Energy Saving Light Bulbs Are Poisonous To the Brain, Nervous System, Liver, Kidneys

Your link indicates that GE makes LEDs, not it's market size.

 

2/3 of energy production powered by coal or natural gas. Same difference.

 

And it's very hazaradous to humans. But that also applies to lead, arsenic and asbestos which all occur naturally. But I don't want them in my home either.

 

How do we know that he didn't simply rig the experiment so that the bulb would burn. Considering the failure rate of 1:150,000 noted in the link from Consumer Reports in 2011 he would have been required to purchase a $1 million worth of CFL's to statistically obtain a video of a single failure. I don't see anyone spending a million dollars on the chance that they would find a defective CFL that would cause a fire. I'd bet money the experiment was rigged to perpetuate a hoax.

Yes, according to the two links fewer than 450,000 (not millions) of CFL's were recalled in 2010 and 2012 due to "possible" (not actual) fire hazards based upon a couple of reported failures. No product is absolutely safe and obviously there was an identifiable problem with design or manufacture of some CLF's where a risk was present. I certainly applaud both the companies and the government in recalling defective products so that the risks can be further reduced.

That is not a condemnation of properly designed and manufactured products of course and overwhelmingly CFL's don't represent any threat of fire as Scopes pointed out.

 

Haha..

Go try an buy a lightbulb and it NOT be GE/a subsidiary...

 

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_n...d+light+bulb&rh=n:2314207011,k:led+light+bulb

 

here I decide to skip over all the internet editorial websites... since everyone claims bias... how about some grad students who crushed multiple styles and tested...

http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es101052q

if you don't have a subscription, ummm okay maybe a school editorial including some of the same grad students who did this research...

http://news.uci.edu/feature/study-sheds-light-on-potential-risks-of-leds/

or maybe we could use LEDsMagazine? that would seem like a fair editorialized website since they want to just talk about LEDs right...

http://www.ledsmagazine.com/articles/2011/02/study-looks-at-toxic-metal-content-of-leds.html

Basically... a couple grad students grabbed multiple variations of LEDs... street lights, house lights, car lights... mashed them up into tiny particles... then tested for elements... and they came up with quite a bit of stuff you wouldn't want dumped in a landfill right? and it clearly takes more energy to make all those parts, from mining them, to refining them, to final assembly... the power savings we get, very well might be trumped overall in the creation and disposal of them... when compared to other materials that are listed as hazardous materials and you can't just throw them in a land fill, these aren't labeled that way currently, when they contain more harmful things...

so I guess thats pretty much a solid point made as best I can without being able to get you this actual research paper from the website... let me see if I can work around the security measures they use to prevent people from saving this stuff... usually a way to finaggle around that stuff...

 

http://luxreview.com/article/2014/09/philips-and-lighting-a-long-goodbye

 

Was there some purpose for your citation? If so, what?

 

That GE owns the market....

 

I had 3 or 4 explode in the socket shooting sparks and leaving carbon streaks, never had it with incandescent before and not since I switched them to LED. It was the primary reason I pulled them all out.

 

Light and human health: LED risks highlighted

 

And what text in your article says that?

 

All your articles come from the same single 2010 source paper.

Here's one reaching the opposite conclusion:

Researchers Find That LED Bulbs Are Healthier For The Environment
Read more at http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/1112688707/led-bulbs-environment-090612/#Tx1kQy50VITIFI8b.99
http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/1112688707/led-bulbs-environment-090612/

- - - Updated - - -

And another, this from 2015:

The environmental benefits of LED lighting

Light bulbs that use LED technology not only bring down your energy bills but are also more environmentally friendly when compared to incandescent bulbs and compact fluorescent lights (CFLs). Both the manufacture and use of LED bulbs causes less damage to the environment than the other two alternatives.

http://exclusive.multibriefs.com/content/the-environmental-benefits-of-led-lighting/waste-management-environmental

 

We produce enough coal and natural gas (and actually oil now) to export, so it is different. But then again, facts don't seem to matter to liberals, unless they support their argument. You should have just stuck to the pollution argument, not doubled down on the invalid oil argument.

 

The pollution argument is good enough for me.

 

Saying that GE's main competitor in LED bulbs is about to go out of the light business...... It's pretty obvious.

 

Personally, I believe that the federal ban of certain incandescents actually hurt the adoption of LEDs and CFLs. After the ban, I started hearing about people hoarding and buying huge amounts of incandescents--enough for their lifetimes, as most of the people claiming that are older. I started going away from incandescents before the law. It just makes economical sense to use more efficient lights, as the wasted energy is heat, and living in FL, that means I just have to pump that heat out with my A/C for most of the year. If I lived in New England, non-incandescents don't make quite as much sense.

 

I personally like the cree led bulbs

anyone that has switch from the old flashlight bulbs to led, knows how much better they are... and they just keep getting better year after year it seems

 

I didn't mean to indicate that it was safe - it exists in the environment. You'll encounter a lot more Mercury taking a walk on a windy day than you'll encounter handling a sealed fluorescent tube.

 

It also says there's a rumor GE will too.

But nowhere does your article say anything about GE LED market share. Hence my question.

- - - Updated - - -

I know they are great, like having a mini spotlight that is the size of your finger and runs on a single AA battery and last for hours and hours.

 

Your link focuses on environmental friendly while I was focusing on LED's not being friendly too the human body, in particular to the damage caused to the eyes.

The LED uses little electrical energy for illumination so it's called environmental friendly by the "climate change bigots." And the environmental contaminating energy used to manufacture a LCD illuminare is less than manufacturing a LCF illuminare. But the good old incandescent light bulb is cheaper and less contaminating to the environment during manufacturing of the incandescent illuminare. But the incandescent bulb uses more electrical energy to provide illumination. So that makes it a politically incorrect form of illumination.

But the incandescent light bulb produces the closest illumination to being natural light. If doesn't harm the body, brain or eyes.

The LED, LCF, fluorescent, HID, etc, etc. don't produce natural light. All of the later mentioned have specific uses be it outdoor or indoor ornamental lighting, warehouse lighting, assembly line lighting, or illuminating a nuclear weapons storage bunker. There's the proper illuminare to use and the LCF and the LED isn't the proper choice for your living room.

 

What damage to the eyes?

This was the claim I was asking about before that you have not supported. Please do so. Thanks. But the impact on metals was addressed in the source I cited.

Source please.

I've never heard that LED light causes harm to body, brain or eyes. Proof please.

More modern LEDs produce light closer the sunlight that I should think eliminates this problem.

 

I agree 100%. I love headlamps, because you can get a fairly bright Cree LED powered headlamp that uses 3AAA batteries that lasts 10-12 hrs.

 

Sorry Iriemon, you're on your own, my expertise aren't free, why should I provide information and everyone else has to pay for it ?

Actually my source is a 2,000 page manual and it's sitting in my office 35 miles away.