dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
4288
share rss forum feed

garys_2k
Premium
join:2004-05-07
Farmington, MI
Reviews:
·Callcentric
·callwithus

1 edit

Another Reason to Not Use CFLs...

They can make you blind and give you cancer.

"The Effects of UV Emission from Compact Fluorescent Light Exposure on Human Dermal Fibroblasts and Keratinocytes In Vitro"

quote:
Abstract

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.

We all know how good the quality control for the CFL's electronics are, and how they sometimes can burst into flame. Now it appears that the fluorescent coating is put on so poorly that significant amounts of raw UV get out, too. Nice.

»onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1···abstract

wierdo

join:2001-02-16
Tulsa, OK

Unless you went blind and got cancer from the fluorescent lights in the office you've been working in for the last ten years, CFLs aren't going to make you blind or give you cancer. The glass itself absorbs most of the UV.
--
It's wierdo, not weirdo. Yes, I know that's not the 'proper' spelling of the similar english language word.


garys_2k
Premium
join:2004-05-07
Farmington, MI
Reviews:
·Callcentric
·callwithus

Did you read the Abstract? Much of the UV was NOT absorbed by the glass and, instead, fell on the cell cultures. That's why its a big deal.

"Regular" fluorescent lamps aren't built that poorly, the coating isn't cracked and UV is absorbed by the fluorescent layer.



cableties
Premium
join:2005-01-27

1 recommendation

reply to garys_2k

I never liked the CFLs. Ugly color temp. Yellowing base. Noise.
I know they have mercury in them (very low amount).
--
Splat


itguy05

join:2005-06-17
Carlisle, PA
reply to garys_2k

Halogen lamps also emit UV.
As do regular old fluorescent lights.

Much ado about nothing, IMHO. Especially since I'd say most are used in some sort of fixture that will include a glass cover.

Shame really as I like the look of Daylight CFL's much better than the nasty, ugly incandescent "soft white" light.



pike
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-01
Washington, DC
kudos:3

2 recommendations

said by itguy05:

Halogen lamps also emit UV.
As do regular old fluorescent lights.

Add to that list the Sun.

itguy05

join:2005-06-17
Carlisle, PA

2 recommendations

said by pike:

Add to that list the Sun.

Have not seen it in so long I forgot it was up there.


IIIBradIII
Comm M-E-L Instr

join:2000-09-28
Greer, SC
reply to itguy05

said by itguy05:

Halogen lamps also emit UV.

Quoted in the original post:
"No effect on cells, with or without TiO2 NPs, was observed when they were exposed to incandescent light of the same intensity."

The comparison appeared to be with CFLs and their couterpart, which are incandescents, not halogens.

itguy05

join:2005-06-17
Carlisle, PA

said by IIIBradIII:

said by itguy05:

Halogen lamps also emit UV.

Quoted in the original post:
"No effect on cells, with or without TiO2 NPs, was observed when they were exposed to incandescent light of the same intensity."

The comparison appeared to be with CFLs and their couterpart, which are incandescents, not halogens.

Yes but I believe the new "High efficiency" incandescents are halogen bulbs.

garys_2k
Premium
join:2004-05-07
Farmington, MI
Reviews:
·Callcentric
·callwithus
reply to itguy05

said by itguy05:

Halogen lamps also emit UV.
As do regular old fluorescent lights.

"Regular old fluorescent lights" have been found to be safe, »www.nema.org/Policy/Environmenta···20C7.pdf this issue is new.

I use plenty of them and am not going to rip out the ones I use, but I now won't use them in certain areas where line of sight is common or they're too close to the skin.

I don't know how well glass filters UVC, either.

garys_2k
Premium
join:2004-05-07
Farmington, MI
Reviews:
·Callcentric
·callwithus
reply to garys_2k

More about the study here:

»www.scientificamerican.com/artic···age-skin

Again, it's peculiar to CFLs and there's at least anecdotal evidence, aligned with these objective studies showing higher UV radiation, of health concerns. Not definitive yet, of course.


TheSMJ

join:2009-08-19
Farmington, MI

2 recommendations

I don't know.

Last month, coffee was going to kill me. This month, it's going to save my life. Next month it's going to kill me again.

My point being: These studies tend to show whatever the lab/author wants it to show. Unless any of these studies can show direct evidence of cancerous UV light causing my cells to go haywire, I'll stick CFL bulbs in any fixture I can.

...At least until LED bulbs become more affordable.



cdru
Go Colts
Premium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:7
reply to garys_2k

Slightly less pessimistic view of the research:

quote:
The team exposed healthy human keratinocytes and dermal fibroblasts to the CFL with the highest UV emissions at a distance of 2.5 cm for 2 hours at a time.
...
But in contrast to media depictions of “skin-frying” CFLs, researchers are reluctant to draw conclusions about consumer risk on the basis of these findings. “The UV measurement procedures are not described, so one cannot evaluate the data,” says Mats-Olof Mattsson, a cell biology professor at the Austrian Institute of Technology. The authors also reported higher UV emissions than other studies have found and did not follow international measurement standards he adds.

In vitro studies have limitations for assessing CFL impacts on skin because the intensity of light reaching the cells within skin is much less than the light intensity at the skin surface. Furthermore, says Harry Moseley, a photobiology professor at the University of Dundee, “Work carried out in vitro can be helpful to show the direct effect of UV radiation on the cells, [but] it doesn’t tell us how the body deals with any damage to the cells.”
So researchers found a possible issue when the source of light is extremely close for long period using no described measurement techniques and didn't follow international standards in the measurements. Seems pretty conclusive to me.

bemis

join:2008-07-18
Reading, MA
Reviews:
·Comcast
reply to garys_2k

This is some what scary because I do use CFL's quite a bit... in fact I have a "150W" (which are huge) that sits in a silver bowl clamp light, I use it for detail work, so I'm under it, at close range for a few hours at a time...

One thing I have noticed about CFLs is that the light tends to leave me night blind for longer... for example, in my bathroom I have two recessed lights and a vanity light... the vanity is incandescent bulbs and the recessed are CFLs. The emit about the same level of light in the room when position is considered... I started noticing that if I ran the CFLs (regardless of whether I run the vanity or not) when I turn the lights off my vision is completely blank for several seconds... if I run the vanity only, the same thing does not happen. The vanity consists of (4) 60W bulbs and is actually closer to eye level... the recessed are (2) 13W bulbs. That alone has had me a bit nervous as to what CFL light is doing to my eyes...



IIIBradIII
Comm M-E-L Instr

join:2000-09-28
Greer, SC
reply to itguy05

said by itguy05:

said by IIIBradIII:

said by itguy05:

Halogen lamps also emit UV.

Quoted in the original post:
"No effect on cells, with or without TiO2 NPs, was observed when they were exposed to incandescent light of the same intensity."

The comparison appeared to be with CFLs and their couterpart, which are incandescents, not halogens.

Yes but I believe the new "High efficiency" incandescents are halogen bulbs.

But this study found the problem was with the CFLs, nothing else.
--
»www.FlightSimWorld.com
Remember, there are old pilots and there are bold pilots, but there are no old bold pilots.
Flight Simulator


Subaru
1-3-2-4
Premium
join:2001-05-31
Greenwich, CT
kudos:1
reply to itguy05

said by itguy05:

Halogen lamps also emit UV.
As do regular old fluorescent lights.

Much ado about nothing, IMHO. Especially since I'd say most are used in some sort of fixture that will include a glass cover.

Shame really as I like the look of Daylight CFL's much better than the nasty, ugly incandescent "soft white" light.

Yeah I hate the soft whites, I ended up getting a 4100K bulb it's OK but it takes like 2-3 min to get full bright..

I can't fit my Maxlite bulb in the NuTone fan but I would really like that one it's instant start to full brightness but it's about 1/2 too long and I can't fit the cover on..

I ended up getting that maxlite and a 105 watt CFL from 1000 bulbs about 3 years ago, I would order more but you need a min order of like $20 before they shipped (unless they changed)
--
It's NOT Ni-kon It's NE-KON!




LG is NOT Lifes Good It's Lucky Goldstar!



SparkChaser
Premium
join:2000-06-06
Downingtown, PA
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS

1 edit
reply to garys_2k

You are basing all of this on an abstract? Or do you have the full paper.

Edit: saw your SA link, thanks

Another link »www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20···2738.htm



Dude111
An Awesome Dude
Premium
join:2003-08-04
USA
kudos:12
reply to garys_2k

 

Yes thank you,they are ugly and not good!!!!!

Your closer to them AT HOME than you are in public!!!!

I think they are disgusting to be honest.... NOT AS GOOD LIGHT,etc....



tmh

@verizon.net
reply to garys_2k

Re: Another Reason to Not Use CFLs...

said by garys_2k:

They can make you blind and give you cancer.

Mom said the same thing but after all this time, I can still see.


tmh

@verizon.net
reply to SparkChaser

said by SparkChaser:

You are basing all of this on an abstract? Or do you have the full paper.

Edit: saw your SA link, thanks

Another link »www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20···2738.htm

The question is still valid. This is a paysite.


Dude111
An Awesome Dude
Premium
join:2003-08-04
USA
kudos:12

 

Try changing your user agent,THE STORY DISPLAYED FINE FOR ME..



tmhj

@verizon.net

said by Dude111:

Try changing your user agent,THE STORY DISPLAYED FINE FOR ME..

My bad, I meant the Wiley one with the peer reviewed manuscript.

Guess I *am* going blind after all.


JustBurnt

@rr.com
reply to cableties

Re: Another Reason to Not Use CFLs...

said by cableties:

I never liked the CFLs. Ugly color temp. Yellowing base. Noise.
I know they have mercury in them (very low amount).

You can get CFLs in any color temperature you want, but it is so much easier to just complain about them.

Noise? Incandescents make noise too. Yellow Base? Why does that matter?


Raphion

join:2000-10-14
Samsara
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
reply to garys_2k

UV is really easy to block. A piece of clear polycarbonate plastic a half millimeter thick will block ALL the UV from a fluorescent lamp. They make sleeves for fluorescent tubes that both prevent them from making a mess if they're broken, and block all UV. Something similar should be relatively trivial to do for compacts.

But this is still a lot about nothing. The intensity of light from the sun is many thousands of times more than that from a compact fluorescent. Letting the sunlight hit your skin for 10 minutes would be equivalent to a year's exposure to CFL illumination.



alkizmo

join:2007-06-25
Pierrefonds, QC
kudos:1
reply to garys_2k

Elevated utility bills from incandescent lighting causes elevated blood pressure potentially leading to heart attacks, studies show.

I wonder had they put those cells under the sun light, if the results would be the same or worse than with fluorescent.



Raphion

join:2000-10-14
Samsara
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
reply to bemis

said by bemis:

This is some what scary because I do use CFL's quite a bit... in fact I have a "150W" (which are huge) that sits in a silver bowl clamp light, I use it for detail work, so I'm under it, at close range for a few hours at a time...

One thing I have noticed about CFLs is that the light tends to leave me night blind for longer... for example, in my bathroom I have two recessed lights and a vanity light... the vanity is incandescent bulbs and the recessed are CFLs. The emit about the same level of light in the room when position is considered... I started noticing that if I ran the CFLs (regardless of whether I run the vanity or not) when I turn the lights off my vision is completely blank for several seconds... if I run the vanity only, the same thing does not happen. The vanity consists of (4) 60W bulbs and is actually closer to eye level... the recessed are (2) 13W bulbs. That alone has had me a bit nervous as to what CFL light is doing to my eyes...

CFLs produce more blue light, which is what kills your night vision. A trick to preserve night vision without having to actually stay in the dark is to wear amber, or even better, red tinted goggles, or use amber or red lighting. Your 60 watt incandescent lamps are... you guessed it; amber in color.


goofy01

join:2004-02-05
Hammond, IN
reply to garys_2k

2.5 cm!?!?! I get a burn from an incandescent at that range over 2 hours.



jkj860
The Final Frontier

join:2002-01-10
Valparaiso, IN
reply to itguy05

said by itguy05:

said by pike:

Add to that list the Sun.

Have not seen it in so long I forgot it was up there.

That was funny! and quite true too!
--
I know you think you understand what you thought I said, but I am not sure you realize what you heard is not what I meant. Nixon

Kearnstd
Space Elf
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
kudos:1
reply to garys_2k

2.5cm is 1 inch. You cannot be with in one inch of any light, Even a standard table lamp the shade is at least 4 inches away if not more. and a standard height ceiling is 8ft off floor level so a normal height person is 2ft away even standing right under it.

These studies are full of shit, Do the test with CFLs at normal everyday distances and then get back to us.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports



jkj860
The Final Frontier

join:2002-01-10
Valparaiso, IN
reply to garys_2k

I pulled out a cfl bulb from a lamp that had went out after about 18 months. The base where the glass tube enters was somewhat melted and burned. That kind of concerns me.
--
I know you think you understand what you thought I said, but I am not sure you realize what you heard is not what I meant. Nixon