Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 49

Thread: Flourescent lights...

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Way too sunny Sacramento, CA area
    Posts
    56
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Flourescent lights...

    EEK! I was in my kitchen, doing dishes, making lunch for the kiddos, cleaning, and my 10 y/o daughter walks in and says, "Yikes, Mom, look at your arms and your neck!" Holy guacamole(as my 5 y/o says)! The rash that I get out in the sun comes out under my flourescent kitchen lighting- bare flourescent bulbs with no covers. I've always hated those lights for the glare and now I have another reason! I was wearing a tank top(only wear those indoors these days) and the rash left very noticeable lines on my shoulders, chest, and back. It's all splotchy with little red pinpricks all over. I need to pull out my winter clothes that I stashed in the back of the closet because my arms are so ugly these days I want to cover them up.

  2. #2
    Saysusie's Avatar
    Saysusie is offline Super Moderator Super ModeratorEmperor of the Universe
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Victorville, California
    Posts
    7,721
    Blog Entries
    9
    Thanks
    1,578
    Thanked 919 Times in 582 Posts

    Default

    Hi Jennyfoo:
    Yes, we also have to avoid "hidden" UV rays that are in Fluorescent lighting! So, you also have to be careful when you shop at Walmart or Kmart, and most grocery stores .. or ANY store that uses the fluorescent light fixtures (long rectangle boxes with long tube-shaped light bulbs). Most people are unaware of the fact that fluorescent lighting gives off UV rays, unless the fixture is fitted with a special lens.
    So, you should use sunscreen even when you are indoors under fluorescent lighting and keep your body covered in tight weave, loose fitted clothing!

    Peace and Blessings
    Saysusie
    Look For The Good and Praise It!

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    California
    Posts
    684
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 14 Times in 13 Posts

    Default Flourescent Light Law Effective 2009

    Hi Jenny & Saysusie,

    My Mom just told me that as of 2009 per CNN or ABC, there is a new law taking effect that only flourescent lights can be used as of 2009 and regular bulbs will be discontinued. Flourescent lights have been known to be "more efficient" and "energy saving." Personally, I would rather not be sick and pay for the little bit of electricity.

    Ladies, please stock up on regular light bulbs in large amounts. I can't believe this law is actually taking effect especially with the high amount of Lupus patients across the country. How in the world did this get past the LFA?

    Take care,

    Faith

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    30
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    Hello guys,

    Well, it is such a coincidence you mentioned that Faith because here in NZ the government announced that by the end of 2009 they are banning the sale of incandescent bulbs. (same in US--funny that)

    I have heard that other countries are also moving ahead with this ban and EU and UK has started last year (if I remember right).

    Since we can't go outdoors already so what does it mean if we can't even have light sources that are safe in our homes?

    I have written to the energy minister here in NZ and I hope I get some response. From what I know, energy saving bulbs do emit a small amount of UV and if we are to live under these lights I suspect I won't be the only one feeling crook.

    The other option is to install special UV blocking filters on every light fixture in the house (which sounds really bad to me--maybe look just as horrible).

    It just doesn't sound like there is a cheap and safe alternative at this stage for us Lupus people if they banned the light bulb...

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    California
    Posts
    684
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 14 Times in 13 Posts

    Default

    Hi tintin28,

    How are those uv tinted windows working? I haven't talked with you in a while. I hope are doing very well. I can't believe our countries are actually doing this. I am simply amazed and in disbelief. My husband thinks I am paranoid because I wear UV clothing when we go shopping at Samsclub or Costco (huge grocery warehouses with UVA flourescent lights). UVA is actually more harmful than UBV (sun's rays) from what I have read up on.

    I think you are correct in that there is not a safe and cheap alternative. At work, I have open flourescent lights and my scalp breaks out and hair loss, and I have also noticed I have more headaches with the brightness. I use small lamps in each room with non-flourescent lights at home, otherwise my eyes hurt all the time. I am definately stocking up as much as I can.

    I think I will write the LFA (USA) on this issue and see what the response is along with local reps. I believe in going green; as long as it doesn't affect anyones health and wellness.

    At times; I think all countries go to polar opposite extremes not realizing how harmful this is to our public (i.e. environmental laws that hamper health and drilling in Colorado and off the California coast due to oil spills, etc.). We, as nations, somehow have to find a middle balance or otherwise alternative lighting and fuels. We are really sinking ourselves if we don't.

    Stock up ladies and gentlemen on as much as you possibly can in the next several months. We all need to be proactive for our health.

    Take care,

    Faith

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    30
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    Hello Faith,

    Yes, I have been away for a while--the semester start was rather busy and one of my colleagues is on sabatical leave so the workload has gone up a bit. I am just glad I can work my normal hours again. I hope you are well too?

    The window tinting works wonders--the rash receded completely but I still have a little pink patch on the cheek after getting a spot of sun a few weeks ago (I had like 3-4 seconds of sun--how crap is that?)

    I think it is a good idea to write to LFA--I have just written to the lupus organisation over here (it is a heck of a lot smaller than LFA in US). I suspect if you guys can lobby some sort of change in America then small countries like NZ and Australia will follow. I have also written to the radio stations so now it is just a matter of waiting and seeing what happens. I will keep you guys posted.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    California
    Posts
    684
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 14 Times in 13 Posts

    Default

    Hi tintin,

    I am sorry to hear your workload has increased; that's not too fun. Do you not have the Summer (schools) off as we in the States? Make sure you are getting enough rest. Like I am one to speak since it's 2:00 am and can't get to sleep. lol. I am glad to hear you are doing better and, the window tinting works!!

    Doing well; I was just recently diagnosed with Sjogren's and APS (anti-phospholipid Syndrome) which causes clotting problems (heart-attacks, mitral valve prolapse). I was expecting, at some point, Sjogrens; but the APS totally took me by surprise. Apparently they both run with Lupus; do auto-immunes ever take a break because I would love to have one!! lol.

    After working for 18 years for the same company with 17 years of excellent reviews, my husband was put on a 60 day probation period; it's scarry since all the insurance is through him. I really wish I had cobra'd a couple of years ago. The economy is slow and I think the manager has been told to lay off; he's definately not going to lay off his son who has just had a newborn baby and has worked there for 4 years. If my husband is let go, we both realize he will take a huge cut in pay since he is an office engineer and not a licensed engineer. It's stressing me out, and the fun fibro has been making waves. I apologize if I sound like I am having a pity party; I am afraid of losing everything. Enough of that. I am praying, praying and praying. God doesn't give us more than we can handle, correct? This is just another test of faith that will pass.

    I sympathize about the sun; I am the same and very sensitive on my hands, shoulders, arms and legs. Are you on Plaquenil 200 mg 2 per evening? That should help you build up some additional resistance. How much? I don't know since everyone is different.

    So far, keep my fingers crossed, I haven't had the mylar rash. You know the script for getting rid of that rash? Any type of cream with Cortisone in it applied 3x daily (Cortaid, Hydrocortisone cream, etc.) or you can ask your doc to call in a rx for Triamcinolone cream 0.1%, applied 2-3x daily. It comes in a huge tub and will last me a full year. Stateside, it is a generic so it's $20.00.

    I will definately write stateside to the LFA; it can't hurt. Maybe we can get a rally going against this new law. Let us know what happens on your end. I will make some calls tomorrow. Heading for my generic Temperpedic (comfy bed); I think I can sleep now.

    Take care,

    Faith

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,998
    Thanks
    256
    Thanked 146 Times in 77 Posts

    Default

    No more incandescent lights? Say it isn't so. My body, my eyes have disliked the blue, eye aching, skin rashing buzzing bulbs since I can remember....

    The fluorescents cost more, will use less energy, but will the electric company raise their rates to compensate from the profit loss.. :shock:

    So, there probably won't be a consumer savings...

    I found this..

    By Eric Kelderman, www.Stateline.org

    Whatís the latest bright idea to save energy? Lawmakers in at least seven states want to ban ordinary light bulbs in favor of longer-lasting, energy-efficient compact fluorescents.

    Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick (D) already has ordered state agencies to fill the light sockets with fluorescents to save electricity and cut power-plant emissions blamed for global warming.

    In what could be the beginning of the end for inventor Thomas Alva Edisonís most famous achievement, even his home state of New Jersey has a bill to do away with energy-eating incandescent bulbs in state government buildings within three years. A similar proposal is up for debate in South Carolina. And legislatures in California, Connecticut, North Carolina and Rhode Island are debating bills to phase out traditional light bulbs statewide by 2012 or 2016 as a way to trim consumers' and governments' electricity bills and to help save the planet from global warming.

    The incandescent light bulb isnít on a slippery slope just in the United States. Australia already has banned it by 2010, and the Canadian province of Ontario will do the same by 2012.

    The problem is that more than 90 percent of the energy used to light a thin tungsten filament inside common bulbs ó using a different material but the same design as Edison in 1879 ó goes to waste as excess heat, according to the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE). Several inventors actually worked on the light bulb before Edison, but heís credited with improving it enough for safe, practical use.

    Fluorescent lights use electricity to excite a gas inside a glass tube. They consume one-quarter to one-third as much electricity as conventional light bulbs and last up to 10 times longer, according to ACEEE. One downside, though, is they also contain small amounts of toxic mercury and should be properly recycled, the EPA recommends.

    With an estimated 4 billion light sockets in the country, the simple gesture of changing a light bulb is seen as a big idea in a world just told by an international scientific panel that human activity is almost certainly heating up the planet. The less electricity a household uses, the less power that must be generated by coal- and natural gas-fired plants that produce carbon dioxide, one of the main gases blamed for global warming.

    The California bill, which would ban the sale of most incandescent bulbs in the Golden State by 2012, was passed by the Assembly's Utilities and Commerce Committee on April 23. A competing measure would require all residential lighting in California to be 50 percent more energy-efficient by 2018.

    The proposed bans in California, North Carolina and Rhode Island would bar the sale of incandescent bulbs that use 25 watts to 150 watts of electricity but would exclude appliance lighting and several specialty lamps, such as used in traffic signals, on boats or inside mines.

    The Connecticut bill would authorize the state Commissioner of Environmental Protection to develop a list of inefficient incandescent bulbs to be banned.

    Besides cutting consumersí electricity bills, fluorescent lighting has potential to cut the nation's carbon-dioxide emissions by as much as 125 billion pounds a year, according to the ACEEE.

    Patrick's office estimates that changing 1,000 bulbs in Massachusetts' State House will save $15,000 a year in electricity usage and reduce carbon-dioxide emissions by 56 tons. "Itís a small start, but such small starts add up to big savings ó in our pocketbooks, and for our environment,Ē Patrick said in a statement when announcing his executive order April 18.

    States arenít alone in targeting the light bulb. U.S. Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.) also has introduced a bill that would require all bulbs to be as efficient as fluorescents by 2012.

    In March, bulb-maker Phillips Lighting Co. announced a partnership with the Natural Resources Defense Council and other environmental groups to advocate measures phasing out incandescent bulbs by 2016.

    Eyeing potential profits from energy savings and a growing market of environmentally conscious customers, Home Depot gave away 1 million fluorescent bulbs on Earth Day (April 22), said Jean Niemi, a spokeswoman for the home improvement company. Discount retailer Wal-Mart has a goal of selling 100 million fluorescents a year.

  9. #9
    Saysusie's Avatar
    Saysusie is offline Super Moderator Super ModeratorEmperor of the Universe
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Victorville, California
    Posts
    7,721
    Blog Entries
    9
    Thanks
    1,578
    Thanked 919 Times in 582 Posts

    Default

    OMG!!! Like we don't have enough to contend with! Now, we are going to be forced to use lighting that actually causes us to flare-up. So, I am going to do some research and/or contact the ADA to see what, if anything, rights we might have in our workplace to not be subjected to lighting that has ill affects on our health!
    So, my blood is boiling now. I can understand trying to conserve energy. But, why are our options taken away completely! Are we going to have to get some kind of government waiver in order to use incandescent lights? If this ain't "Big Brother", I'm not sure what is!!!

    M. A. H.
    Saysuei
    Look For The Good and Praise It!

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    915
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default

    I think that it is terrible that they are going to force us to us flourescent lighting. There aught to be a way to fight this. I am wondering though if opaque shades over the lights help at all against the UV rays put off by them? Anyone have any answers?

    thanks,
    Kathy
    Lupus for many years. Like most of my life. Sjogrens that started at 35 and Scoliosis, Spinal Stenosis, Degenerative Disc Disease, Osteo-Arthritis of the spine, Ankylosing Spondilitis, Periferal Neuropathy, mild CP and now just recently diagnosed with PA. I had a disc replaced in December of 2007.

    Medications:
    Plaquenil, Sulindac, Imuran, Celiac diet, Tramadol and B12 shot once a month.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •