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.
********************************************************************
Fluorescent Bulb Break Creates Costly Hassle
Written by Nick Gosling
Thursday, April 12, 2007
PROSPECT - It was just like any other Tuesday.
Prospect resident Brandy Bridges holds up a newspaper insert
promoting the type of CFL (compact fluorescent lamp) bulbs that she
says have caused elevated levels of mercury in her home when one
broke last month.-STAFF PHOTO BY NICK GOSLINGOn March 13, Brandy
Bridges was installing some of the two dozen CFL (compact fluorescent
lamp) bulbs she had purchased in an attempt to save money on her
energy bill.
One month later, though, Bridges is paying much more than she had
ever expected to.
On that Tuesday, Bridges was installing one of the spiral-shaped
light bulbs in her 7-year-old daughter's bedroom. Suddenly, the bulb
plummeted to the floor, breaking on the shag carpet.
Bridges, who was wary of the dangers of cleaning up a fluorescent
bulb, called The Home Depot where she purchased them. She was told
that the bulbs had mercury in them and that she should not vacuum the
area where the bulb had broken. Bridges was directed to call the
Poison Control hotline.
Poison Control directed her to the Maine Center for Disease Control
and Prevention and the Department of Environmental Protection.
Upon reaching the DEP the next day, the agency offered to send a
specialist out to Bridges' house to test the air levels. The
specialist arrived soon after the phone conversation and began
testing the downstairs, where he found safe levels of mercury - below
the state's limit of 300 ng/m3 (nanograms per cubic meter).
In the daughter's bedroom, the levels remained well below the 300
mark, except for near the carpet where the bulb broke. There the
mercury levels spiked to 1,939 ng/m3. On a bag of toys that bulb
fragments had landed on, the levels of mercury were 556 ng/m3.
Bridges was told by the specialist not to clean up the bulb and
mercury powder by herself. He recommended the Clean Harbors
Environmental Services branch in Hampden.
Clean Harbors gave Bridges a low-ball estimate of $2,000, based on
what she described, to clean up the room properly. The work entailed
removing anything with levels greater than 300 ng/m3, including the
carpeting.
One month later, Bridges' daughter's bedroom remains sealed off with
plastic "to avoid any dust blowing around" and to keep the family's
pets from going in and out of the room.
Her daughter, Shayley, has to sleep downstairs in a full house that
already consists of Bridges' fiancé, her 71-year-old mother and her
handicapped brother.
Today, Bridges is "gathering finances" to pay the $2,000 for the
cleaning herself. That won't cover the cost for new carpeting and
other items that will have to be replaced. Her insurance company said
it wouldn't cover the costs because mercury is considered a
pollutant, like oil.
One month later, Bridges is still searching for answers. She has
contacted staff members from the offices of U.S. Sens. Susan Collins
(R-Maine) and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) to tell them about her
situation but has received no response.
She has talked with representatives from the CDC and DEP and spent
roughly two to three hours a day over the past several weeks, talking
on the phone and in person and contacting local papers to get the
word out on what she believes are dangerous light bulbs.
And, she said, she is wondering why the DEP "publicly recanted the
statement" it made to an area newspaper, in which DEP officials said
it was safe to clean up the CFL bulbs using household materials.
";I'm really upset. They should not change their story just because it
does not fit into a good plan for these light bulbs," said
Bridges. "I'm trying my best to keep my family safe and the state
just keeps trying to cover it up."
Officials have said that Bridges has little to worry about and she
could easily clean up the bulbs by hand.
State Toxicologist Andrew Smith said it would be unlikely that a
person could contract mercury poisoning from the levels of mercury
found in Bridges' daughter's room.
"In this situation, my understanding, was this 1,900 was the sign
reading right at the spot of the floor where the bulb broke," said
Smith. "While 1,900 was certainly considered an elevated reading of
mercury vapor, it was a very localized level that I would not expect
to result in any sign of mercury exposure.&
