{"id":15638,"date":"2011-06-21T15:44:40","date_gmt":"2011-06-21T19:44:40","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.windturbinesyndrome.com\/static\/static\/?p=15638"},"modified":"2012-01-21T12:31:31","modified_gmt":"2012-01-21T17:31:31","slug":"pierpont-and-laurie-discuss-wind-turbine-syndrome-cape-cod-mass","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.windturbinesyndrome.com\/static\/2011\/pierpont-and-laurie-discuss-wind-turbine-syndrome-cape-cod-mass\/","title":{"rendered":"Pierpont & Laurie discuss Wind Turbine Syndrome (Cape Cod, Mass.)"},"content":{"rendered":"

Click here<\/a> for a Webinar<\/a> with Drs. Pierpont and Laurie, 6\/14\/11, put on by\u00a0Windwise~Cape Cod<\/a>.
\n\u00b7<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

\u00b7<\/span>
\nEditor’s note<\/em>: \u00a0In her book, “Wind Turbine Syndrome,” Pierpont ended her discussion of peer review<\/a> with the following:<\/span><\/p>\n

In the case of this book, a variety of scientists and physicians, all\u00a0professors at medical schools or university departments of biology,\u00a0read and commented on the manuscript and recommended it as\u00a0an important contribution to knowledge and conforming to the\u00a0canons of clinical and scientific research. \u00a0 Moreover, they did in fact\u00a0suggest revisions, even substantial revisions and additions, all of\u00a0which I made. Some gave me written reports to include in the book\u00a0itself. See “Referee Reports.” Others offered to review the book\u00a0after it was published.<\/span><\/p>\n

That said, the litmus test of scientific validity is not peer review,\u00a0which, after all, is not infallible, as the history of science amply\u00a0demonstrates. Peer review is an important first step in judging\u00a0scientific or scholarly merit. Still, the ultimate test is whether\u00a0other scientists can follow the author\u2019s research protocol and get\u00a0the same results, or if different lines of research point to the same\u00a0conclusions.<\/span><\/p>\n

That, of course, remains to be seen with this report.<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

I am happy to report that confirmation no longer “remains to be seen.” \u00a0Dr. Sarah Laurie’s research in Australia is daily confirming Pierpont’s case for Wind Turbine Syndrome. \u00a0(Click here<\/a> for a PDF of Dr. Laurie’s Cape Cod PowerPoint presentation.)<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Click here for a Webinar with Drs. Pierpont and Laurie, 6\/14\/11, put on by\u00a0Windwise~Cape Cod. \u00b7 \u00b7 Editor’s note: \u00a0In her book, “Wind Turbine Syndrome,” Pierpont ended her discussion of peer review with the following: In the case of this book, a variety of scientists and physicians, all\u00a0professors at medical schools or university departments of biology,\u00a0read and commented on the manuscript and recommended it as\u00a0an important contribution to knowledge and conforming to the\u00a0canons of clinical and scientific research. \u00a0 Moreover, they did in fact\u00a0suggest revisions, even substantial revisions and additions, all of\u00a0which I made. Some gave me written reports to include in the book\u00a0itself. See “Referee Reports.” Others offered to review the book\u00a0after it was published. That said, the litmus test of scientific validity is not peer review,\u00a0which, after all, is not infallible, as the history of science amply\u00a0demonstrates. Peer review is an important first step in judging\u00a0scientific or scholarly merit. Still, the ultimate test is whether\u00a0other scientists can follow the author\u2019s research protocol and get\u00a0the same results, or if different lines of research point to the same\u00a0conclusions. That, of course, remains to be seen with this report. I am happy to report that confirmation no longer “remains to be seen.” \u00a0Dr. Sarah Laurie’s research in Australia is daily confirming Pierpont’s case for Wind Turbine Syndrome. \u00a0(Click here for a PDF of Dr. Laurie’s Cape Cod PowerPoint presentation.)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[163,16],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.windturbinesyndrome.com\/static\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15638"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.windturbinesyndrome.com\/static\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.windturbinesyndrome.com\/static\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.windturbinesyndrome.com\/static\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.windturbinesyndrome.com\/static\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=15638"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.windturbinesyndrome.com\/static\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15638\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.windturbinesyndrome.com\/static\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=15638"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.windturbinesyndrome.com\/static\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=15638"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.windturbinesyndrome.com\/static\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=15638"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}