The hidden truth on Energy saving bulbs

We are told that we are being eco-friendly by using energy saving bulbs - true. They save energy and money. Therefore they are good for us.

Untrue.

What? Are you surprised? Disbelieving even? Well it's true, energy saving bulbs emits as much EMF (Electro Magnetic Fields) radiation as fluorescent tubes and as many of us know - they definitely aren't good for us. We all know about the real EMF nasties - computers, microwaves, cell phones and TVs, but something we are sold as good for us and the planet - hey wait a minute!

Measuring EMF

How do we know this? Can it be proved? Yes - Gauss is a common unit of measurement of magnet field strength (Gauss meters are readily available and a valuable tool for those that want to really know how much they're affected by EMF). A Gauss meter used for biological purposes should always be "frequency weighted". This means that it will show a higher EMF reading than those meters typically used by electricians and engineers.

An energy saving bulb has a reading of 160 to 200 mg at one inch away. Compare this with EMF radiation from a computer, which is 5 to 100 mg at 50 cm. A frequency weighted meter was used for these measurements. Most of us accept that computer monitors are not good for us! But isn't it a surprise about energy saving bulbs?

Schools have woken up to the fact that wireless networks are harmful. Many have now removed them. Energy saving bulbs still remain. The legacy of this is an increasing number of students becoming electro sensitive. This condition is when the symptoms of EMF radiation are so severe that they make living in this modern, electrical-age a nightmare. There are no statistics as yet but many studies are currently being done on this subject.

Becoming electro-sensitive

A sixteen year old student, that we know, had been exposed to EMF from energy saving bulbs for many years. Her caring parents limited her use of the computer and how much she watched TV. They had banned her from owning or using a cell phone. They didn't believe in microwave ovens. As intelligent, loving parents they had educated themselves about what was good and bad for their family. This included getting informed about EMF radiation. Yet their daughter became electro sensitive. She couldn't watch the TV or use a computer - at all.

No amount of elimination of electrical devices etc from her life helped. It was only when an expert on electro sensitivity asked if she was exposed to energy saving bulbs was there any light shed on what seemed a dark and endless tunnel.

As a result of this discovery all the energy saving bulbs were removed from the school.

I wish that there was a fairy tale end to this story. That she was cured, being able to go on and enjoy a normal life. This didn't happen. The damage that had caused her electro sensitivity was severe. She has found that it is only by protecting herself from harmful radiation that she is can lead a relatively normal life.

With out EMF protection she is completely disabled unable to live comfortably in this world where it is virtually impossible to avoid EMF radiation - including those money and resource saving, seemingly innocent little light bulbs!

This is not the end of the Energy saving bulb story! There is more! When they die, are thrown in with the rubbish where their fragile glass shatters they spill their contents - Mercury! They continue to be a health hazard - even the planet isn't safe!

Footnote. You can now buy LED bulbs with very low emissions that use minimal power and have no mercury.

Margie
Digg StumbleUpon del.icio.us technorati blinklist furl reddit sphinn

Tags: emf energy saving bulb toxins

Send to a friendPost Comment

Comments

pauline - Nov 12, 2007

Thank you Margie for putting this information out there. We discovered this for ourselves after I replaced bulbs in our house and My husband started getting terrible head aches. Took us a while to suspect the bulbs and when we put a gauss meter over them we knew for sure and took them out. headaches cured! We have searched but have never found any other mention of the negative fields put out by these bulbs. Heard news item that there is pressure being put on china to stop producing ordinary incandescent bulbs and that this country plans to make them unobtainable. If you have any information on where to get these LED bulbs please post it on your website
thankyou

Chrisy - Dec 23, 2007

Actually we are constantly being bombarded by cellphone radiation all around us, regardless of whether we use a cellphone or not. but you're right, people should use LED bulbs, they save energy!

Ranjit Daniel - Jul 3, 2008

Hi
Thanks for the very useful information.
Please can you let me know where I can buy these LED bulbs?
I live in Auckland, NZ

Regards
Ranjit

Rene Pang - Jan 28, 2009

For LED lighting information ,Please contact me.LED have a life of 50,000 hr compare to Energy saver which is 6000 hr.
Energy saver bulb not only expose UV and IR ,it damages electronic device by harmonic.

Rene Pang - Jan 28, 2009

sales@argus-at.com

smita - Aug 13, 2009

Thanks for this article. Its worth reading!

andrea - Sep 30, 2009

Where in auckland, or anywhere can I get baton style light bulbs for my house as I refuse to put in any cfl bulbs anywhere.
I have looked and asked everywhere with no luck. Is it costy to put in led light fittings to all light sockets in my house, which is what I may have to look at if there are none available.

Dan Green - Jan 23, 2010

There is much bigger problem with these bulbs. It is the light which they emit. Although much improved compared to the typical fluorescent lamps, it's nature is the same - cold light with lots of ultraviolet rays.

Sheet Music Download

Jonathan Evatt - Statistics may need modifying... - Jul 16, 2010

Hi Margie,
Thanks for the info.
I was wondering about the data you posted comparing the EMF from the bulb to that from a computer screen.

"An energy saving bulb has a reading of 160 to 200 mg at one inch away. Compare this with EMF radiation from a computer, which is 5 to 100 mg at 50 cm"

I think the point being made would be clearer, and in fact meaningful, if the conditions of the comparison were the same in both cases. One was a measurement taken at one inch (2.54 cm) from the bulb, and the other is 50 cm from a computer screen. The net result is that the comparison tells us little more than "both devices emit EMF". Do you have data on hand that compares both at the same distance?

Keep up the great work. It's important people know about these issues.

With heart,

Jonathan


Post Comment

*
*


Visual CAPTCHA

*
Code is not case-sensitive
*

We welcome comments on this article, provided they have something to contribute. Please note that all links will be created using the nofollow attribute. This is a spam free zone. HTML is stripped from comments, but BBCode is allowed.