"All the World's a Stage We Pass Through" R. Ayana

Showing posts with label cfls. Show all posts
Showing posts with label cfls. Show all posts

Saturday, 31 May 2014

The medical experts who refuse to use low-energy lightbulbs in their homes


The medical experts who refuse to use low-energy lightbulbs in their homes:
Professors have stocked up on old-style bulbs to protect against skin cancer and blindness. So should YOU be worried?


Top eye expert Prof John Marshall has boxes stacked with old-fashioned incandescent lightbulbs at home 
Top eye expert Prof John Marshall has boxes stacked with old-fashioned incandescent lightbulbs at home

 



How would you view a man who's stockpiled a lifetime supply of old-fashioned lightbulbs because he believes low-energy bulbs could lead to blindness?

You might well dismiss him as dotty. But the man in question, John Marshall, is no crank. In fact, he's one of Britain's most eminent eye experts, the professor of ophthalmology at the University College London Institute of Ophthalmology. So concerned is he that he has boxes stacked with old-fashioned incandescent lightbulbs at home.

'I bulk bought incandescent lightbulbs before the Government made it illegal to import them,' he says. 'I can't give you an exact number, but I have enough to see me out.'

Nor is he alone in his concerns about modern lightbulbs. Another eminent British professor, John Hawk, an expert in skin disease, is warning they may cause sunburn-like damage, premature aging and even skin cancer.

He doesn't have any low-energy bulbs in his house, explaining: 'I have lots of old-style bulbs I bought in bulk when they were available.'

Incandescent bulbs had been the standard form of illumination for more than a century. But following an EU directive, the Government banned the import of 100-watt bulbs from 2009. This was followed by a ban on 60w bulbs in 2011 and a full ban on all 'traditional' bulbs in 2012.

The EU directive was aimed at cutting fuel and carbon emissions. The low-energy bulbs - or compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs), to give them their technical name - are said to use 80 per cent less electricity and to  last longer.

Old-fashioned incandescent bulbs work by electrically heating a filament inside a glass globe filled with inert gas, so that it emits light.

Instead of a glowing filament, low-energy bulbs have argon and mercury vapour within a spiral-shaped tube. When the gas gets heated, it produces ultraviolet light. This stimulates a fluorescent coating painted on the inside of the tube. As this coating absorbs energy, it emits light.

The concern is about some of the light rays emitted in high levels by these bulbs, says Professor Marshall.  Recent scientific evidence shows these specific rays are particularly damaging to human eyes and skin.

Light is made up of a spectrum of different coloured rays of light, which have different wavelengths. As he explains: 'Light is a form of radiation. The shorter the wavelength, the more  energy it contains.
'The most damaging part of the spectrum is the short wavelength light at the indigo/violet end of blue.
'Incandescent bulbs did not cause problems, but these low-energy lamps emit high peaks of blue and ultraviolet light at this wavelength.'

Low-energy bulbs are said to use 80 per cent less electricity and to last longer


HOW THEY CAN ATTACK YOUR EYES

In the same way ultraviolet rays in sunlight can cause premature aging in our skin if we get sunburnt, there is a similar situation in the eye, says Professor Marshall.

'You shed skin every five days, but your retina is with you for life.'

The retina at the back of the eye is vital for sight - it's made up of light-sensitive cells that trigger nerve impulses that pass via the optic nerve to the brain, where visual images are formed.

Sustained exposure to ultraviolet light wavelengths from CFLs increases the risk of two seriously debilitating eye conditions, macular degeneration and cataracts, the professor claims.

With macular degeneration, the macula, which is at the centre of the retina, becomes damaged with age. A cataract is a clouding of the lens inside the eye. These are two of the leading causes of blindness in Britain.

'If you are in a country with high levels of ultraviolet light, your eyes will age faster,' he says. 'This is why the incidence of cataracts is earlier and greater nearer the equator, where sunlight is at its strongest, so there is more light across all spectrums. CFLs may have a similar effect.

'The exposure can also significantly increase your risk of macular degeneration. The biggest risk factor for this is age, as it commonly starts to affect people from 60 to 80.

'You will almost certainly exacerbate that risk with low-energy lightbulbs,' adds the professor, who last month warned his colleagues of the dangers at Optrafair, a national education forum for opticians.

Invented in the late 1800s, but how do light bulbs work?



READING LAMP DANGER ZONES


But it's not just your eyes that may be at risk from these lightbulbs. Professor John Hawk, the retired head of the photobiology unit at St John's Institute of Dermatology, King's College, London, warns: 'There is good evidence that the CFLs that have been foisted upon us emit radiation sufficient to cause damage to the skin if used close by for long enough.'

He says the risk is particularly high if the bulb is a metre or less from your body, which is common as people use them in reading lamps.

'There is evidence that demonstrates that the lamps can not only cause damage to skin, but also short-term symptoms such as sun rash and prickly heat, a condition that medically is called polymorphic light eruption.

'As with any ultraviolet damage, these effects can add up over the years. The cumulative effect of this ultra-violet light causing burning, skin cell damage and aging skin, is that it must to some small, but significant, extent, increase the risk of skin cancer.'

Low-energy bulbs are also known to cause trouble to people who have lupus, an auto-immune disorder that typically affects the skin, joints and internal organs. Irritation caused by ultraviolet light worsens the rashes, joint pain and fatigue associated with the disease.

According to the Lupus Foundation of America, up to two-thirds of people with the condition are sensitive to CFLs.

The EU has acknowledged that exposure to low-energy lightbulbs may cause skin damage. But a report published in 2008 by its Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks said this risk is only with  'prolonged' exposure at distances of less than 20cm.

In such cases, 'CFLs may lead to UV exposures approaching the work- place limit set to protect workers from skin and retinal damage'.


The LINK to MIGRAINE

'Migraines and epilepsy are also problems,' says Professor Hawk. 'I have seen 30 skin patients in my clinic who have been experiencing these problems linked to the bulbs.'

This may be because low-energy bulbs can flicker imperceptibly (incandescent bulbs flicker only when they are about to break).

A 2013 study in the journal Neurology found that flickering lights are likely to trigger migraines in some sufferers. Flickering lights are also a trigger for epileptic fits.

Eleanor Levin, 44, a teacher of Spanish and music from Lancaster, blames low-energy bulbs for her headaches. She says she can't be in the same room as one as it will trigger attacks of nausea, confusion and migraine. She first noticed the problem three years ago, when she began to suffer headaches in the office where she worked. 'In the end, it made me so ill I had to give up that job,' she says.

Flickering lights are likely to trigger migraines in some sufferers. They are also a trigger for epileptic fitsFlickering lights are likely to trigger migraines in some sufferers. They are also a trigger for epileptic fits


Eleanor has seen an array of doctors and neurologists.

'Some neurologists have told me they believe the problem is caused by light flickering and is related to migraines,' she says.

'I have old-fashioned incandescent lights at home and don't get headaches - that's why I now teach students at home for a living. I'm also fine with halogen bulbs.'

But she says she has to be careful where she goes at night. 'Luckily, there are enough places that use gentle ambient light without these bulbs,' she says.

'The EU accepts there can be skin-damage problems related to low-energy lightbulbs, but not headaches. I suspect there are a lot of people who suffer milder problems with CFL bulb-related headaches, but who have not made the link with the cause.'

It's also previously been reported that low-energy bulbs contain small amounts of mercury, raising concerns that if the glass is broken, this toxic substance could be released into the air or landfill.
A study by Germany's Federal Environment Agency found a broken low-energy bulb emits levels of the vapour up to 20 times higher than the safe guideline limit for an indoor area.

While the amounts are relatively small, if a low-energy bulb does break, Public Health England advises householders to evacuate the room and leave it to ventilate for 15 minutes.

You're advised to wear gloves while wiping the area with a damp cloth and picking up the fragments - these should be placed in a plastic bag, then sealed.

This should be taken to a council dump and placed in  a special recycling bank - councils do not collect hazardous waste in normal collections.

Incandescent bulbs had been the standard form of illumination for more than a century
Incandescent bulbs had been the standard form of illumination for more than a century


RISK of FAULTY BULBS

Another potential concern is that low-energy bulbs bought off the shelf vary considerably in the amount of dangerous spectrum ultraviolet light they emit, according to research at Ninewells Hospital, Dundee, by Professor Harry Moseley, its head of photo-biology. 'There appear to be significant problems with quality control in their manufacture,' he says.

'Our testing has found that in a batch of ten CFLs from randomly selected makers, one may be significantly worse than  the rest, because, for example, it has a fault in its light-shielding.'

Professor Moseley says that the 'single-envelope' bulbs - the low-energy bulbs where the coiled  parts are visible - tend to emit the highest levels of ultraviolet light.

He believes those with a 'double' envelope - where a pearly dome like an old- fashioned lightbulb covers the coiled parts - tend to block out UV light 'much better'.

Dermatologist Professor Hawk acknowledges the efforts to improve the bulbs by providing clouded glass domes.

'But we are not sure how improved they are,' he says.

He has been trying to lobby the EU to lift its ban on incandescent bulbs.

'I have talked to the committee on light safety in Brussels about these concerns, but no one there seems to be interested in this,' he says.

'The EU was trying to be green by introducing CFLs, but they did not think of the health consequences. They are  very reluctant to reverse  its policies.'

Anne Vick, the communications director of Lighting Europe, the industry association representing leading lighting manufacturers, maintains 'there is no risk from ultra- violet light exposure emitted by  CFLs as their UVA and UVB rays are well within the limits that guarantee consumer protection'.
She adds: 'European scientific experts have not found any health impact from UV rays emitted by energy-saving bulbs in normal conditions.

'For workers exposed to high levels of light and for people affected by extreme light sensitivity, experts recommended using double-envelope lamps.

'CFLs comply with all relevant consumer protection legislation. All lamps are thoroughly tested in order to ensure safe applications for all consumers.'

Meanwhile, an EU spokes- person told the Mail that 'based on scientific evidence, an EU scientific committee in 2008 and the UK's Health Protection Agency came to the conclusion that in normal use compact fluorescent lamps do not pose risks to the general public'.

However, Professor Moseley is not convinced.

He says that what's needed is better legislation from the EU on the quality and safety of  low-energy lighting.

'But they are very reluctant,' he says. 'Their feeling is that it is the sufferers' problem. In Brussels, the carbon emission targets take precedence.'

Eye expert Professor Marshall has a far simpler, if rather blunt, solution.

'I would like to urge the manufacturers of these lightbulbs to get rid of them.'

FIRST light bulb which you can turn on with NO POWER



From The Daily Mail @ http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2626564/The-medical-experts-refuse-use-low-energy-lightbulbs-homes-Professors-stocked-old-style-bulbs-protect-against-skin-cancer-blindness-So-YOU-worried.html


For more information see http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com/search/label/cfls
- See ‘Older Posts’ at the end of each section


Hope you like this not for profit site -
It takes hours of work every day to maintain, write, edit, research, illustrate and publish this website from a tiny cabin in a remote forest
Like what we do? Please give enough for a meal or drink if you can -  
Donate any amount and receive at least one New Illuminati eBook!
Please click below -



Videos -



For further enlightening information enter a word or phrase into the random synchronistic search box @ http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com


And see




 New Illuminati on Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/the.new.illuminati

New Illuminati Youtube Channel - http://www.youtube.com/user/newilluminati/feed


New Illuminati on Twitter @ www.twitter.com/new_illuminati


New Illuminations –Paintings in Light by R. Ayana @ http://newilluminations.blogspot.com

The Her(m)etic Hermit - http://hermetic.blog.com


The Prince of Centraxis - http://centraxis.blogspot.com (Be Aware! This link leads to implicate & xplicit concepts & images!)



DISGRUNTLED SITE ADMINS PLEASE NOTE –
We provide a live link to your original material on your site (and links via social networking services) - which raises your ranking on search engines and helps spread your info further! This site is published under Creative Commons Fair Use Copyright (unless an individual article or other item is declared otherwise by the copyright holder) – reproduction for non-profit use is permitted & encouraged, if you give attribution to the work & author - and please include a (preferably active) link to the original (along with this or a similar notice).

Feel free to make non-commercial hard (printed) or software copies or mirror sites - you never know how long something will stay glued to the web – but remember attribution! If you like what you see, please send a donation (no amount is too small or too large) or leave a comment – and thanks for reading this far…

Live long and prosper! Together we can create the best of all possible worlds…


From the New Illuminati – http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com

Wednesday, 16 May 2012

A New Method of Poisoning Us with Radiation: 'High Efficiency' Light Bulbs

A New Method of Poisoning Us with Radiation: 'High Efficiency' Light Bulbs


by Thomas Corriher





I experienced an episode of "crazy" during the presentation of my 7th grade science project.  I was still in the public schools at that time, and the understanding of science by teachers and students alike was more than a little bit underwhelming.  They knew that light was really fast, but their overall understanding seemed to stop shortly thereafter. 

When I began preaching to them about fluorescent lights emitting radioactive, electromagnetic fields that were guaranteed to increase a person's cancer risk: well, everyone's eyes seemed to glaze over as if I were speaking a foreign language.  I vainly explained that if these lights operated at high voltages, and these voltages were pulsed at high frequencies, then radioactive energy was obviously emitted, and moreover, these bulbs were already known for producing the full band of light energy (some of which is destructive too).

It is how radio waves are made: frequency pulses.  The higher the frequency, the more dangerous overall, but voltage and proximity matter, too, in regards to its dangerous ionizing effects upon the human body.  They just looked at me as if I were the stupid one.  They had those 'he's so special' looks on their faces, in most cases.  Some had the 'he's so crazy' look.  It was incomprehensible to them that I actually understood the topic that I had tried to lecture them about.  Thus, I had the problem

I believe my teacher even failed me, while the dumbed-down science projects like "Do Plants Need Water?" were graded highly.  It was the typical public school's act of rewarding only mediocrity.  Shortly thereafter, by some freak of the cosmos, it was actually proven by multiple independent studies that electrically-produced electromagnetic energy (radiation) from fluorescent lights and power lines were indeed a danger to health. 

This was long before cell phones existed, and these were considered ground-breaking findings.  Eventually, my being 'crazy' (thinking independently and having a willingness to challenge authority) got me sent to military school to get "straightened out".  These traits would have been considered virtues in more noble times.

It is time for me to get crazy again, with a topic that has far more importance and significance than radiation from power lines and fluorescent lights.  Please read the remainder of this article with care, for it is vitally important that all of us spread this message, and you should understand why, by the time you have completed your reading.  I realize that few of our readers have backgrounds in electrical or electronics engineering, so I am going to attempt to explain some otherwise complex topics in plain English. 

This article will explain that there is a new generation of light bulbs that produce radiation in a more dangerous manner than we have ever seen before.  Thus, I need to explain some very basic laws of electricity, so that readers may understand the dilemma that we all face.  Please patiently wade through this information, because you need to know it and understand it.

Electricity really only exists in motion.  Nothing happens without power transmission ("current"), and therefore, there is no real power without its movement.  A disconnected battery is like a ship in a bottle.  The ship is not really a sea vessel because it never has the motion of floatation.  Both these things have the potential to be more (a sea vessel or power source), but they are both just paper weights until that time.


The 3 Core Types of Electrical Current (Don't Skip This)


There is D.C. (direct current).  This is the steady state current: meaning that the voltage never changes while the current is flowing.  This is the "cleanest" type of power.  It may come from a filtered power supply, or a battery.  D.C. power will usually produce a tiny magnetic field along its wires; but overall, it will not radiate energy or effect other devices with typical usage.

Next there is A.C. (alternating current).  This is a current/voltage combination that is constantly changing, as if it were produced by a standard generator.  It typically reverses itself (back flows) half of the time to show negative voltages and currents on equipment capable of measuring it.  As alternating current cycles from its maximum positive to its maximum negative value, the time this takes in seconds is mathematically computed to produce the frequency calculation.  In other words, frequency is a calculated measurement of how fast the voltage/current is changing.  For instance, the standard frequency for power in the U.S. is 60 Hz..  This means that the power positively peaks and then drops to its greatest negative value exactly 60 times per second.  Some readers may find it fascinating to know that this means the generators are rotating exactly 60 times per second too (60 R.P.S.).

Finally, there is pulsating D.C..  Pulsating direct current is a combination of D.C. and A.C..  The voltage and current with pulsating D.C. do not change in values, except for changing from a state of being fully on or fully off.  It is as if someone is quickly turning a switch on and off, but there are no middle voltages, or negative voltages.  On precision equipment, the on pulses usually appear as blocks called "square waves".


Why You Need To Know A Little Something About High Frequency Currents




You may be asking why our readers would need to know these things?  That comes really soon, so be careful what you wish for.  (Just kidding.)  As I mentioned earlier, a new radiation threat is upon us all.  In lieu of this, I must begin by emphasizing the 'radio' and 'radiant' roots for the word radiation.  They ultimately are descriptions of the same phenomena: radiant energy in the form of electromagnetic waves of pulsating energy.  So, how does the energy actually radiate itself outward?  The truth is, we don't really understand that part.  Physicists have pulled their hair out for decades over that question. 

What we do know is that when things vibrate at a nuclear level or have electrical current changes, then these changes of state these frequencies cause energy to be radiated outward at the same frequencies.  This is how radio transmissions work.  Radio transmissions merely mix the audio (voice) signal with an exact frequency that listening radios are "tuned" for, and viola!  Or as my past electronics teachers would have said, in their fancy-smancy engineering terms:  "It will have imparted intelligence upon the carrier wave". 

A good analogy of how frequencies operate is remembering the ripples from a time when you dropped a pebble into a small creek or pond.  You may recall that the ripples were reflected from the banks at exactly the same rate and distance as the original waves that struck them.  The whole point of this paragraph is to make clear that the very basis of radiant energy transmissions and all types of radiation on the entire electromagnetic spectrum boil down to one thing: frequencies.  Frequencies determine how far the energy travels, how well it penetrates, and how it affects things.  The ultra high frequencies of gamma (i.e. nuclear) radiation will quickly destroy a person through burns, cancer, or otherwise; while the low 60 Hz. of standard American power has little effect in typical exposure.  Frequency determines if the energy is radio, microwave, infrared light, visible light, x-rays, gamma, or ultraviolet.  There is real power in frequencies.  No pun intended. As a general rule, the higher the frequency, the more dangerous the energy is.  Nuclear radiation is at a really high frequency, for example.

For years, we have heard about how incandescent bulbs are bad for the environment.  This made way for a whole new industry of "green" bulbs, marketed to the growing portion of people who seek to address environmental concerns.  However, they actually compromise people's health, and are ultimately more harmful to the environment.


Common Symptoms Resulting From Exposure To "Energy Efficient" Light Bulbs

  • Dizziness
  • Cluster headaches
  • Migraines
  • Seizures
  • Fatigue
  • Inability to concentrate
  • Anxiety

There are lots of theories regarding how these bulbs can cause these effects, but they are speculative.  Very little research has been done.  Despite this, European countries are phasing out incandescent bulbs, and forcing the public to switch to the "energy efficient" alternative.

The new light bulbs stunningly emit two forms of radiation outside of the light spectrum: ultraviolet and radio frequency; and would you believe the F.D.A. is involved?  The F.D.A. states that in addition to visible light (U.V.A.), these bulbs also emit U.V.B., and infrared radiation; but let's not forget those radio transmissions!  These bulbs are also said to have a flicker rate of 100-120 cycles per second, which seems low considering the U.V.B. light that they produce, and of course, those radio transmissions.  In any case, even a flicker rate as low as 100 hertz is more than enough to trigger severe episodes of epileptic seizures.  Video games are well known to do the same at a mere 60 Hz.  Judging from the multiple bands of radiation released, the flicker rate can be expected to be well beyond 120 hertz (including the light that we can't actually see), so just start adding zeros to get the point about how likely they are to trigger epileptic seizures. 

These bulbs have negative effects on people with lupus too, which is something that has baffled everyone so far.  That's still not all.  They are known to damage the skin too, and did we mention high frequency radiation?  Watchdog organizations in the U.K. are clamoring about the issues mentioned above, and the fact that these bulbs also aggravate eczema and porphyria too.

Our staff has been doing this work long enough to spot the pattern.  The radiation from these bulbs directly attacks the immune system, and furthermore damages the skin tissues enough to prevent the proper formation of vitamin D3.  This will cause major cholesterol problems in time, and cripple the liver by preventing it from converting the cholesterol reserves inside the skin tissues (vitamin D2) into usable vitamin D3.  This has the potential to cause or aggravate, not dozens, but hundreds of disease states. 

All that they had to do was shift the frequencies of otherwise benign light bulbs, and suddenly we have this mess.  It is as if the whole mess with fluorescent light bulbs gave somebody inspiration for how to radiation poison us, while tricking us to beg for it, in order to "save the environment".


The Energy Efficient Scam


One of my first lessons while studying Electronics Engineering was that energy efficiency is effected more by heat than any other factor.  That's why super conductors are always super cooled, and why your oven uses about 60 times more power than your television.  Heat equals wasted power.  That's written in stone.  Amazingly, standard light bulbs manage to be extremely energy efficient, despite the heat that they produce, and despite the fact that their light comes from heated elements.  In fact, they manage to waste less than 10% of the power applied.  This is because the heat resists the current flow in the wire coil to the point of practically cutting off the current. 

You see, heat also increases resistance.  This breaking effect upon a bulb's current gives standard incandescent light bulbs their overall high efficiency.  My first engineering project was testing light bulbs with high-end testing equipment, to study this rare property.  I remember our teacher gleefully laughing at us as we sat befuddled by the fact that all of our calculations for voltages, currents, and power usage just did not add up.  He thought it was almost hysterical when we began testing the equipment itself. 

The exercise was meant to be a memorable lesson about how heat may dissipate (or conserve) power in such a way that electrical devices at least appear to bend the rules of physics.  Another important lesson was that while theoretically incandescent light bulbs ought to be wasteful of energy, they actually increase their own resistance via heat to the point that very little of their energy is wasted.  Take for example how long a standard flashlight will produce bright light with one or two small batteries.  On the other hand, just try to power an oven with those same batteries for an exercise in futility.  The whole thing was fascinating to the point that I knew this program of study was meant for me.

The new generation of bulbs is supposedly designed to save us from a problem that does not exist inefficient conventional bulbs, so this is where the story about them starts to reek like dead fish.  The new bulbs, as you may have already noticed, do not produce a noticeable amount of heat.  This is because the light from the new generation of bulbs is produced by injecting pulsating electricity (having a frequency) into a chemical gas to radiate light, as in radiation. 

Pay close attention to that frequency thing.  By the types of radiation that the new bulbs emit, we know that they must operate at frequencies astronomically higher than the 120 hertz that they are said to, so somebody is certainly lying about them.  What's more is that technically, there is no reason for the higher frequencies to be used.  If a lower frequency produces the needed visible light, then why do these bulbs operate at unnecessary higher frequency bands too? 

These extra frequencies simply could not have been stepped up and oscillated (frequency generated) higher by accident, regardless of whether the oscillation is chemical or electronic.  Doing such a thing can make even an experienced engineer's head spin, due to the overall technical difficulties in frequency tuning; especially on the high-end. 

Furthermore, are we expected to believe that none of the companies or regulators involved ever bothered to test these new light bulbs with an oscilloscope during the testing?  What else could an engineer test a new light device with?  A sound meter?   It's absolutely ludicrous to believe that they do not know.  Thus, the only explanation is that these bulbs produce harmful radiation by design.  They are designed to produce dangerous ionizing radiation outside of the range of visible light, which is known to be extremely harmful (ie. deadly) to humans, and it is all justified to solve an "environmental problem" that doesn't even exist.

The proof is already before you to observe at your leisure how they interfere with radios, cordless phones, and R.F. remote controls.  Can you smell it too?  This writer is practically gasping for air.


It Gets Even Worse.  Seriously.


This may be showing my age to some, but I had never heard of 'dirty electricity' when I was in college.  It sounds like the super power for a comic book super villain, and in a way, it actually is.  Guess what it involves?  If you guessed frequencies, then great job.  For those of you with some electronics training, it is similar to the topic of harmonics, but the rest of you need not worry about this point. 

Here's the quick and dirty about 'dirty electricity'.  The new age bulbs do not just directly radiate radiation from themselves, which alone would be plenty bad and a reason for infamy.  Believe it or not, these bulbs actually inject frequencies back into the buildings' electrical supply lines.  This means that every wire in the building is also producing radiation too, like a spider web of giant antennas, and at even higher frequencies.  Is there any reader out there who still believes the radiation poisoning is unintentional? 

All I can say is God bless Dr. Magda Havas, of Trent University, who cataloged these findings with empirical data about the frequency ranges for both the radiation coming from the bulbs, and the 'dirty electricity' radiation that pulses throughout entire buildings.  She is credited for creating the following table.  As you view the table below, just imagine if the new age bulbs had been using an equivalent power to that of the regular light bulbs that were being tested (60 watts instead of 15).  It would be a fair comparison if both bulbs used the same power.

 

"The energy efficient compact fluorescent lights that are commercially available generate radio frequency radiation and ultraviolet radiation, they contain mercury - a known neurotoxin, and they are making some people ill. Instead of promoting these light bulbs governments around the world should be insisting that manufactures produces light bulbs that are electromagnetically clean and contain no toxic chemicals. Some of these are already available (CLED) but are too expensive for regular use. With a growing number of people developing electrohypersensitivity we have a serious emerging and newly identified health risk that is likely to get worse until regulations restricting our exposure to electromagnetic pollutants are enforced. Since everyone uses light bulbs and since the incandescent light bulbs are being phased out this is an area that requires immediate attention."



Prologue

It's ironic that people buy these bulbs to help the environment, because they emit mercury vapor when they break.  In fact, they're so toxic that you're not supposed to put them in your regular garbage.  They're household hazardous waste.  If you break one in the house, you are supposed to open all of your windows and doors, and evacuate the house for at least 15 minutes to minimize your exposure to the poisonous mercury gas.  Don't forget that mercury is a bio-accumulative toxin, so it remains in your body forever in ever growing amounts.

Bulb photos are courtesy of David Dees.




For more information about compact fluorescent timebombs see http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com.au/search/label/compact%20fluorescent%20lights 



PLEASE Help This Unique Site Survive
Donate any amount and receive at least one New Illuminati eBook!
Just click in the jar -





For further enlightening information enter a word or phrase into the search box @  New Illuminati or click on any label/tag at the bottom of the pagehttp://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com


And see




 New Illuminati on Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/the.new.illuminati

New Illuminati Youtube Channel - http://www.youtube.com/user/newilluminati/feed



The Her(m)etic Hermit - http://hermetic.blog.com






This material is published under Creative Commons Fair Use Copyright (unless an individual item is declared otherwise by copyright holder) – reproduction for non-profit use is permitted & encouraged, if you give attribution to the work & author - and please include a (preferably active) link to the original along with this notice. Feel free to make non-commercial hard (printed) or software copies or mirror sites - you never know how long something will stay glued to the web – but remember attribution! If you like what you see, please send a tiny donation or leave a comment – and thanks for reading this far…


From the New Illuminati – http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com

Tuesday, 6 December 2011

Damning Study: Eco Bulbs Cause Cancer

Damning Study: Eco Bulbs Cause Cancer


Americans will be forced to use CFLs that contain poisonous carcinogens after government ban on traditional light bulb begins to take effect in January. The health of many other nations is also threatened.

Damning New Study: Eco Bulbs Cause Cancer 200411top

By Paul Joseph Watson

A damning study conducted by German scientists has found that so-called energy saving light bulbs contain poisonous carcinogens that could cause cancer and should be “kept as far away as possible from the human environment,” but Americans will be forced to replace their traditional light bulbs with toxic CFLs ahead of a government ban set to take effect at the start of next year.

“German scientists claimed that several carcinogenic chemicals and toxins were released when the environmentally-friendly compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs) were switched on, including phenol, naphthalene and styrene,” reports the London Telegraph.

The study, conducted by Peter Braun at the Berlin’s Alab Laboratory, led the scientists involved to warn that the bulbs should only be used sparingly, in areas with good ventilation, and “definitely not in the proximity of the head,” due to the danger of the electrical smog the bulbs generate impacting human health.

That’s going to cause difficulties for Americans who will be forced to buy the bulbs following a government ban on traditional incandescent lighting that comes into effect on January 1, 2012.

A 2007 bill signed in to law by President George W. Bush mandates that, “Manufacturers will no longer be able to make the 100-watt Thomas Edison bulb after Jan. 1, 2012, followed by the 75-watt version in Jan. 2013, and the the 60- and 40-watt bulbs in Jan. 2014.”

The legislation mirrors similar laws in Europe, where incandescent bulbs began to be phased out in 2009. The EU also plans to ban halogen bulbs by 2016, forcing people to use compact fluorescent lamps, or CFLs, which produce a poor quality of light with an attendant flicker affect that causes many people to become dizzy and ill.

Ron Paul is amongst those leading a charge in Congress to repeal the draconian state phase out of Thomas Edison’s iconic invention. The Freedom Action group has also launched a national campaign to repeal the ban. Last week, the South Carolina House passed a bill overturning the ban and similar legislation is in the works in Texas, Georgia and Minnesota.

“It is my strong belief that the feds have overstepped the 10th Amendment and now are venturing into telling us what kind of lighting we can have in our homes and businesses,” Republican Rep. Bill Sandifer said in a statement after the House passed his legislation. “This bill is about taking a stand against government intrusion in our everyday lives. I am championing this bill because I believe that we must fight for limited government, personal freedoms, and the free market.”

Damning New Study: Eco Bulbs Cause Cancer 210311banner

Forcing Americans to buy CFL bulbs that are harmful to their health and the environment is completely unconstitutional. Indeed, in a similar vein to forcing Americans to buy mandatory health insurance under Obamacare, it’s a clear violation of the Commerce Clause.

The so-called “dirty energy” emitted by CFLs produces radiation that has been linked with migraine headaches, sleep abnormalities, fatigue, and other health defects.

The new German study adds to concerns raised by separate research conducted by Abraham Haim, a professor of biology at Haifa University in Israel, who found that the light emitted by CFL’s increased the chance of women getting breast cancer by disrupting the body’s production of the hormone melatonin.

CFLs are also more harmful to the environment because they are filled with toxic mercury that contaminates the environment when the bulbs reach the landfill.

“A report released in 2008 from the Maine Department of Environmental Protection revealed that when a CFL bulb is broken, it can release dangerously high levels of mercury into the air,” writes Ethan Huff.

“In Toronto, city officials require people to dispose of CFL bulbs at special hazardous waste facilities because they don’t want the city’s landfills to become contaminated with mercury. While used CFL bulbs are not legally recognized as hazardous waste, they are treated as such because they pose serious environmental threats when broken and released into the environment.”

Americans have begun stockpiling dwindling supplies of incandescent light bulbs as the 2012 ban nears.

The light bulb ban is a foretaste of what’s to come as the enforcement arm of the eco-fascist agenda unfolds. As we have documented, enviro-Nazis envisage a future world in which car use will be heavily restricted, CO2 emissions will be rationed, meat will be considered a rare delicacy, the state will decide your career, and only the mega-rich elitists enforcing all these new rules and regulations will be exempt from them.

Indeed, as Rand Paul recently highlighted, the light bulb ban mirrors the collectivist dictatorship fictionalized in Ayn Rand’s dystopic novel Anthem, where the elite decides to replace light bulbs with candles as part of its purge of individual choice.

“There’s a young man and his name is Equality,” explained U.S. Sen. Rand Paul, a Kentucky Republican and tea party favorite, at a recent energy hearing in Washington where he talked about the book. “[The character] is an intelligent young man but he is banned from achieving or reaching any sort of occupation that would challenge him. He is a street sweeper.”

“Over time, he discovers an abandoned subway and rediscovers the incandescent light bulb,” Paul continued. “And he thinks, naively, that electricity and the brilliance of light would be an advantage for society and that it would bring great new things as far as being able to see at night, being able to read and the advancement of civilization.”

“He takes it before the collective of elders, and they take the light bulb, and basically it’s crushed beneath the boot heel of the collective,” Paul went on. “The collective has no place basically for individual choice.”

*********************

Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a regular fill-in host for The Alex Jones Show.









For further enlightening information enter a word or phrase into the search box @  New Illuminati or click on any label/tag at the bottom of the pagehttp://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com


And see

The Her(m)etic Hermit - http://hermetic.blog.com





This material is published under Creative Commons Fair Use Copyright (unless an individual item is declared otherwise by copyright holder) – reproduction for non-profit use is permitted & encouraged, if you give attribution to the work & author - and please include a (preferably active) link to the original along with this notice. Feel free to make non-commercial hard (printed) or software copies or mirror sites - you never know how long something will stay glued to the web – but remember attribution! If you like what you see, please send a tiny donation or leave a comment – and thanks for reading this far…

From the New Illuminati – http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com