By Victoria Ward
Fears have been reignited about the safety of energy saving light bulbs after a group of scientists warned that they contain cancer causing chemicals.
Their report advises that the bulbs should not be left on for extended periods, particularly near someone’s head, as they emit poisonous materials when switched on.
Peter Braun, who carried out the tests at the Berlin's Alab Laboratory, said: “For such carcinogenic substances it is important they are kept as far away as possible from the human environment.”
The bulbs are already widely used in the UK following EU direction to phase out traditional incandescent lighting by the end of this year.
But the German scientists claimed that several carcinogenic chemicals and toxins were released when the environmentally-friendly compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs) were switched on, including phenol, naphthalene and styrene.
Andreas Kirchner, of the Federation of German Engineers, said: “Electrical smog develops around these lamps.
“I, therefore, use them only very economically. They should not be used in unventilated areas and definitely not in the proximity of the head.”
British experts insisted that more research was needed and urged consumers not to panic.
Dr Michelle Bloor, senior lecturer in Environmental Science at Portsmouth University, told the Daily Express: “Further independent studies would need to be undertaken to back up the presented German research.”
The Department for the Environment insists the bulbs are safe, despite the fact that they contain small amounts of mercury which would leak out if the glass was broken.
Advice on its website states: “Energy efficient light bulbs are not a danger to the public.
“Although they contain mercury, limited at 5mg per lamp, it cannot escape from a lamp that is intact.
“In any case, the very small amount contained in an energy efficient bulb is unlikely to cause harm even if the lamp should be broken.”
The latest report follows claims by Abraham Haim, a professor of biology at Haifa University in Israel, that the bulbs could result in higher breast cancer rates if used late at night.
He said that the bluer light that CFLs emitted closely mimicked daylight, disrupting the body's production of the hormone melatonin more than older-style filament bulbs, which cast a yellower light.
The Migraine Action Association has warned that they could trigger migraines and skin care specialists have claimed that their intense light could exacerbate a range of existing skin problems.
No authoritative or regulatory body anywhere in the world classifies styrene to be a known cause of human cancer. Moreover, a study conducted by a "blue ribbon" panel of epidemiologists and published in the peer-reviewed Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine (November 2009) reports: "The evidence of human carcinogenicity of styrene is inconsistent and weak. On the basis of the available evidence, one cannot conclude that there is a causal relationship between styrene and any type of human cancer."
ReplyDeletePriscilla Briones for the Styrene Information and Research Center (SIRC), Arlington, Virginia. SIRC (www.styrene.org) is a trade association representing interests of the North American styrene industry with its mission being the collection, development, analysis and communication of pertinent information on styrene.
Priscilla, you have an obvious conflict of interest as you are representing the styrene industry. I wonder how you expect anybody to believe that the information you provide is credible.
ReplyDeleteAccording to the "The Physical and Theoretical Chemistry Laboratory" at Oxford University, styrene is "Toxic. Carcinogen. Mutagen. Corrosive, causes burns to skin and eyes. Lachrymator. Harmful by inhalation, ingestion and through skin absorption. Long term exposure may affect CNS."
"Handle as a carcinogen."
http://msds.chem.ox.ac.uk/ST/styrene.html
Don't take this personally; styrene is only one of the 70000+ petrochemicals derived toxins around us...
If you have further comments, I suggest you contact the original authors of this study.
@Priscilla - I wouldn't expect you to say anything different, given you're representing your industry.
ReplyDeleteIf the styrene ends up in landfill sites or incinerators and gets burnt, that is a big concern, and long term exposure can come from through pollution. What happens if these are combined with other air and water pollutants?
I have some questions about the survey you cite in the peer-reviewed Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine (November 2009), if I may. I was wondering:
Who funded this study, and how we can know it wasn't funded by special interests?
If we can be sure that the experiment was fair and not biased?
If we can also be sure that the peer reviewers were not biased either?
In 2009, California proposed to list styrene as a carcinogen under the act known as "Proposition 65". The styrene industry resisted this and filed a lawsuit to try to stop this from happening.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.treehugger.com/files/2009/07/the-facts-about-styrene-cancer-bike-helmets.php