sis
just briefly we got a call from uh... regular listener chloe
from canada recently
and uh... defending although uh... she uh... is uh... very few strongly feels
it's appropriate to curtail our freedom and liberty
wanted to make the argument that uh...
that uh... fluorescent light bulbs were very problematic now
i'm perfectly willing to except the argument that
fluorescent light bulbs
are uh...
or the and product
is bad for you and should not be uh... replacing products that are not bad for
you that to me is not even a libertarian argument that's just
you know what products they're on healthy for people
timesheet she argued that um... there is been studies showing that
that uh... uh...
these fluorescent lights that we sit under here in this uh...
office
create something called dirty electricity
which can cause it allegedly an eva riley of health problems now i'm just
reading this off of a site called side based science-based medicine
and uh... the the links that they've appointed to uh... seem pretty legit in
this story uh... you know
twenty to push back on this
much of the
of of this
claim comes from one canadian researchers doctor magda
harmless
she appears to be a lone dissenting voice
this guy uh... points uh... mostly articles are subject to say some experts
say electromagnetic radiation is safe but some say that is causing health
problems
inevitably it is not the harvest who is always quoted saying it causes health
problems
she is now talking to the media about type three diabetes as if it's an
approving then accepted entities claims that exposure to electromagnetic
radiation including
cfl skin increased blood sugar
her evidence is one published study which is nothing more than a case series
of four patients
case reports in case series are generally considered to be the weakest
form of scientific metal medical evidence
there were not above anecdotes
the w_h_o_ recently reviewed the literature of non ionizing radiation and
found
scientific knowledge in this area is now more extensive done for most chemicals
based on a recent in-depth review of the scientific literature
the world health organization concluded the current evidence does not confirm
the existence of any health consequences from exposure to low level
electromagnetic fields
there is however some gaps in knowledge about biological affects exist and
needed uh... need for the research
these uh... fields fall off sharply with this in scene after a couple of feet
the m f put out by lightbulbs falls to a tiny by many orders of magnitude to be
negligible
he goes on to also talk about the
the supposedly fears about mercury in um...
in fluorescent light baldy says even if a light bulb is broken the exposure
mercury is negligible far less than hitting a tuna fish sandwich
with that said
pregnant women are told not to eat tuna fish
um...
d_p_ eight someone sent me that's have
very specific uh...
instructions on how to cleanup after a
mercury lightbulb
or a should say a fluorescent light bulb with mercury breaks
only about thirty percent of the mercury in a cfl as released as a vapor after
breaking
and this occurs over a four-day period which is why ssh clean it up quickly
and carefully
the amount of mercury we're talking about is uh... is negligible
i wouldn't put eight young child next to it
but i also have a agian incandescent light bulb breaks
also don't put on a young child they so there's a gonna get a splinter
so just be careful about so-called scientific information a float around on
uh... on the web particularly when there is a big agenda by people to make this
some type of issue about freedom
presented to spreads like wildfire so they can you know
put you in the fema camps and then break all the uh... fluorescent light bulbs at
a possible
that's the plan of course