and say like him that we must move rapidly not just to lessened but to zero carbon emissions (and on top of that, suck a whole lot of CO2 out of the air by such means as planting forests).”

          4. SebastianH

            Reply got deleted again?

            Wow, I was merely noticing that by “The whole comment” I meant the article/comment on The Register written by Lewis Page, not what those two Google scientists wrote.

            Anyways, the laws of physics are the limit. Not the willingsness of petrol heads.

  6. Richard Mann

    Hello from Ontario, Canada. Please see the following article, and the comments following, which document ongoing harm in rural Ontario. The most recent entry, October 19, 2018, describes adverse cardiac events.

    http://cmajblogs.com/health-canada-and-wind-turbines-too-little-too-late/

    Richard

    1. Sommer

      Look at what Dr. Mariana Alves-Pereira said in a presentation she gave in May of this year to professionals in Slovenia about the harm from LFN and infrasound from turbines.
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZXCZ3OyklrE
      She has publicly stated that with what she now knows, she would not live within 20 km from a wind turbine.
      Why are people being forced to live much, much closer than that to these turbines?

  7. Rita Holmes

    Hi from Fairlie in Ayrshire Scotland UK. Some of us in our village and another village on an island of Cumbrae opposite us suffered severe health impacts whilst the two offshore sized wind turbines here were being tested 2.5km from us. We had no help whatsoever from Health Protection people, Environmental Health Officers or government and had to start investigating ourselves.Scottish and Southern Energy running the Test Facility was in total denial that infrasound from these wind turbines, a Siemens machine and a Mitsubishi Sea Angel could be the cause. Mitsubishi had blade diameter of 165m and an output of 7MW. When it turned even just idling I was rendered unable to walk properly, and at its worst I could not speak intelligibly or think.Thankfully on June 30th this year both ceased operation and symptoms have disappeared. I can only describe what we were exposed to for four years,each time one was switched on, as torture.Those affected described heart palpitations,feeling as though they were wearing lead jackets and having to make themselves breathe as their chests felt compressed. We experienced nausea, earache, headaches and exhaustion. This only happened when one or both turbines were turning. None of us are opposed to wind turbines in general, but the infrasound they generate can cause severe health problems. They need to be well away from humans and animals and in my case 8km from the Mitsubishi Sea Angel was not far enough away to negate symptoms.

  8. Penelope

    wikipedia:
    “Elephants also produce infrasound waves that travel through solid ground and are sensed by other herds using their feet, although they may be separated by hundreds of kilometres. ”


    “Infrasound from distant artificial sources has been detected at 2 Hz by a chain of stations in Sweden. A number of infrasound sources were located and identified as hydroelectric power plants, industrial plants, and oil fields. The infrasound from distant artificial sources propagates with reflections in the upper atmosphere: during summer mainly with reflections in the stratospheric sound channel and during winter with reflections in the upper sound channel.” Abstract of one of a short list of articles here https://physicstoday.scitation.org/doi/pdf/10.1063/1.883019

    Of course detection is a long way from human perception or harm, but . . . . “Wind turbines convert 40 percent of the wind’s energy into power and 60 percent into infrasound” — Pierre. WOW & OWW

    1. SebastianH

      “Wind turbines convert 40 percent of the wind’s energy into power and 60 percent into infrasound” — Pierre. WOW & OWW

      [citation needed]

      According to Betz’s law, no turbine can capture more than 16/27 (59.3%) of the kinetic energy in wind. The factor 16/27 (0.593) is known as Betz’s coefficient. Practical utility-scale wind turbines achieve at peak 75% to 80% of the Betz limit.[2][3]

      (link)

      Doesn’t mean the part not captured becomes infrasound emissions. Also, a 2 MW wind turbine would then output 1.2 MW (or 3 MW depending on what the percentage is taken from) of infrasound. That would be very very loud, don’t you think? A true skeptic would have questioned such an assertion.

  9. Energy^2

    “No device can produce sum useful energy in excess of the total energy put into constructing it, due to wear and tear internal to matter” (The Fifth Law).

    Assuming none of our fossil fuels-built industrial base, that we have built since the steam engine, is around: grow forests and forge an axe to cut more woods and construct a waterwheel.

    Run the wheel and it will never endure in one piece to produce the sum useful energy matching any of the total solar energy the woods burned for making the axe and the woods cut with the axe to build the wheel – were exposed to – over the decades of the experiment.

    Not to mention the solar energy necessary to grow foods and sustain humans with shelter, maintaining their well-being, knowledge transfer and the build of a simple industrial base – in the process.

    This will happen regardless of the water is still flowing in the river and the Sun still shining everyday.

    The waterwheel wasn’t possible to come to existence without waiting for the forest to grow dense-enough and the time taken to construct the wheel.

    The strength and sound design of the wheel dictate how much Energy could ever be captured from the river – not the ‘free’ Energy-potential flowing in the river.

    This means it is the decades-long exposure to solar (and Life) – not the Energy in the river – is what has dictated the amount of hydro energy was possibly captured:

    Energy always and only comes from the past into the future.

    This is a universal across all energy-producing devices: waterwheels, the Sun, AI, quantum computers, nuclear, fusion, solar, wind, hydro – and you name it.

  10. Delingpole: Wind Turbines Can Harm Heart, Says German Professor – REAL News 45

    […] According to NoTricksZone: […]

  11. Wind Turbines Can Harm Heart, Says German Professor | Headline of the Day

    […] According to NoTricksZone: […]

  12. Delingpole: Wind Turbines Can Harm Heart, Says German Professor – IOTW Report

    […] According to NoTricksZone: […]

  13. Jim Feasel

    This lady has been studying the effects of infrasound on human health for 30 years. Scary stuff.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZXCZ3OyklrE

  14. Energy & Environmental Newsletter: November 12, 2018 - Master Resource

    […] New Medical Research Confirms Infrasound Negatively Impacts Heart Health! […]

  15. Energy And Environmental Newsletter – November 12th 2018 | PA Pundits - International

    […] New Medical Research Confirms Infrasound Negatively Impacts Heart Health! […]

  16. Green Energy is the Perfect Scam – Energy And Environmental Newsletter – November 12th 2018 – Newsfeed – Hasslefree allsorts

    […] New Medical Research Confirms Infrasound Negatively Impacts Heart Health! […]

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this. More information at our Data Privacy Policy

Close