UV radiation exposure is inevitable when you work and play in the sun. In addition, we now have inside UV radiation, too!

UV radiation from the sun comes in three varieties: UVA, UVB, and UVC.

UVA

helps produce the natural killer cell stimulating factor, thereby assisting the immune system in a healthy body. Natural killer cell stimulating factor is also increase by several different lactobacillus (why we eat yogurt and naturally fermented goodies), chlorella, spirulina and whey sourced lactoferrin. Do we find ourselves increasing food sources for natural-killer-cell-stimulating- factor to compensate for too many hours inside? Would some time exposed to UVA from the sun be a natural solution?

UVB

rays help the body transform cholesterol into the coveted Vitamin D3 of bone support fame. Cholesterol + Sunlight = Vitamin D3. Healthy bones need Vitamin D3. Is the problem really too much cholesterol or just not enough UBV?

UVC

rays damage DNA. The ozone layer neutralizes the UVC from the sun. The 3rd atom of oxygen in the (3 oxygen atom) ozone molecule breaks loose and attaches itself to things that are detrimental to the body, helping to neutralize them. Yes, there is so much air pollution that ozone levels are being depleted by it, allowing more UVC to get to the surface of the earth–and us–which in turn causes more damage to our DNA.

So much is said about protecting ourselves from UV radiation from the sun–use sun screen, limit exposure, wear UV resistant clothing, and the list goes on. We are becoming conditioned to curtail regular, limited healthy exposure to natural sunlight and the resultant healthy UVA and UVB exposure, even when we are in the sun! YES exposure gets to be DONE IN MODERATION and with common sense!!! 8 hours one day a week (i.e.: Saturday at the track) is NOT common sense!

Now we have detrimental UVC inside! CLF

light bulbs emit detrimental UVC, but nothing is mentioned about the beneficial UVA or UVB emitting from CLF bulbs.   At least one study said that significant amounts of UVC are emitted and received by a person when in close proximity to a CLF bulb. MORE UVC than what is experienced when outside in the sunlight!

However, if, at “…close range, around a foot or so, CFL exposure is “the equivalent of sunbathing at the equator”*, why are we not embracing protective, self-preservation and common sense in the use of CLF light bulbs? Is there a CLF bulb close to your head in your floor lamps and desk lamps? Did you apply sun screen when you turned on the CLF lights in your room? Did you put on your UV resistant clothing? Probably not. Silly, huh. Maybe not. How close is that CLF lamp next to your reading or writing spot? Sit farther away.

 

Yes, fluorescent bulbs emitting UVC have been used now for years in overhead fixtures. The fluorescent bulbs are just getting closer to our skin and our face now when we use CLF bulbs in floor and desk lamps. UVC damage can also come from your computer lighting, from your tablet lighting, from your big screen TV lighting, and from your cell phone back-light. These newer sources are in addition to TV tubes and fluorescent industrial lighting applications that we have lived with for years. And remember–the UVC damage is cumulative.

The question begs

Is UVC radiation damage done by the sun the menace? Or, is the menace really the increased time exposure to UVC radiation from CLF generating electronics coupled with the reduced distance to our skin? Cell phone light, computer and big screen TV lights generate UVCs if they use fluorescent tubes for their back light, which many do, especially if they are Energy Star rated. Since there is inadequate ozone in our immediate surroundings to neutralize those UVCs, what is protecting our DNA?

Finally, we haven’t even touched the mercury emissions from the CLF bulb questions! “The U.S. Department of Energy has strongly advocated CLF use under its Energy Star program, spending $252 million in 2010 to increase CLF adoption.”* And the researcher in the quoted article wanted to know why European literature was observing that “…exposure to CLF bulbs might be responsible for exacerbating certain skin conditions, such as photodermatoses and skin cancer in humans.”*. Because she was curious that there was nothing in US literature mentioning these negative body responses, she ran her own experiments to find out why a whole group of countries should have such a different result than a single “leading” country.

More questions that need answers. In the mean-time, protect yourself from the inside out, too!

*Quoting Rafailovich in ” Can Compact Fluorescent Lightbulbs Damage Skin?” By Umair Irfan , ClimateWire on July 25, 2012,
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/can-compact-fluorescent-lightbulbs-damage-skin/.

Minerals that may support healthy skin

Magnesium, Sulfur, Selenium, Zinc, Iodine, Potassium, Chromium, Manganese, Calcium.