CFLs emit harmful levels of UV

[Quantum Windbag]

I wonder what all those science loving liberals are going to think about the massive outbreak of skin cancer in their future.

Inspired by a European study, a team of Stony Brook University researchers looked into the potential impact of healthy human skin tissue (in vitro) being exposed to ultraviolet rays emitted from compact fluorescent light (CFL) bulbs.
The results, "The Effects of UV Emission from CFL Exposure on Human Dermal Fibroblasts and Keratinocytes in Vitro," were published in the June issue of the journal of Photochemistry and Photobiology.
The researchers, led by Miriam Rafailovich, PhD, Professor of Materials Science and Engineering and the Director of the Garcia Center for Polymers at Engineered Interfaces at Stony Brook, conducted similar research to a European study on Light Sensitivity. Stony Brook researchers collected CFL bulbs purchased from different locations across Suffolk and Nassau counties, and then measured the amount of UV emissions and the integrity of each bulb's phosphor coatings. Results revealed significant levels of UVC and UVA, which appeared to originate from cracks in the phosphor coatings, present in all CFL bulbs studied.

Harmful effects of CFL bulbs to skin; Energy-efficient bulbs safest when placed behind additional glass cover

Funny how you love government scientists when they tell you what you want to hear.

Funny how you assume they work for the government.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

I wonder what all those science loving liberals are going to think about the massive outbreak of skin cancer in their future.

Harmful effects of CFL bulbs to skin; Energy-efficient bulbs safest when placed behind additional glass cover

Funny how you love government scientists when they tell you what you want to hear.

Funny how you assume they work for the government.

Unlike you, I read the first sentence, so I didn't have to assume that

.

Inspired by a European study, a team of Stony Brook University ...

You're incredibly stupid.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Funny how you love government scientists when they tell you what you want to hear.

Funny how you assume they work for the government.

Unlike you, I read the first sentence, so I didn't have to assume that

.

Inspired by a European study, a team of Stony Brook University ...

You're incredibly stupid.

Yes, a university. It is even the state university of New York, and they are subsidized by tax dollars. That does not make them government scientists, does it? And who said I liked the report?

 

[MuadDib]

I wonder what all those science loving liberals are going to think about the massive outbreak of skin cancer in their future.

So you hate science?

I love science, but I do hate idiocy.

I hate CFL's, too.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Funny how you assume they work for the government.

Unlike you, I read the first sentence, so I didn't have to assume that

.

Inspired by a European study, a team of Stony Brook University ...

You're incredibly stupid.

Yes, a university. It is even the state university of New York, and they are subsidized by tax dollars. That does not make them government scientists, does it? And who said I liked the report?

I don't believe the sincerity of your post. You can't seriously be this retarded.

 

[Conservative]

I wonder what all those science loving liberals are going to think about the massive outbreak of skin cancer in their future.

Harmful effects of CFL bulbs to skin; Energy-efficient bulbs safest when placed behind additional glass cover

Is this any different from regular flourescent lights?

I have no idea. CFLs use a different technology because of the size, but I have no idea if that results in a difference in UV radiation. My guess is that, since people tend to sit closer to CFLs, the radiation is more concentrated. Most regular fluorescent are covered by a diffuser, which probably absorbs at least some of the UV they produce. That is just my gut speaking though, I could be wrong.

Sorry, but I disagree with this statement. Most fluorescent bulbs I see in buildings have a diffuser of some sort, yes. However, said diffuser is usually an egg crate type thing or something similar, as these images show...

...which don't really block anything, let alone UV rays.

Even the acrylic or plastic ones like this...

...don't block any UV at all.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Is this any different from regular flourescent lights?

I have no idea. CFLs use a different technology because of the size, but I have no idea if that results in a difference in UV radiation. My guess is that, since people tend to sit closer to CFLs, the radiation is more concentrated. Most regular fluorescent are covered by a diffuser, which probably absorbs at least some of the UV they produce. That is just my gut speaking though, I could be wrong.

Sorry, but I disagree with this statement. Most fluorescent bulbs I see in buildings have a diffuser of some sort, yes. However, said diffuser is usually an egg crate type thing or something similar, as these images show...

...which don't really block anything, let alone UV rays.

Even the acrylic or plastic ones like this...

...don't block any UV at all.

I agree the egg crate diffusers are useless. My experience seems to be the opposite of yours, newer fixtures have the acrylic type diffuser like the one in the last picture you posted. They are designed that way to minimize migraines. They probably are not very good at blocking UV, but my guess is they do block a little, I have absolutely no evidence to back that up though.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Is this any different from regular flourescent lights?

I have no idea. CFLs use a different technology because of the size, but I have no idea if that results in a difference in UV radiation. My guess is that, since people tend to sit closer to CFLs, the radiation is more concentrated. Most regular fluorescent are covered by a diffuser, which probably absorbs at least some of the UV they produce. That is just my gut speaking though, I could be wrong.

Sorry, but I disagree with this statement. Most fluorescent bulbs I see in buildings have a diffuser of some sort, yes. However, said diffuser is usually an egg crate type thing or something similar, as these images show...

...which don't really block anything, let alone UV rays.

Even the acrylic or plastic ones like this...

...don't block any UV at all.

Depends on if its short wave UV or long wave.

What do the scientists at Stony Brook who wrote the paper recommend?

"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."