photostill

Energy-efficient CFL bulbs cause skin damage, say researchers
By Caroline May

New research funded by the National Science Foundation has scientists warning consumers about the potentially harmful effects energy-saving CFL light bulbs can have on skin.

The warning comes based on a study conducted by Stony Brook University and New York State Stem Cell Science — published in the June issue of Photochemistry and Photobiology — which looked at whether and how the invisible UV rays CFL bulbs emit affect the skin.

Based on the research, scientists concluded that CFL light bulbs can be harmful to healthy skin cells.

“Our study revealed that the response of healthy skin cells to UV emitted from CFL bulbs is consistent with damage from ultraviolet radiation,” said lead researcher Miriam Rafailovich, Professor of Materials Science and Engineering at Stony Brook University, in New York, in a statement. “Skin cell damage was further enhanced when low dosages of TiO2 nanoparticles were introduced to the skin cells prior to exposure.”

According to Rafailovich, with or without TiO2 (a chemical found in sunblock), incandescent bulbs of the same light intensity had zero effects on healthy skin.

The scientists found that cracks in the CFL bulbs phosphor coatings yielded significant levels of UVC and UVA in all of the bulbs — purchased in different locations across two counties — they examined.

With high levels of ultraviolet radiation present, the researchers delved into how the exposure affected the skin. According to the findings, skin damage from exposure to CFLs was consistent with harm caused by ultraviolet radiation.

“Despite their large energy savings, consumers should be careful when using compact fluorescent light bulbs,” said Rafailovich. “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.”

The research was inspired by a similar 2008 European study conducted by the Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks which found a potential for skin damage and suggested the use of double-enveloped bulbs as a mitigation tool.

CFLs have been the source of political rumblings since 2007 when Congress approved new energy standards that would have started to phase out the traditional incandescent light bulb in favor of the energy-efficient CFL bulb this year. In December, Congress offered a provision to prevent the Department of Energy from enforcing the standards for nine months. The regulation is still on the books.

The restriction on consumer choice has represented a political battle cry for Tea Partiers and conservatives alike who view the regulation as an infringement on individual liberty. Environmentalists and CFL proponents argue the bulbs are environmentally friendly and economically efficient.


You know, I've always had a problem with these bulbs. The fact that they contain mercury is the big problem. Mercury doesn't just disappear into the soil and that's the end of it. It eventually, like everything else either ends in the ocean or it ends in a collection place. Once there it sinks to the bottom where the bottom feeders get it into their systems while eating. Once it is in the fish, it stays in the fish until something eats it when it is dead. Whatever eats it then absorbs the mercury from the flesh of that scavenger. Mercury poisoning isn't a nice thing to have.

To quote Wikipedia:

Quote:

Many of the toxic effects of mercury are partially or wholly reversible, either through specific therapy or through natural elimination of the metal after exposure has been discontinued. However, heavy or prolonged exposure can do irreversible damage, in particular in fetuses, infants, and young children. Young's syndrome is believed to be a long term consequence of early childhood mercury poisoning.Mercuric chloride may cause cancer as it has caused increases in several types of tumors in rats and mice, while methyl mercury has caused kidney tumors in male rats. The EPA has classified mercuric chloride and methyl mercury as possible human carcinogens (ATSDR, EPA)

Now they didn't say reversing the toxic effects were easy. Nor did they say continued exposure wouldn't make it worse, far from that. How do you remove mercury from the environment once it is there? You can't. So it means giving up the fish to eat.

Quote:

Minamata disease sometimes referred to as Chisso-Minamata disease is a neurological syndrome caused by severe mercury poisoning. Symptoms include ataxia, numbness in the hands and feet, general muscle weakness, narrowing of the field of vision and damage to hearing and speech. In extreme cases, insanity, paralysis, coma, and death follow within weeks of the onset of symptoms. A congenital form of the disease can also affect foetuses in the womb.

Minamata Bay is contaminated with mercury.

These bulbs all contain mercury. While each one isn't a huge amount, put it in a land fill and it becomes measurable.

I have two of these bulbs in my house. They are in a ceiling fan. With the vibration the fan produces there is no way in hell they don't have cracks in the coatings. However they are behind glass and metal and that by itself will ensure that the UV problem stated in this article won't be an issue in my home. It's a fine way to demonstrate how regulatory capture of government regulations that have decided that the old incandescent bulb is no longer to be sold in favor of a more expensive solution has worked. No one actually checked the long term safety like they do drugs. All the politicians just took the industries word at it was more efficient.

So what else have we not discovered about this mandated product? It also raises concerns about other actions the government is taking while intruding into our lives on behalf of special interest groups and industries. It's only later you find out about the possibilities that it may not be as good as billed for acceptance.

__________________

You can help this site, by clicking on the link below to buy a Premium Account.
& Thank you for helping us. Click;