CFL's admiting Harmful Radiation?!???

for example....the only lights on in my house right now are the ones coming out of my computer screen and the cfl's in my grow area. which isnt anywhere near me. and theres been more fires with HID's than with cfl's. but i'm not gonna lie....that shit hurts your eyes even if your not looking at it directly. the friggin "cool white" ones give everything some weird blue/white glow...kinda creepy. but i did just replace a 40w incan in my house with a 13w cfl that makes better lighting.

in oregon we like to conserve energy. and my mercury ballasts are always recycled.

You're all missing the details on cfl's, let me explain quick and simple...

1. Radiation is only a problem INCHES away from the bulb... Your plants are getting it, but that's fine. You just should NOT use a CFL in your desklamp or reading lamp or any fixture you stay within a foot of for prolonged periods of time. It's really no different than how everyone had Tube TV's and you weren't supposed to stick your face up to the tv, same deal.

And another important note: For CFL's to save you money on your lighting you need to have them running for longer periods of time than just turning them on when you go into the area and turning them off. For example going into your kitchen with 500w of combined cfl's and just running them 30 minutes to an hour. The startup current is high and it makes them ***less efficient*** than even incandescents when used in places where you're just in and out and turning them off quick.

And another: If you are running 500w of cfl's you could have gotten the same lumens from 250w of halide or hps...

And another: Look up the specifications of your CFL's. Many of them are only rated for a certain number of lumens at a low ambient temperature. They say like a 40w gives around 2600 lumens AT 72 degrees farenheit. If you look closer that means running them in a 80 degree f grow and having a reflector on them which brings the ballast up to 90f or even 100f the efficiency and light output drops substantially. That 2600 lumen light may only put out 1800 lumens with the ballast at 100f.

On top of the issues of mercury and broken bulbs etc...

I like cfl's around the house where it makes sense to run them, not in my grow, not in a hallway where you just turn them on for 10 minutes or etc...

This is some of the symptoms that can be caused by mercury. I think the scariest part is that all the symptoms are fairly Normal problems that people deal with every day, It kinda makes you wonder what the real problems are.

I'v been diagnosed with general anxiety disorder and I have been taking meds for it since I was 17. A lot of the symptoms of depression and general anxiety are the same as low exposure to mercury.



CFL's depend upon mercury vapor to work. According to the EPA, the following are some health risks of exposure to mercury and mercury vapor depending upon levels of exposure.

Where in the hell am I? said:

"These are the EPA Guidelines for cleaning up a Broken CFL bulb, I suggest anyone who uses them to Please read this. Especially if you have young kids or babies in your home", there are EPA guidelines for cleaning up ALL/ANY broken bulbs.

Click to expand...

....yeah, theres EPA guidelines for cleaning up any hazardous materials. Just because no one follows them, does not mean they shouldnt be followed or at least considered when cleaning up elemental mercury in your home.

And theres no 11-12 step guide to clean up regular bulbs. Its because of mercury.....If you like ingesting mercury then dont follow them, thats your choice to make.

fdd2blk said:

i know EXACTLY what smoking does. do you know what CFL's do?

Click to expand...

Yes. Nothing so far.

Only about 20% carry a harmful amount of UV, if in the same area for too long. Seen this just today on Daily Planet on Discovery Channel. This explains why CFL's are actually not bad to use during veg.

346ss said:

hold on.. you guys are worrying about these little itty bitty CFL lights, and how they "can cause radiation" or whatever..

But did you happen to think about what smoking does to your body? and your lungs?

Click to expand...

If you are referring to smoking pot, do you know what it does? There is no risk of cancer, it can actually inhibit or cure cancer in some studies.

It also increases your lung capacity if you always take huge bong hits and stretch your lungs out.

It can HELP people with asthma by opening up airways...

The only time smoking pot is really that bad for you is if you spray some poison on the plants to kill bugs that you shouldn't or similar.

People have smoked pot for thousands of years and there is not one case of cancer on record caused by pot alone. No cases of emphysema or any of that kind of crap either.

Nobody ends up on oxygen machines or having to have a hole cut in their throat etc... No matter how much of a 24/7 stoner you are.

Cigarettes are another matter all together, but smoking pot is about the least harmful thing your lungs are exposed to in life these days.

Good stuff or.med.

oregonmeds said:

if you are referring to smoking pot, do you know what it does? There is no risk of cancer, it can actually inhibit or cure cancer in some studies.

It also increases your lung capacity if you always take huge bong hits and stretch your lungs out.

It can help people with asthma by opening up airways...

The only time smoking pot is really that bad for you is if you spray some poison on the plants to kill bugs that you shouldn't or similar.

People have smoked pot for thousands of years and there is not one case of cancer on record caused by pot alone. No cases of emphysema or any of that kind of crap either.

Nobody ends up on oxygen machines or having to have a hole cut in their throat etc... No matter how much of a 24/7 stoner you are.

Cigarettes are another matter all together, but smoking pot is about the least harmful thing your lungs are exposed to in life these days.

Click to expand...

If I may, as a physician, I'm just gonna clear up some things around here:

1. Cfls do emit UVA. Yet UVA is virtually harmless to any organism on this earth. It's the UVB and (especially) UVC rays that are hazardous and deadly. If UVA actually could pass the keratine layer of the skin it would produce melanocites that are responsable for a darker tan color. You can't get a tan from cfls. Only UVB and UVC rays pass through the keratine layer and thus, produce a darker tan.
Also, UVA has no effect on your plants. Only UVB improves trichome production and potency. UVC is deadly to any and all organisms on this earth.

2. Most cfls do contain a worrying amount of mercury or other heavy metals that are highly poisonous to humans and plants. If you break one, be sure to protect yourself and your plants from the metal vapors as well as you can. Ventilate/air out the room, then pick up the shards. Do not spend (you or your plant) any unnecessary time in a room with a freshly broken cfl. (Protecting your plant is good because mercury is absorbed by the plant, ends up in the buds and eventually back in your lungs. Granted, it's not as bad as inhaling pure mercury vapor, but if you care about your health, take good care of your plant, as if it were your body.)
Yet, if you look at a global scale, more mercury is released into the atmosphere from a coal power plant in order to sustain an incandescent than a cfl. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Mercury_emissions_by_light_source_(en).svg)

3. It is true that cfls emmit worse electromagnetic radiation than incandescent bulbs. Incandes. bulbs run on 50Hz, a frequency too large to "break through" the skin and affect us while cfls run on some 40kHz, almost 1000x the frequency of and incandescent. This EM frequiceny will affect all tissues and cells in your body and in the plants body in a harmful, negative way.

I recommend, if you care about your eye sight, general health and the environement, get LED lamps. They produce alot of light, contain no toxic elements (some may have cadmium, but it's not nearly as toxic as mercury), don't break easily, have a really long life, run at 50Hz, use less than 1w/100lum, occupy little space, are dimmable and produce no IR or UV light.

As for plant lighting, LEDs seem to be gaining popularity due to lower consumption, no extra heat and no more electric fiddling with wiring or other electronics like ballasts. http://ledgrow.eu/

Doctor cannabis you don't know much about cannabis growing if you are suggesting people use LED's to grow with.
LED's still suck ass at flowering and are only barely enough to veg with if you spend a shitload of money on them.

Might need to change that name... Dr I dunno a thing

346ss said:

Yes. Nothing so far.

Click to expand...

that's what they said about asbestos.

Oh, and as for the smoking part:

Smoking, in general, is bad. Through combustion, carbon monoxide (CO) and tar are released.
CO permanently binds to the hemoglobin in your red blood cells, thus forever hindering the transportation of oxygen by the affected red cells. Red cells have a life of 120 days, so only after 120 days of not smoking will a maximum of oxygen transportation reoccur in your body.
Tar is a substance produced by combustion of aromatic esters. It is extremely toxic to all cells and will affect your respiratory system, producing bronchitis, emphysema and many other horrible conditions.
Smoking will slowly paralyze the cilia of the trachea/windpipe (this is still reversible), thus making your lungs more vulnerable to bacteria, microorganisms, ash, dust or any other airborne particle.
All of these will sustain the build-up of precancerous formations in the lungs and body, thus leading to cancer.

Yet:

There are many studies out there that suggest that smoking cannabis, even in amazingly large quantities (70 joints a day!) will not affect the lungs and body at all, in regards to cancer formation. At all. Actually, if you want to be blunt (hihi...) about it, a 1974 Virginia University study showed that cannabis succesfully hinders the formation of breast, lung and skin cancer. A study performed in Madrid in 2000 proved that cannabis will stop the growth of tumors in the brain. I could go on and on, but I'd rather that you check these out for yourself:

https://www.rollitup.org/general-marijuana-growing/151533-medical-marijuana-uses-700-medical.html

And if you still want to completely eliminate CO and tar, buy a vaporizer.

Doctor Cannabis said:

Oh, and as for the smoking part:

Smoking, in general, is bad. Though combustion carbon monoxide (CO) and tar are released.
CO permanently binds to the hemoglobin in your red blood cells, thus forever hindering the transportation of oxygen by the affected red cells. Red cells have a life of 120 days, so only after 120 days of not smoking will a maximum of oxygen transportation reoccur in your body.
Tar is a substance produced by combustion of aromatic esters. It is extremely toxic to all cells and will affect your respiratory system, producing bronchitis, emphysema and many other horrible conditions.
Smoking will slowly paralyze the cilia of the trachea/windpipe (this is still reversible), thus making your lungs more vulnerable to bacteria, microorganisms, ash, dust or any other airborne particle.
All of these will sustain the build-up of precancerous formations in the lungs and body, thus leading to cancer.

Yet:

There are many studies out there that suggest that smoking cannabis, even in amazingly large quantities (70 joints a day!) will not affect the lungs and body at all, in regards to cancer formation. At all. Actually, if you want to be blunt (hihi...) about it, a 1974 Virginia University study showed that cannabis succesfully hinders the formation of breast, lung and skin cancer. A study performed in Madrid in 2000 proved that cannabis will stop the growth of tumors in the brain. I could go on and on, but I'd rather that you check these out for yourself:

https://www.rollitup.org/general-marijuana-growing/151533-medical-marijuana-uses-700-medical.html

And if you still want to completely eliminate CO and tar, buy a vaporizer.

Click to expand...

Smoking is bad for you and tar does this and that, except for marijuana...

OregonMeds said:

Doctor cannabis you don't know much about cannabis growing if you are suggesting people use LED's to grow with.
LED's still suck ass at flowering and are only barely enough to veg with if you spend a shitload of money on them.

Might need to change that name... Dr I dunno a thing

Click to expand...

I'm not saying "go out and buy LEDs", I'm only saying that people have started growing with LEDs and are happy with their results.

I will admit that LED light won't shine as far as HID light, but seeing that they produce almost no heat, you can keep them at 4 inches from your plant.

http://www.ledgrowlights.com/LED vs. HID.htm

Doctor Cannabis said:

I'm not saying "go out and buy LEDs", I'm only saying that people have started growing with LEDs and are happy with their results.

I will admit that LED light won't shine as far as HID light, but seeing that they produce almost no heat, you can keep them at 4 inches from your plant.

http://www.ledgrowlights.com/LED vs. HID.htm

Click to expand...

kinda hard to do when you have a 10 X 10 foot room full of plants.

Doctor Cannabis said:

I'm not saying "go out and buy LEDs", I'm only saying that people have started growing with LEDs and are happy with their results.

I will admit that LED light won't shine as far as HID light, but seeing that they produce almost no heat, you can keep them at 4 inches from your plant.

http://www.ledgrowlights.com/LED%20vs.%20HID.htm

Click to expand...

I have to say, I agree with pretty much Everything you have said so far Dr.C, Except growing with LEDs. I think LEDs are a good option to replace lights in your house (much better and safer then CFLs and will last longer) But I still think there will have to be another breakthrough in LED technology before they are even close to being worth the investment. Higher power LEDs are really the only option, but then you run into that same old problem, your running a lot of wattage, and you could probably be running more efficient with HIDs. Although less heat is a bonus with LED lights, the UFOs and high power lighting panels do get quite hot, especially when running 12-18 hours a day.


But IMO CFLs are still a great alternative for growing if your careful, although I would still choose an HID over CFLs or LEDs any day.

The problem with CFLs and LEDs, once you start running multiple lights (like people who run 5-6 of the 43w CFLs) You could run a 250w HPS and it will run more efficiently and produce more light.

fdd2blk said:

kinda hard to do when you have a 10 X 10 foot room full of plants.

Click to expand...

I must've said something wrong around here, otherwise I don't get why I'm getting all the criticism.

LED panels have been used by some growers who have said that they provide good results. It's just like SOG, ScrOG, cfl grows, HID grows, micro grows or what not, some growers are for them, some against. But if you like the idea and it suits your needs and conditions, you might want to look into it. No one's putting a gun to anyone's head here...

2 funny FDD.
Hell these days, I ignore all that shit. If you really keep track of everything they "inform" and "educate" us on, you would come to the conclusion that living life is hazardous to your health.

flamdrags420 said:

2 funny FDD.
Hell these days, I ignore all that shit. If you really keep track of everything they "inform" and "educate" us on, you would come to the conclusion that living life is hazardous to your health.

Click to expand...

You can ignore it but that wont make it go away. CFLs have not been around that long, so essentially we are the long term test subjects, the people who buy and use them. At one point everyone thought asbestos was fine to use in all kinds of building materials.....Until they found all the health risks associated with asbestos.