|
|
December 06, 2005
Sunlight, Lighting And Your Health (Dangers Of Fluorescent Lighting)
"The writer draws the attention to the common claim that fluorescent lights are more efficient than orthodox Edison light bulbs. It is true that fluorescent lamps are more efficient to the tune of some thirty to eighty per cent (30 - 80%) but at a high health risk cost."
"As always of an investigative mind, I decided to search further into this problem pertaining to these lights having found that the entire matter involved the "radio light spectrum" and other light frequencies which are invisible to the human eye whilst, however, radiating high levels of "radio active" energy containing the frequencies of x-ray, gamma and cosmic rays. There is no solution, even with total lead shielding of the starter unit, transformer capacitor sections and the tube cathode areas as it leaves the illuminating area of the tube itself free to radiate all manner of radio frequency and mercury vapour energies. The only way out is to outlaw them completely."
"Too many people, including doctors and general hospital staff, are spending far too much time indoors (an unfortunate occupational hazard as also found within other professions and trades) subjecting themselves to this continuous bombardment of colourless radioactive radiation from fluorescent lights, the worst of which are the soft white economical plug-in bulbs. These bulbs, although physically small, are nevertheless hazardous."
This is an important article given the current efforts to reduce energy. Sadly, this may come at the expense of health.
At great consternation I have switched to all tungsten Sylvania daylight bulbs...And it does make a difference at least in visual acuity. The bulbs I suspect use Neodynium coating to produce a daylight analog and hence are even less efficient than the standard tungsten lights but the better acuity tends to compensate this disadvantage. Further investigation still needs to be done on the effects from Neodynium energy spectrum - never simple is it? At the moment I am looking into tungsten based daylight lamps made by Solux which appear to be the closest to daylight
Chris Gupta
-------------------------------------------------------
Sunlight, Lighting And Your Health
THIS IS A WIDELY IMPORTANT ISSUE WHICH AFFECTS EVERY ONE OF US AND REFERS TO A PUBLICATION IN A NEW ZEALAND NEWSPAPER, THE "EASTERN BAY NEWS" OF WHAKATANE, DATED 1st MAY 2003 TITLED "SAVING POWER WITH THESE TOP ENERGY WISE TIPS"
Dr. Robert Adams
Copyright © 2003 NZ
The writer draws the attention to the common claim that fluorescent lights are more efficient than orthodox Edison light bulbs. It is true that fluorescent lamps are more efficient to the tune of some thirty to eighty per cent (30 - 80%) but at a high health risk cost.
Having been involved with problems pertaining to these lights some many years ago, i.e., during the late 1950's, I was commissioned to remove every fluorescent light fitting in every Totalisator Agency Board office throughout New Zealand for the purpose of fitting radio interference suppressors to eliminate radiated noise developed by the fluorescence radiation of the lights (more on this matter and its relevance to health a little further on) and simultaneously installing anti-interference antenna systems which I had invented and patented at that time.
As always of an investigative mind, I decided to search further into this problem pertaining to these lights having found that the entire matter involved the "radio light spectrum" and other light frequencies which are invisible to the human eye whilst, however, radiating high levels of "radio active" energy containing the frequencies of x-ray, gamma and cosmic rays. There is no solution, even with total lead shielding of the starter unit, transformer capacitor sections and the tube cathode areas as it leaves the illuminating area of the tube itself free to radiate all manner of radio frequency and mercury vapour energies. The only way out is to outlaw them completely.
The general public is completely oblivious to this lurking danger to their health. This situation should be addressed with urgency. The general public is entitled to be made aware of this danger to their health and as there is now legislation in place to cover these kind of unforeseen risks attention to this paramount issue should be addressed and enforced immediately. Such action would result in savings of millions of dollars in medical care, not to mention human suffering as a result of the gross ignorance of the health authorities of the dangers involved in the widespread use of these lethal devices.
Millions of fluorescent lights exist in the offices of commerce, in factories, workshops, homes, schools, universities, colleges, airports, cafes and restaurants, hospitals ad infinitum all radiating these dangerous energies into the unsuspecting public worldwide.
The effects of lighting on the human functioning development and psychological effects are indeed profound. Try placing seedlings/plants adjacent to an unshielded fluorescent light at the end where the starter unit is located, they will surely wilt and die, (and this is most certainly not attributable to "heat" radiation, a conclusion some may readily jump to). Unshielded fluorescent lights are a menace to mankind and should be replaced by standard Tungsten filament lighting.
Too many people, including doctors and general hospital staff, are spending far too much time indoors (an unfortunate occupational hazard as also found within other professions and trades) subjecting themselves to this continuous bombardment of colourless radioactive radiation from fluorescent lights, the worst of which are the soft white economical plug-in bulbs. These bulbs, although physically small, are nevertheless hazardous.
The powerful health benefits of man's bodily exposure to direct sunlight, i.e., ultra-violet rays, has been known to the ancients for thousands of years. History has it, however, that it was not taken up as a serious scientific matter by physicians until the 1800s when the healing properties of man's exposure to sunlight became manifest by way of serious observation and, later, more profound study and research. Such research heralded in breakthroughs of success in healing with ultra-violet during the 1870s.
I quote now a paragraph from Jacob Liberman's book "Medicine of the Future" pages 47 - 48 headed "Putting Prisoners in the Pink and Athletes in the Red":
Another recent innovation has been the widespread use of bubble-gum-pink rooms to sedate inmates in prisons across the country. Some sources reported that a reduction of muscle strength happened in inmates within 2.7 seconds. Baker-Miller pink (bubble-gum pink) exerts a physical rather than psychological effect, and it has been proved to calm the most jangled nerves within minutes. Where brute force or sedative drugs were once the only treatment option, small pink holding cells are now used to significantly reduce the incidence of violent and aggressive behaviour. Originally spearheaded by clinical psychologist Alexander Schauss of Tacoma, Washington, the use of Baker-Miller pink has now been advocated in hundreds of correctional institutions throughout the world.
See also: Independent Study finds learning rates are 26 percent higher in reading, 20 percent higher in math in rooms with the most daylight. Go to study.
posted by Chris Gupta on Tuesday December 6 2005
URL of this article:
http://www.newmediaexplorer.org/chris/2005/12/06/sunlight_lighting_and_your_health_dangers_of_fluorescent_lighting.htm
Related Articles
Migraines
At 09:36 2009-02-11, Gerry wrote: Hi Chris Could you please give me the remedy for migraine headaches, my wife gets these consistently!! You had mentioned organic yogurt mixed with what I forget?? Thank-you ------------------ Hi Gerry, Here is a little compilation (not complete by any means) of remedies: Making the Magnesium-Migraine Link In addition to magnesium, get some live organic yogurt and add a capsule of Vitamin B100 complex plus... [read more]
March 02, 2009 - Chris Gupta
Build a Low cost & simple Magnetic Pulser
Finally, at long last here is an extensive update (of the 2003-08-19 original) that many have been requesting. Some additions are: - Basic 220/240 Volt AC Circuit. - A Simple auto pulsing Circuit. - 12 V DC Operation - High Power vs low power - discussion - Polarity of Coil. - Various other embellishments and updates - that should address many questions in the comments - Pictures of the Original... [read more]
February 19, 2009 - Chris Gupta
Cell Phones - Ear, Eye Damage, High Blood Pressure & More!
Further to: Em Fields On Brain Tumor Incidence - Chemicals And Cell Phones ... here is more incriminating data. This adds to the already copious data on the negative harm from EMF (Electro Magnetic Radiation). Just as EMF can help in some instances so can it harm if used inappropriately. The microwave 2.4 mhz as the 60 Hz* mains frequencies are one of the most harm full ones. Surely... [read more]
August 22, 2007 - Chris Gupta
Readers' Comments
I am one of many people suffering from the effects of fluorescent lighting. When under them I develop neurological symptoms within minutes and these are quite severe and last for several hours after coming out of the lights. Are there any medical answers for this problem?
Posted by: Rita Plazo on February 21, 2008 06:38 PM
Read the report below by the WHO. While I sympathize with EMF sensitivity sufferers (being a potential lupus sufferer myself), I believe that attributing symptoms to CFLs or fluorescents alone is hasty. Studies seem to have proven no discernable correlation between EMFs and symptoms, as detailed here: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs296/en/index.html
and
http://ewh.ieee.org/soc/embs/comar/Hypersensitivity.htm. Perhaps this info will help people to seek answers and bring attention to the people that do have a different experience with CFLs and EMFs.
Posted by: Aurora Feletti on February 23, 2008 05:26 PM
The push to use fluorescents could be very bad for many people. The Job Accommodation Network (http://www.jan.wvu.edu) lists reduction or elimination of fluorescent lighting as an appropriate accommodation for many conditions. In addition to causing headache, fatigue, and problems with light sensitivity, they are listed as problematic for individuals with epilepsy, migraine, lupus, chronic fatigue syndrome, and vertigo (related to cardiovascular problems, multiple scleroses, and several other disorders.) I have also seen accounts of difficulties faced by individuals with hyperactivity, autism, and anxiety.
When I talk about my own sensitivity (almost immediate increases in seizure activity regardless of the type of fluorescent), approximately 15 of the population respond with stories about symptoms from this type of lighting, most commonly headache, fatigue, anxiety and confusion. I find that many people are not aware that their lights are causing their symptoms, until they start thinking about the circumstances the problems occur in.
When standard lighting triggers seizure or other symptoms, one is excluded from many important activities. It seems to me that if cement were as valuable as energy, we would be telling people in wheelchairs that it is not reasonable to expect a ramp. What we need to do is look further for alternatives that do not harm any one, or leave them stuck outside.
Please contact your elected officials and let them know that you do not want this health hazzzard in our institutions, or our homes.
Posted by: Janet Kaye Love, MSSW, LPC, NCC on April 21, 2008 06:02 PM
I have been looking into alternative lighting systems to fluorescent tubes.
This first started because of an interest in reducing carbon emissions.
The further i looked into the problem the more i found out about the problems with fluorescent.
In my office at work i first measured the lux output from the tubes which ran at 1600 at 1m height directly under a bank of 3 tubes.
The office recommended is i believe 500 Lux at 1M height from floor.
Health and safety spec shows minimun light levels but no max.
We have anti-glare computer screens which do not reflet light however desk tops and white paper or any gloss surface does.
Apart from the lights being too bright i was also suffering from the effects of light flicker,flicker is caused in the light due to electricity pulsing through the light at 50-60HZ A/C.
The flicker can be picked up by the naked eye in some people and it can lead to health problems-fits,migraene fatigue and other problems.
An easy way to pick up flicker would be to pick up your camera phone and point the camera at the light which should pick up the strobe effect.
A better example of this is if you have an old computer monitor in your office compare the flicker from this to a modern flat screen also an HD television screen.
The worrying thing is the government is to ban all incandescent lights by 2010 and plan to replace these with CFL(compact fluorescent lights)
Posted by: Steve on August 7, 2008 09:34 AM
Fluorescent Light bulbs can cause seizure disorders and dermatitis. This is also having a big effect on children because it brings on attention deficit disorder.
The light bulb has a bad effect on Central Nervous System and also increases a problem in learning disorder to children.
Posted by: ed on November 3, 2009 11:05 AM
There is one problem with attributing fluorescent light to your health maladies... you haven't cited ANY RELIABLE PROOF. This is all conjecture.
The author of the article states that in the 1950s, he was "commissioned to remove every fluorescent light fitting in every Totalisator Agency Board office throughout New Zealand for the purpose of fitting radio interference suppressors to eliminate radiated noise developed by the fluorescence radiation of the lights".
Fortunately, technology has evolved a lot since the 1950s, and this dinosaur is obviously not caught-up on the latest trends, or is sponsored by companies who have vested interest in the sale of incandescent bulbs. If you look at a spectral distribution map of incandescent or HID (high pressure sodium, metal halide, metal halide, etc), none of them match sunlight very closely either. There is a huge variation within fluorescent lights... for instance, I am running a 250W (no this is not a type-o) CFL, 6,000 Kelvin color temperature, and the appearance is very close to natural sunlight. It definitely improves my mood, especially in Sweden where I am currently living where I can go months without seeing the sun.
I too used to believe that certain health conditions were exacerbated by fluorescent light, but after working in the lighting energy efficiency field for several years, I have changed my mind. If someone has some actual studies to prove me wrong, I would love to read them.
Posted by: Zchild on November 22, 2009 10:05 AM
Name is Ross. I have ONE CFL bulb in my small Motor home. The rest are 12v mini bulbs. When I need strong light to read, I used the CFL. When I was on the phone, I told friend to wait, my head hurts. Guess the light is too brite. The minute I turned it off I felt better. I then said, maybe that 125 cycle CLF is different than 60 cycles??? and much different than candle light or kerocine lighting??? So, he said google it up. I did and found for the first time what I always suspected. I HATE CFL lighting because it makes me nervous, hurts my head, makes me tired, anxious, and encreases my bi-polarism swings. I am going back to antique carbon filament bulbs which can still be bought off ebay.
Posted by: Ross Marshall on February 10, 2010 12:21 AM
I'm not too worried about UV, gamma rays, X rays etc.
The actual quality of the visible light from fluorescent tubes is infamous. No proof or science is needed, we already know this.
Normal fluorescent light is poor in two ways:
1. the tubes flicker
2. they have a very limited spectrum, not a broad / spread spectrum like daylight or incandescent light
The company FullSpectrumSolutions produces lights including top quality fluorescent tubes. They avoid these problems and are much better for you.
Posted by: Sam Watkins on July 23, 2010 12:34 AM
I am highly effected by fluorescent lights. they have effected me throughout my life and I believe that's why I had a hard time in school.
Posted by: dorothy on August 9, 2010 09:53 PM
I also have many of the symptoms listed above when I am around flourescent lights. My landlord has mandated the use of flourescent lighting only; which basically amounts to eco-fascism. But they tell me that the government is mandating this change along with the utility companies - since a bill has already been signed according to Wikipedia - for the phase out of all incandescent lighting by 2014.
Posted by: janya on September 1, 2010 10:07 PM
British health officials have warned that the new bulbs could worsen existing skin conditions, like eczema and dermatitis. Skin disorders that are photosensitive could react to the more intense light of fluorescent bulbs, which emit UV rays similar to outdoor exposure levels on a sunny day. Britain's Health Protection Agency now recommends that people should not be closer than 30 centimetres from the energy-saving variety for more than one hour per day.
Thanks,
Modern Lighting
Posted by: Sarah on January 6, 2011 04:30 AM
My daughter has ADHD, and she can see the flicker from fluorescent lights.
I have found that some full spectrum CFLs have an electronic ballast, which cycles fast enough that it doesn't seem to bother her.
At school, her teachers have her sitting by a window whenever possible, and I placed her desk in her room next to a window with a scrim and a full-spectrum incandescent desk lamp.
Not a scientific study, as one poster requested, but what I've found works for my family.
Posted by: ray allen on September 21, 2011 10:53 AM
Serving K12 since 1970: Lighting: Best visual, most healthy:
5000 Kelvin, 90 plus CRI, TCLP RATED. IF GONING TO LED, MUST BE RATED AT 1.90 or higher SCOTOPIC, and light level determined with a P/S meter, not a standard light meter, they give false readings.
Posted by: Leslie Pace; CEM, CDSM, CSDP, LC CL on April 8, 2013 07:04 AM
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.
These articles are brought to you strictly for educational and informational purposes.
Be sure to consult your health practitioner of choice prior to any specific use of any of the non drug device or food based medicinal products referenced herein.
2211
|
|
