There is a massive difference between controlled burning at high temperatures in a power station and a little wood burner someone might have in their home.

Well, depends on how it's done. A wood burning stove in a regular one family house, where daddy is more concerned about the cost of the firewood than its water content is terrible yes.

A power/heating plant with proper monitoring of the combustion and filtering of the smoke is definitely no worse than a coal burning plant.

I dunno. I have an airtight stove as the only source of heat. We don't have gas or oil available out in the remote parts of Canada so wood heat is much healthier than freezing to death. Cutting, splitting, and hauling the wood keeps me in remarkably good health and the design of an airtight stove and functional lined chimney stack means I don't breathe smoke or particular matter and efficiency is remarkably high.

The wood used is not fed with industrial fertilizer, it doesn't require clearing the land to grow, and it doesn't require irrigation or ongoing maintenance. 100% of the carbon it contains was sucked out of the air not mined from the foundations of the Earth. It is completely carbon neutral.

I would go as far as saying wood heat is fantastic for human health.

Wood fires around your home: yes. Wood fires in power plants, instead of coal: probably not a big deal. Power plants already have extensive measures in place to clean their smoke.