Following a letter from a researcher from the University of Haifa, the Interior and Environmental Protection Committee of the Knesset froze discussion of a bill to replace the lighting with fluorescent lighting in public buildings
Following the letter of Prof. Avraham Haim from the Department of Evolutionary Biology at the University of Haifa, the Interior and Environmental Protection Committee of the Knesset decided to freeze the vote on the bill to replace the existing lighting with fluorescent lighting in public buildings. "Research findings show a direct link between fluorescent light and the development of prostate cancer cells," Prof. Haim wrote in his letter.
The Interior and Environmental Protection Committee of the Knesset was supposed to discuss on Tuesday the bill of MK Astrina Tertman and MK Alex Miller, according to which all public institutions in Israel will be required to switch to the use of fluorescent bulbs or similar energy-saving bulbs, with the aim of reducing electricity consumption and contributing to the reduction of air pollution . However, following a letter sent by Prof. Chaim to the chairman of the committee, MK Ofir Pines, in which he warns of the dangerous consequences of the light emitted from fluorescent lamps, the committee decided to freeze the vote and hold a comprehensive discussion on the issue.
"I definitely agree that reducing greenhouse gases is of utmost importance, but should we replace one problem with a terrible health problem? For the past ten years I have been researching the effect of lighting on the immune system and lighting as a factor that increases the risk of getting breast cancer and prostate cancer. These research topics in Israel are incredibly behind compared to what is happening in the field in the United States and Scandinavia. The findings from our studies show that the negative effect is mainly from light (in the wavelengths) that is released from the fluorescent lamp.
Today the results of a study by PhD student Itai Kellogg were published in the Chronobiology International newspaper. The results of the study show a close relationship between lighting intensities and the incidence of breast cancer. Research for a recently completed master's thesis shows a direct link between fluorescent light and the development of prostate cancer cells. Perhaps we should think about reducing the lighting intensities and using wavelengths that do not pose a danger to public health?", wrote Prof. Haim MK Pins, who along with the members of the committee received the warning and decided to postpone the vote until a discussion was held with the participation of experts from the Ministry of Health and academia.
16 תגובות
And under no circumstances should you use a vacuum cleaner or a broom as they will cause the mercury to disperse in the space of the room.
The fluorescent bulbs are especially dangerous when they break because of the toxic mercury found in the content which can be inhaled by humans. In the event of a broken bulb, evacuate the room immediately, turn off the air conditioner and let the room air out for 15 minutes, then remove the large parts with cardboard or paper, and the small parts with adhesive tape and put everything in a sealed container.
The fluorescent bulbs do emit harmful UV radiation and it is recommended to keep a distance of at least a meter from them and under no circumstances should they be used as table lamps.
The mercury in the content is especially harmful to the brains of babies and small children, so do the thinking for yourself.
Just go to LED.
It should be remembered that a fluorescent bulb is more economical
Are eurolux cfl lamps that are built with a glass shell suspected to be carcinogenic
Since Prospor is so confident in his findings. I would like to reveal the research it is based on. In medicine there are new studies coming up and conflicting results. So what?
So what?
Some professor comes and throws us some kind of word and disappears
So, what does it mean to change all the light bulbs in the house or not?
Well? It's been 8 months already. Have you met at all? What are the conclusions? to use or not? dangerous or not? If it's dangerous, why does the electric company still recommend using such bulbs? And why don't they immediately change the light bulbs in most offices and public buildings in Israel. Has anyone looked for a similar study abroad? What did the distinguished committee chaired by Knesset member Paz do in the meantime.
Waiting patiently for the committee's decisions, by the light of the PL bulb
The King is naked
Fluorescence is weaker than UV. Usually we sit in offices dressed and tied in holocaust for the pleasure of exposing the body to the sun at the seaside, where the radiation in all spectrum ranges is thousands of times greater. Congratulations on your dental work. It seems that the arrows were shot first and then the circles. My advice to the distinguished professor is to confirm his findings before his warnings.
There really is an atmosphere of remorse in the air..
Does it really matter to the prostate gland whether light with a continuous wavelength is shone on it or not?
To all the LED cheerleaders, the future of LED is in LCD backlighting, not mass lighting.
The wavelengths of the LED are also sharp, no less than the wavelengths of the fluorescent.
Hezi,
I don't know about your feeling.. but according to my personal experience, it is actually yellow incandescent bulbs that make me tired and depressed and fluorescent lamps are the ones that make me feel alert and happy.
In my opinion, even if there wasn't the above study, it's still a strange bill. Fluorescent bulbs emit light with a non-continuous and unnatural spectrum to the eye. According to my personal experience, being in an environment dominated by fluorescent lighting can cause an unpleasant feeling, and I wouldn't be surprised if there were Studies that will prove that it has a negative effect on the mood. I do not underestimate the consideration of saving energy, but there are so many other equally large wastes that the Knesset does not bother to take into account. For example, the air conditioners in many places are turned on at maximum power and cool the offices to such low temperatures until the workers are forced to wear sweaters in the summer. The solution to this problem does not require replacing an existing system but only awareness, and it is likely that the possible energy savings are greater than the savings in fluorescent lighting (an average office air conditioner consumes more energy than its lighting). I ask myself why exactly in the field of light bulbs the Knesset members are happy to show diligence .
And really, what wavelengths are we talking about?
Are also FSL bulbs?
LED Now is the time to invest in companies that develop lighting
Two or three years until the LEDs enter every home.
But the Knesset has already enacted many laws and regulations regarding cellular antennas, the harm and danger of which is hundreds and thousands of times less than the one that is brought up in this article.
Which means that the act of legislation often stems from cheap and scandalous populism, and not from risks based on their actual value.
jubilee
Maybe he eliminated premature statements?
I smell a familiar smell here, which usually wafts in this country - when there is an international consensus among scientists and not among politicians regarding the aforementioned danger, then it will be possible to talk about changes in state laws. It is impossible for the Knesset to eliminate a welcome initiative before it has creamed skin and tendons based on research work(s) which have not yet led to a general agreement even outside the country.
Probably it's time to switch to LED lighting that both saves electricity and is not harmful to health