The Quonset Hut

Here is something I ran across.

SBU Study Reveals Harmful Effects of CFL Bulbs to Skin - See more at: http://commcgi.cc.stonybrook.edu/am2/pu ... U61hG.dpuf

STONY BROOK, NY, July 18, 2012 – 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.

At Stony Brook’s Advanced Energy Research and Technology Center (AERTC), the team took the same bulbs and studied the effects of exposure on 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, the key structural material in the outer layer of human skin. Tests were repeated with incandescent light bulbs of the same intensity and with the introduction of Titanium Dioxide (TiO2) nanoparticles, which are found in personal care products normally used for UV absorption.

“Our study revealed that the response of healthy skin cells to UV emitted from CFL bulbs is consistent with damage from ultraviolet radiation,” said Professor Rafailovich. “Skin cell damage was further enhanced when low dosages of TiO2 nanoparticles were introduced to the skin cells prior to exposure.” Rafailovich added that incandescent light of the same intensity had no effect on healthy skin cells, with or without the presence of TiO2.

“Despite their large energy savings, consumers should be careful when using compact fluorescent light bulbs,” said Professor 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, funded by the National Science Foundation, was a collaboration of Stony Brook University and New York State Stem Cell Science (NYSTEM). Co-authors of the study include: Dr. Rafailovich; Dr. Tatsiana Mironava, Adjunct Faculty, Department of Chemical and Molecular Engineering, Stony Brook University and Senior Research Support Specialist, NYSTEM; Dr. Michael Hadjiargyrou, Professor, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Stony Brook University; and Dr. Marcia Simon, Professor, Department of Oral Biology and Pathology, Stony Brook School of Dental Medicine and the Director of the Living Skin Bank at Stony Brook.

- See more at: http://commcgi.cc.stonybrook.edu/am2/pu ... U61hG.dpuf

Those CFL bulbs are often given free in the UK....experiment???????
I work two days at a recycle centre, many people throw them away ( a sixth sense telling them to discard them???)

This is not to derail this thread.
What is light?
Kevin

You are light, Kevin, and CFLs contain mercury, treasured by some, loathed by others...as alchemy shows, one mans poison is another man gift...the tosser gets a safer home, and the recycler gets moola for his pocket..win-win.

LEDs are where its at.

A density of light is a result of field interactions between other light densities of many kinds Id guess....always there, just waiting to show itself to the right observer.

One of the bonuses of working at a recycle centre is that many people like good little lemmings throw away such as incandescent light bulbs.
I have great big bags of them saved up.
It makes You wonder if there is a concerted agenda to de-populate this planet, in a variety of methods?
This paranoia is catching.
Kevin

kevin wrote:One of the bonuses of working at a recycle centre is that many people like good little lemmings throw away such as incandescent light bulbs.
I have great big bags of them saved up.
It makes You wonder if there is a concerted agenda to de-populate this planet, in a variety of methods?
This paranoia is catching.
Kevin

Agendas, and greed, fueling world leadership for millenia.

They want enough of us to fuel their wealth and intrinsic needs as elitists, but not enough to rise up and take back our world...a delicate balance in the minds of war and usury.

What they dont realize is that they have seeded their own demise through hamfisted methodology, unless of course they are willing to live in a hermetic coccoon.

Those old bulbs did something they dont like through their operation...what could it be?

Dave

I believe that the claim is that incandescents use more current than the CFL's or LED's. The thrust of it all is to reduce the carbon imprint according to the global warming enthusiasts and Al Gore. I am sure you already know this and state so for those that don't.

The light radiation from a fire is the low end of the spectrum and last I checked, no one ever got cancer from a campfire...burned perhaps but not cancer. I believe that animals on this planet or conditioned from years to be adapted to the lower light spectrum and the higher frequencies or lower wavelengths are not as prevalent.

I think I am rambling and having a difficult time getting my brain to engage with my typing fingers. Got to bed late.

Mikado

Mikado14 wrote:I believe that the claim is that incandescents use more current than the CFL's or LED's. The thrust of it all is to reduce the carbon imprint according to the global warming enthusiasts and Al Gore. I am sure you already know this and state so for those that don't.

The light radiation from a fire is the low end of the spectrum and last I checked, no one ever got cancer from a campfire...burned perhaps but not cancer. I believe that animals on this planet or conditioned from years to be adapted to the lower light spectrum and the higher frequencies or lower wavelengths are not as prevalent.

I think I am rambling and having a difficult time getting my brain to engage with my typing fingers. Got to bed late.

Mikado

I concur.
If you have seen the video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OPR3GlpQQJA
the video suggests Wayseers are drawn to the flame

Fluorescent operates on 60 Hz. Perhaps a carrier wave to control minds.
Or activate a physical trigger in the body.
To interrupt communication with the cells....create cancer.

I have made the transition to these bulbs and they are energy saving and regardless of the climate debate are cheaper to run and last longer. On the negative side, the light is not quite right and the bulbs have limitations aesthetically.