DANGEROUS CFL BULBS IN OUR HOUSES

[Baoh]

I think the study the OP was referring to was this one:
Walls HL et al. (2011) Eye Disease Resulting From Increased Use of Fluorescent Lighting as a Climate Change Mitigation Strategy.

There is a response, it appears.

American Journal of Public Health
August 2012, Vol. 102, No. 8 : pp. e6-e6

Climate Change, Fluorescent Lighting, and Eye Disease: A Little Too Light on the Science
Andrew Bierman and Mark S. Rea
(doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2012.300730)

I will try to find copies of both documents when I have time.

 

[Jacqui]

Reminder... please keep the debate about the subject, not about each other and your views of them. Thanks!

 

[Kapidolo Farms]

http://www.tortoiseforum.org/thread-60691.html

Cool new thread.

So, when I was a young lad they told me certain bad habits would lead to blindness. I can still see, though I do need to wear glasses, thank god for moderation.

Smiley face.

 

[Jacqui]

This type of moderation has nothing to do with you going blind, it has to do with going off topic just to get folks to read your thread.

 

[Edna]

Edna, I don't understand what your deal is about this subject. Anyone can find "scientific studies" to back up any claim they want. Look at the whole "global warming" scandal.

This forum is all about experienced people sharing things they have observed with other like minded individuals. Because someone in some lab tested a few bulbs with some sort of meter, does not mean that the millions of these bulbs that are sold are all safe, OR all dangerous for that matter. Frankly I didn't find the link you posted helpful for much of anything. I mean you no offense, but all the graphs of all the different individual bulbs really didn't tell me much. Whatever that study found, whatever any "study" finds does not change the personal observations of many experienced people in my mind. There are myriad explanations why a bulb could test one way in a lab, and perform a different way in practice over the enclosure of a live animal.

Because data can be, and often is, skewed to suit an agenda, I tend to trust the judgement of people that I personally know and are generally successful at what I am attempting. Regardless of what your study showed, I have personally witnessed many cases of these cfl UV bulbs doing damage to reptile eyes. To be fair I have also seen them used many more times with no apparent ill effect. The bottom line is that at some point everyone has to decide to trust the word of someone, and I tend to favor the word of the actual practitioner over the word of the lab scientist. Everyone else is, of course, free to trust, or not trust, the word of whomever they wish.

I and others have presented FIRST hand information here. I believe Heathesr's approach is sensible. Where there is smoke, often there really is fire. Are you telling me that would would accept the findings of a single grad student who published a single article in a "scientific" journal as the "gospel truth" over the word of dozens of people who have been keeping turtles and tortoises for decades and have actually really used these bulbs, and actually seen problems?

This post is not an attack. We all know that tone doesn't come across in type. My tone here is intended to just be conversational. I'm just questioning a friend and trying to understand why you are so hot after this topic and why experienced people sharing their experiences equates to "drinking the proverbial kool-aide" for you.

Tom,
First, I have to admit that I laughed out loud at your Kool-aide analogy. I went back and read this whole thread and could not find a single instance of “experienced people sharing their experiences.” What I do read in the many threads about lighting sounds more like, “Trust me, I know about these things.” And to me that sounds just like, “Trust me, drink the Kool-aide.”
My “deal” with this subject is that claims have been made but evidence has not been presented. I have found only one statement of personal experience with a cfl uvb bulb damaging an animal. That would be Maggie’s statement on Student’s “The Discussion” thread. Her statement lacks the kind of information that would make it useful, such as specific bulb manufacture and date, burn-in time, and how other possible causes for the problem were eliminated. Subsequent posts asked her specifically to provide information about the year in which the incident happened and the mounting position of bulbs. Such information was not provided.
When I posted a question about using T-5 bulbs, Student stated that he had used them and they had blinded his tortoises. Again, he gave no helpful details about the manufacture of the bulbs, how high they were mounted above the substrate, how long he burned them in before exposing his animals to them.
I am willing to accept primary evidence that cfls are harmful. That would include statements that begin: “In 20XX, I used bulb X with my (specify age and species). I burned the bulb in following the manufacturer’s directions and mounted it X inches above the substrate. My tortoise had (describe opportunities to avoid the light).”
On Student’s thread, you stated: “I have seen many instances of it here on this forum.” Student replied, “Tom, just to put a point on it…. Can you specify which brands you have used and experienced issues with?” (Emphasis added)
I don’t accept instances you have seen on this forum as evidence. Whenever someone is having a problem with their tortoise, the first thing blamed is the lighting if it is cfl. The presence and then removal of a cfl, along with other changes in cares, followed by improvement of the tortoise, does not constitute proof of a cause/effect relationship regarding the cfl and eye damage. Remote diagnosis based on a keeper’s description is suspect at best. Attributing a “cure” to one of the changes made is suspect as well.
I don’t share your skeptical view of science. The wave lengths of eye-damaging light can be determined. Bulbs can be tested to determine which wave lengths they are emitting. In an article written for a scientific journal, I expect to see a problem statement, a hypothesis, a review of the literature, an explanation of theory, information about sampling and methods, findings, analysis, and discussion. If charts and graphs are provided, I can read those and decide for myself if the reporting is consistent with the data. If you wish to claim that the researchers and writers of such articles are all grad students, that wouldn’t be too difficult to check on. However, I doubt your premise.
Where are all the first hand reports of damage from cfls? I’d be happy to compile the data from them.
Edna

 

[lynnedit]

Edna, that was very well put. I have assumed coil bulbs are harmful, because it is stated so on this forum, but actual experience matters!

I remember seeing this article, I guess skin cells could be extrapolated to eye cells.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=can-compact-fluorescent-lightbulbs-damage-skin

I find tortoise/reptile lighting very confusing. My main concern is that torts are much closer to the lighting than we are.
Our bulbs are in can lights in the ceiling, or have a lamp shade. But to get warm, they have to get within a foot or so of the light.

 

[CourtneyAndCarl]

Everything has its faults. I'm sure they will be finding plenty of things wrong with LEDs eventually.

 

[Edna]

Everything has its faults. I'm sure they will be finding plenty of things wrong with LEDs eventually.

I began wearing glasses years ago because light shatter at night was making it impossible for me to drive. Just recently I noticed that the anti-glare coating on my glasses is completely ineffective with LED headlights. I'm night-blind again!

 

[Kapidolo Farms]

Hi Edna,

I like reading your posts, they are well thought out and balanced.

I use T5 tubes, I have now had them over several pancakes for a few months, no issues. I use BluMax complete spectrum bulbs, they are manufactured for people with SAD. This is not too rigorous a use, as pancakes are not 'baskers' for the most part. I will get some of the Arcadia T5 tubes soon, and see what comes of it. All these are T5HO, not T5HE, so the higher wattage tubes are what I'm using.

I have a few CFL in use, exo terra 2.0, zoo med 5.0 (both the lower wattage), and bright white from Home Depot. I don't like them, they create to much of an intense focus of light, the T5 tubes distribute light over a larger area (the length of the tube) and that just works better for my applications.

Will

 

[Millerlite]

Think the major problem with led bulbs is the shades of light. It will get better and cheaper.

 

[Tom]

Edna, I understand that you would like specific, documented scientific proof. That would be great, but we don't have it. I have listed first hand experiences about this many times. I can't help it if you wish to disregard my, or anyone else's experiences because they didn't keep specific recorded details. I saw a friend raise a healthy bearded dragon from a hatchling. I provided her with food for it on occasion. All was fine for years, then she went to the pet store and they sold her a coil bulb instead of her usual, but more expensive MVB. By the second day the lizard who had never skipped a meal went off food. Days 3 and 4 saw his eyes get more and more swollen and a steady increase in eye rubbing with the forelimbs. After a week and a half she called me over to help her see what the issue was. She never told me about the new bulb. I went over there and looking down on the lizard I could not see the bulb. I could see that his eyes were swollen shut and he was rubbing at them frequently. I picked up the fixtures and saw the dreaded coil bulb. I asked how long she had been using it and she said about a week and a half. I asked when did the problem start, she said around a wek and a half ago... She removed the bulb and within days the swelling receded and he began feeding again. Within a couple of months he was completely back to normal again. I don't know what brand it was. Don't care. She bought it at Petco. The enclosure was around 18" tall and the bulb sat on top. The lizard could climb his branches and get to around 12" from the bulb at the closest. There was no "burn in" time that I'm aware of. This is just one example. I've seen similar examples in other species, including baby tortoises. This is enough "evidence" for me. This is credible info coming from credible people. I don't need light meter readings and peer reviewed literature to convince me of what I have seen. If you do, that is fine. No problem there. My problem is the insinuation that me and others have some reason to jump on some sort of crazy train and just make stuff up for no good reason. I have seen what I have seen. The fact that I cannot meet your standard of proof does not mean it didn't happen, or that I or anyone else is wrong about it. Like you I have also seen them used many times without apparent issue. Am I curious about why this is? Sure. But I have seen that they are enough of a problem, frequently enough, that people are better off using something that is safer, and so that is what I recommend.

I don't have "evidence" that the sky is blue either. But it is. And if someone asks me what color it is, I will tell them blue. Science is great. I love science. It was my favorite subject in school. The thing is, I don't always need science to tell me things that are obvious.

 

[wellington]

Well said Tom and I totally agree. Although I don't have any hands on experience with them, nor have I seen anyone that has had problems with them, the experiences of the honest experienced members of this forum, such as Tom and many others, well that's enough for me. After all, I don't want to risk my own torts eyes on something that many has said is bad and have seen the results of it being bad. Also, there are other reptiles that this bulb is not recommended for and for the same reasons. Enough for me. If you (whoever) wants to risk your torts eye sight, and put them through that pain, as cruel as it may be if it turns out bad, it's your choice. The reports of them having bad effects on humans is just another reason to not use them!

---

BTW, I can't quote the details and scientific findings that made up the segment, as it was on my local news.

 

[lynnedit]

No way am I going to use a coil bulb, EVER, but Edna's post is very well expressed and thought provoking.

I am going to try to learn until I drop. I wish there was more information on the best way to provide reptile lighting and heat. Seems we have a long way to go.

---

Think the major problem with led bulbs is the shades of light. It will get better and cheaper.

What do you mean about the 'shades of light'?

 

[Baoh]

I think the study the OP was referring to was this one:
Walls HL et al. (2011) Eye Disease Resulting From Increased Use of Fluorescent Lighting as a Climate Change Mitigation Strategy.

There is a response, it appears.

American Journal of Public Health
August 2012, Vol. 102, No. 8 : pp. e6-e6

Climate Change, Fluorescent Lighting, and Eye Disease: A Little Too Light on the Science
Andrew Bierman and Mark S. Rea
(doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2012.300730)

I will try to find copies of both documents when I have time.

Neither of these are studies, but are effectively op-ed journal entries.

I will attach them, but I would recommend that anyone reading this not waste their time unless they choose to read the source references supplied. The original piece is full of errors and these are only given partial address by the second piece.

Much appreciation to a comrade in thoughts who was generous enough to send me these.

 

[lynnedit]

Thank you, Baoh! I tried to look at your link before but could only see the abstract w/o registering.
Much appreciated.

 

[Baoh]

Anytime, but they are not worth the effort (in my opinion), as they are simply opinion pieces rather than studies.