The scientists, led by Miriam Rafailovich, collected CFL bulbs from across Long Island to measure the amount of UV the bulbs gave off. They were alarmed thow many of the bulbs' phosphor coatings were lacking, causing them to leak significant levels of UVC and UVA.
“Our study revealed that the response of healthy skin cells to UV emitted from CFL bulbs is consistent with damage from ultraviolet radiation,” said Rafailovich.
“Despite their large energy savings, consumers should be careful when using compact fluorescent light bulbs. Our research shows that it is best to avoid using them at close distances and that they are safest when placed behind an additional glass cover.”
Healthy human skin tissue cells, including fibroblasts, a type of cell found in connective tissue that produces collagen, and keratinocytes, an epidermal cell that produces keratin, were damaged by the CFL radiation.
Old-fashioned incandescent light bulbs of the same intensity were found to have no adverse affect on the same cells
__________________ "I have no issues with people of all types being here, I do have a problem with the more extreme ends of any spectrum trying to dominate and push out moderates and opposites." Bill Plein
I agree. But I don't agree with the intent in which this OP was posted. To imply that we shouldn't improve and try to reduce our consumption is what I disagree with. Seems that too many of us are unwilling to improve and squelch anything that may be beneficial later. I am not a fan of the new bulbs but we do need to think ahead and find solutions. DH does nothing to improve, just bitch blaming anyone who he dislikes as the reason for his personal failings. America use to work together for solutions, now we sit on our asses, mooching off the previous generations work and innovations, unwilling to expend a nickle or sweat to make the world better. All innovations come at a cost. So the bulb under certain circumstances cause skin cancer, so did poorly designed microwave ovens. Why not work to take another step instead of bitching? It certainly not the Mexicans fault as much as Dirty fairy would like to blame. The report even states that there are ways to alleviate the chance of contacting skin cancer. Its hypocritical to post this story yet complain if the other side posts a equally stupid article.
__________________ "I have no issues with people of all types being here, I do have a problem with the more extreme ends of any spectrum trying to dominate and push out moderates and opposites." Bill Plein
The air just gets cleaner and we don't even burn as much energy as we used to,
dispite the myopic views of selfish buffoons like you who constantly whine about EPA and the regulations that were imposed that reduced the waste and cleaned the air.
__________________ "I have no issues with people of all types being here, I do have a problem with the more extreme ends of any spectrum trying to dominate and push out moderates and opposites." Bill Plein
Compact fluorescent light (CFL) bulbs can provide the same amount of lumens as incandescent light bulbs, using one quarter of the energy. Recently, CFL exposure was found to exacerbate existing skin conditions; however, the effects of CFL exposure on healthy skin tissue have not been thoroughly investigated. In this study, we studied the effects of exposure to CFL illumination on healthy human skin tissue cells (fibroblasts and keratinocytes). Cells exposed to CFLs exhibited a decrease in the proliferation rate, a significant increase in the production of reactive oxygen species, and a decrease in their ability to contract collagen. Measurements of UV emissions from these bulbs found significant levels of UVC and UVA (mercury [Hg] emission lines), which appeared to originate from cracks in the phosphor coatings, present in all bulbs studied. The response of the cells to the CFLs was consistent with damage from UV radiation, which was further enhanced when low dosages of TiO2 nanoparticles (NPs), normally used for UV absorption, were added prior to exposure. No effect on cells, with or without TiO2 NPs, was observed when they were exposed to incandescent light of the same intensity.
Compact fluorescent light (CFL) bulbs can provide the same amount of lumens as incandescent light bulbs, using one quarter of the energy. Recently, CFL exposure was found to exacerbate existing skin conditions; however, the effects of CFL exposure on healthy skin tissue have not been thoroughly investigated. In this study, we studied the effects of exposure to CFL illumination on healthy human skin tissue cells (fibroblasts and keratinocytes). Cells exposed to CFLs exhibited a decrease in the proliferation rate, a significant increase in the production of reactive oxygen species, and a decrease in their ability to contract collagen. Measurements of UV emissions from these bulbs found significant levels of UVC and UVA (mercury [Hg] emission lines), which appeared to originate from cracks in the phosphor coatings, present in all bulbs studied. The response of the cells to the CFLs was consistent with damage from UV radiation, which was further enhanced when low dosages of TiO2 nanoparticles (NPs), normally used for UV absorption, were added prior to exposure. No effect on cells, with or without TiO2 NPs, was observed when they were exposed to incandescent light of the same intensity.
The point is obvious. The government has no right to tell me what type of light bulb to use. Everything we use has a risk of some type. Allow us to manage the risk, not the government. If there is a risk of skin cancer from a light bulb, I can handle it in my house.
Have you ever tried going into your garage when its below zero and not being able to see because these CFL bulbs don't work well in the cold? Source of argument, me. So to combat the government intrusion, I have a lifetime supply of the necessary bulbs to make my garage and porch bright when needed.
See what happens when the government and eco freaks start messing with things...its starts out looking good on paper until you apply it in the real world and find out you traded one problem for another one thats just as potentially deadly!
See what happens when the government and eco freaks start messing with things...its starts out looking good on paper until you apply it in the real world and find out you traded one problem for another one thats just as potentially deadly!
So you suggest we do nothing and except the status quo? The reason for the article is to encourage proper installation and make sure that we know they need to be covered in a fixture. Don't like them, go back to beeswax candles or kerosene lamps. I am sure there were plenty of people complaining then about the incandescent bulb. Remember that during the early days of electrical installation they didn't believe in grounding.
__________________ "I have no issues with people of all types being here, I do have a problem with the more extreme ends of any spectrum trying to dominate and push out moderates and opposites." Bill Plein
The point is obvious. The government has no right to tell me what type of light bulb to use. Everything we use has a risk of some type. Allow us to manage the risk, not the government. If there is a risk of skin cancer from a light bulb, I can handle it in my house.
Have you ever tried going into your garage when its below zero and not being able to see because these CFL bulbs don't work well in the cold? Source of argument, me. So to combat the government intrusion, I have a lifetime supply of the necessary bulbs to make my garage and porch bright when needed.
As in many areas, as the need arises there will be an answer that will follow. There will be cold weather applications of bulbs that will develope, just as there are continuing improvements in the energy saving lightbulbs. I have little love for the cfc bulbs but I have purchased a few that are much better now than the initial offering.
__________________ "I have no issues with people of all types being here, I do have a problem with the more extreme ends of any spectrum trying to dominate and push out moderates and opposites." Bill Plein
So you suggest we do nothing and except the status quo? The reason for the article is to encourage proper installation and make sure that we know they need to be covered in a fixture. Don't like them, go back to beeswax candles or kerosene lamps. I am sure there were plenty of people complaining then about the incandescent bulb. Remember that during the early days of electrical installation they didn't believe in grounding.
No dummy, he never said any of what you claim he did and neither did I, your just putting false words in peoples mouths and claiming they mean it.
It really comes down to having a choice to use which ever bulbs we prefer to use, it's called freedom of choice in america. Since our air is now so much cleaner and our energy use has declined even with more illegal aliens mooching of our infrastructure we can use any bulbs we want to.
The point is obvious. The government has no right to tell me what type of light bulb to use. Everything we use has a risk of some type. Allow us to manage the risk, not the government. If there is a risk of skin cancer from a light bulb, I can handle it in my house.
Have you ever tried going into your garage when its below zero and not being able to see because these CFL bulbs don't work well in the cold? Source of argument, me. So to combat the government intrusion, I have a lifetime supply of the necessary bulbs to make my garage and porch bright when needed.
I hate cfc bulbs, I have a nice stock of regular bulbs that work just fine, harm nobody, and I'm fine with the few extra dollars they cost, plus they do give off heat and that's just fine with me in the winter.
So you suggest we do nothing and except the status quo? The reason for the article is to encourage proper installation and make sure that we know they need to be covered in a fixture. Don't like them, go back to beeswax candles or kerosene lamps. I am sure there were plenty of people complaining then about the incandescent bulb. Remember that during the early days of electrical installation they didn't believe in grounding.
No I would suggest that instead of doing something stupid just to get something done how about find a real solution thats a safe alternative. I know...that would sound a little too much like right, wouldnt it?
So you suggest we do nothing and except the status quo? The reason for the article is to encourage proper installation and make sure that we know they need to be covered in a fixture. Don't like them, go back to beeswax candles or kerosene lamps. I am sure there were plenty of people complaining then about the incandescent bulb. Remember that during the early days of electrical installation they didn't believe in grounding.
That is a thought, but we also have to keep in mind that everyone is going to have a different point of view. I am not saying that candles and lamps are better, but I am thinking that with all the technology we have along with all the varied opinions we have around the world... eventually this will be solved and people don't have to possibly worry about getting cancer.
Linear Mode
