http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7170246.stm

This time I put the quotes in the header. I apologise for not doing so on
the migraine post.

Is there are conspiracy against low energy lamps going on? Is Npower behind
it all? What next "low energy lamps worsen VD/make you an alchoholic/will
not allow you to see in the dark?"

I think we should be told.

Adam

On Fri, 04 Jan 2008 20:26:16 GMT, "ARWadworth"
wrote:

Is there are conspiracy against low energy lamps going on?

One would hope so. At least until they improve dramatically.

--
Frank Erskine

On Fri, 04 Jan 2008 22:42:26 GMT, wrote:

On 4 Jan,
Frank Erskine wrote:

On Fri, 04 Jan 2008 20:26:16 GMT, "ARWadworth"
wrote:

Is there are conspiracy against low energy lamps going on?

One would hope so. At least until they improve dramatically.

Wot's wrong with them? I've used them exclusively for about 20 years.

Colour rendering, warm-up time, physical size, weight...

I bet you have _some_ conventional bulbs...

cooker hood lamp?
car lamps?
radio dial lamps?
Christmas tree lamps?
Torch?

--
Frank Erskine

ARWadworth wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7170246.stm

This time I put the quotes in the header. I apologise for not doing
so on the migraine post.

Is there are conspiracy against low energy lamps going on? Is Npower
behind it all? What next "low energy lamps worsen VD/make you an
alchoholic/will not allow you to see in the dark?"

I think we should be told.

If they get the 'passive smoking' people to take on the cause, you won't see
a low energy lamp anywhere in a few years time.

Amazes me how easy it is to manipulate public opinion.



--
Dave - The Medway Handyman
www.medwayhandyman.co.uk
01634 717930
07850 597257

On Fri, 04 Jan 2008 23:20:43 GMT, "The Medway Handyman"
wrote:

ARWadworth wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7170246.stm

This time I put the quotes in the header. I apologise for not doing
so on the migraine post.

Is there are conspiracy against low energy lamps going on? Is Npower
behind it all? What next "low energy lamps worsen VD/make you an
alchoholic/will not allow you to see in the dark?"

I think we should be told.

If they get the 'passive smoking' people to take on the cause, you won't see
a low energy lamp anywhere in a few years time.

Amazes me how easy it is to manipulate public opinion.

It amazes me it took so long to getroundtuit (and we know it's less to
do with health and more to do with culpability but I care less as long
as they do it). It's been 25 years since I've been forgoing *my*
rights and waiting for the day when I can go into any place and have
a meal or drink and not (have to be in) smoke at the same time ...

All the best ..

T i m

On Jan 4, 10:42 pm, wrote:
On 4 Jan,
Frank Erskine wrote:

On Fri, 04 Jan 2008 20:26:16 GMT, "ARWadworth"
wrote:

Is there are conspiracy against low energy lamps going on?

One would hope so. At least until they improve dramatically.

Wot's wrong with them? I've used them exclusively for about 20 years.

Is there anything wrong with your brain?
Or do you talk like you write?

These light bulbs are toxic. They can affect your brain. They contain
small amounts of mercury.

I don't know if that is native mercury or a more reactive compound.
You must dispose of them carefully as incinerators will produce toxic
fumes with them.

All that without our having the slightest idea of the damage they have
the potential for.

I think the context to be looked at more closely is the need for more
nuclear power stations after most of the last ones went off line at
almost identical dates. (Thanks Margarat.)

Couple that with massive power price hikes and you get the making of a
conspiracy. Do you trust your government?

Would they lie to you?

Weatherlawyer wrote:

Is there anything wrong with your brain?
Or do you talk like you write?

These light bulbs are toxic. They can affect your brain. They contain
small amounts of mercury.

That's right, just the same as those evil florescent tubes we've been
routinely using for about 60 years.


--
Mark
Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply.

In article ,
Weatherlawyer writes:

These light bulbs are toxic. They can affect your brain. They contain
small amounts of mercury.

Yes, about 3mg each. Another 2.5mg of mercury is produced by
the generation of electricity to power them. Conversely, about
10mg of mercury is produced to power equivalent filament lighting,
so CFL mercury production is significantly less than that for a
filament lamp.

Also at 3mg, each CFL contains about 1/1000th of the mercury in
the average person's body (3g).

I don't know if that is native mercury or a more reactive compound.

It's native mercury. Long term harm to the body comes from organic
mercury compounds rather than native mercury. The body is not good
at converting native mercury to organic compounds fortunately, but
plants (e.g. vegetables) can if it gets into their soil and taken
up by their roots.

You must dispose of them carefully as incinerators will produce toxic
fumes with them.

Less than power stations do in powering filament lamps.

All that without our having the slightest idea of the damage they have
the potential for.

Fluorescent lighting has been in widespead use since WWII in this
country.

I think the context to be looked at more closely is the need for more
nuclear power stations after most of the last ones went off line at
almost identical dates. (Thanks Margarat.)

Couple that with massive power price hikes and you get the making of a
conspiracy. Do you trust your government?

Government is 10 years too late to start building new power
stations and maintain integrity of supply in the UK.

Would they lie to you?

The problem is in part public opinion. This has stopped
replacement of the infrastructure required to maintain our
supply integrity. It will take large price hikes and/or collapses
in supply to change this. We are just starting to encounter these
now, but expect them to get very much worse as the time to fix
the problem is around 15 years, and it's not even been widely
recognosed as existing yet.

See http://groups.google.com/group/uk.d-...f46f4fa4a9973c
for additional background to this.

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

On Fri, 04 Jan 2008 22:42:26 GMT
wrote:

On 4 Jan,
Frank Erskine wrote:

On Fri, 04 Jan 2008 20:26:16 GMT, "ARWadworth"
wrote:

Is there are conspiracy against low energy lamps going on?

One would hope so. At least until they improve dramatically.

Wot's wrong with them? I've used them exclusively for about 20 years.



It all depends on how many you eat a week.

On Fri, 04 Jan 2008 20:26:16 +0000, ARWadworth wrote:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7170246.stm

This time I put the quotes in the header. I apologise for not doing so
on the migraine post.

Is there are conspiracy against low energy lamps going on? Is Npower
behind it all? What next "low energy lamps worsen VD/make you an
alchoholic/will not allow you to see in the dark?"

I think we should be told.


The key fact that was missed out in this report this morning was - IF THE
LAMP BREAKS. It makes me wonder who fed this story to the meja machine
why they wanted to do so. I mean the risks are real (say for a care taker
who is dealing with broken tubes and CFLs but must rank below 437th on
the list of bad things for most people.


--
Ed Sirett - Property maintainer and registered gas fitter.
The FAQ for uk.diy is at http://www.diyfaq.org.uk
Gas fitting FAQ http://www.makewrite.demon.co.uk/GasFitting.html
Sealed CH FAQ http://www.makewrite.demon.co.uk/SealedCH.html
Choosing a Boiler FAQ http://www.makewrite.demon.co.uk/BoilerChoice.html

In article ,
says...
Colour rendering, warm-up time, physical size, weight...

I bet you have _some_ conventional bulbs...

We have three halogen bulbs left and no other incandescent lamps[1]. The
halogens are in three reading lamps which, as they fall apart, will get
replaced with LE units.

[1] Apart from inside the oven, inside the microwave and the lamp in the
sewing machine. And probably a few others I've forgotten.

--
Skipweasel.
Never knowingly understood.

In article d992000b-6bdd-467f-9e02-
,
says...
I don't know if that is native mercury or a more reactive compound.
You must dispose of them carefully as incinerators will produce toxic
fumes with them.

Though of course coal-fired power stations have been chucking out
mercury for over a century.

--
Skipweasel.
Never knowingly understood.

On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 17:23:42 +0000, Skipweasel wrote:

In article d992000b-6bdd-467f-9e02-
,
says...
I don't know if that is native mercury or a more reactive compound. You
must dispose of them carefully as incinerators will produce toxic fumes
with them.

Though of course coal-fired power stations have been chucking out
mercury for over a century.

Not to mention the local crem!

Ah, Ok - I'll get my coat ...

Weatherlawyer wrote:
On Jan 4, 10:42 pm, wrote:
On 4 Jan,
Frank Erskine wrote:

On Fri, 04 Jan 2008 20:26:16 GMT, "ARWadworth"
wrote:

Is there are conspiracy against low energy lamps going on?

One would hope so. At least until they improve dramatically.

Wot's wrong with them? I've used them exclusively for about 20 years.

Is there anything wrong with your brain?
Or do you talk like you write?

These light bulbs are toxic. They can affect your brain. They contain
small amounts of mercury.

I don't know if that is native mercury or a more reactive compound.
You must dispose of them carefully as incinerators will produce toxic
fumes with them.

All that without our having the slightest idea of the damage they have
the potential for.


What hogwash! Do you subscribe to the emotive department of some Green Group
rather than trying to be rational?

Back in my youth we would play with mercury splashing the little balls
about. A game that is rightly not available to kids today.

Incinerators are closely monitored for their emissions; approx. 30% of the
capital investment is in scrubbing the emissions so that Hg does not get
into the environment. The controls, IIRCC, are tighter than those on power
stations.

It is no longer permitted or possible to buy mercury thermometers. The use
of mercury is tightly controlled.

The quantities involved in CFLs is minute compared to former use. Facilities
are being developed to recycle CFLs and tubes (though slowly) so that they
will not have to be incinerated with their mercury content present - though
whether this is sensible is a moot point - perhaps we should catch all the
mercury through an incinerator scrubber and then recover minerals from the
ash?

Water is "toxic": I have two references available (well, will be once I've
got this new PC sorted out) about two individuals who have died from
excessive consumption of water.

Get a grip and be rational.

On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 22:22:36 GMT, Clot wrote:

Weatherlawyer wrote:
On Jan 4, 10:42 pm, wrote:
On 4 Jan,
Frank Erskine wrote:

On Fri, 04 Jan 2008 20:26:16 GMT, "ARWadworth"
wrote:

Is there are conspiracy against low energy lamps going on?

One would hope so. At least until they improve dramatically.

Wot's wrong with them? I've used them exclusively for about 20 years.

Is there anything wrong with your brain?
Or do you talk like you write?

These light bulbs are toxic. They can affect your brain. They contain
small amounts of mercury.

I don't know if that is native mercury or a more reactive compound.
You must dispose of them carefully as incinerators will produce toxic
fumes with them.

All that without our having the slightest idea of the damage they have
the potential for.


What hogwash! Do you subscribe to the emotive department of some Green Group
rather than trying to be rational?

Back in my youth we would play with mercury splashing the little balls
about. A game that is rightly not available to kids today.

Incinerators are closely monitored for their emissions; approx. 30% of the
capital investment is in scrubbing the emissions so that Hg does not get
into the environment. The controls, IIRCC, are tighter than those on power
stations.

It is no longer permitted or possible to buy mercury thermometers. The use
of mercury is tightly controlled.

The quantities involved in CFLs is minute compared to former use. Facilities
are being developed to recycle CFLs and tubes (though slowly) so that they
will not have to be incinerated with their mercury content present - though
whether this is sensible is a moot point - perhaps we should catch all the
mercury through an incinerator scrubber and then recover minerals from the
ash?

Water is "toxic": I have two references available (well, will be once I've
got this new PC sorted out) about two individuals who have died from
excessive consumption of water.

Get a grip and be rational.

http://www.dhmo.org/facts.html

in 695093 20080106 005411 Gotde T Shirt wrote:

http://www.dhmo.org/facts.html

I love websites like that. One gem :

"Research conducted by award-winning U.S. scientist Nathan Zohner
concluded that roughly 86 percent of the population supports a ban
on dihydrogen monoxide."

Yeah, right.

On 2008-01-06 04:20:56 +0000, Anne Jackson said:

The message from "The Medway Handyman"
contains these words:

ARWadworth wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7170246.stm

This time I put the quotes in the header. I apologise for
not doing so on the migraine post.

Is there are conspiracy against low energy lamps going on?
Is Npower behind it all? What next "low energy lamps worsen
VD/make you an alchoholic/will not allow you to see in the dark?"

I think we should be told.

If they get the 'passive smoking' people to take on the cause,
you won't see a low energy lamp anywhere in a few years time.

Amazes me how easy it is to manipulate public opinion.

I think we should try to breed out the 'gullability' gene...

National Lottery sales would plummet, and Nulaber would never be in
government again.

On Sun, 6 Jan 2008 13:13:57 UTC, Andy Hall wrote:

On 2008-01-06 04:20:56 +0000, Anne Jackson said:

The message from "The Medway Handyman"
contains these words:

ARWadworth wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7170246.stm

This time I put the quotes in the header. I apologise for
not doing so on the migraine post.

Is there are conspiracy against low energy lamps going on?
Is Npower behind it all? What next "low energy lamps worsen
VD/make you an alchoholic/will not allow you to see in the dark?"

I think we should be told.

If they get the 'passive smoking' people to take on the cause,
you won't see a low energy lamp anywhere in a few years time.

Amazes me how easy it is to manipulate public opinion.

I think we should try to breed out the 'gullability' gene...

National Lottery sales would plummet, and Nulaber would never be in
government again.

And B&Q would have to scrap stocks of wind turbines.

--
The information contained in this post is copyright the
poster, and specifically may not be published in, or used by
http://www.diybanter.com

Bob Eager wrote:
On Sun, 6 Jan 2008 13:13:57 UTC, Andy Hall wrote:

On 2008-01-06 04:20:56 +0000, Anne Jackson
said:

The message from "The Medway Handyman"
contains these words:

ARWadworth wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7170246.stm

This time I put the quotes in the header. I apologise for
not doing so on the migraine post.

Is there are conspiracy against low energy lamps going on?
Is Npower behind it all? What next "low energy lamps worsen
VD/make you an alchoholic/will not allow you to see in the dark?"

I think we should be told.

If they get the 'passive smoking' people to take on the cause,
you won't see a low energy lamp anywhere in a few years time.

Amazes me how easy it is to manipulate public opinion.

I think we should try to breed out the 'gullability' gene...

National Lottery sales would plummet, and Nulaber would never be in
government again.

And B&Q would have to scrap stocks of wind turbines.

I don't think they are far away from doing that Bob. I had a chat about
them with a bloke I know in my local B&Q. When I asked how they were going
he gave me what can only be described as an 'old fashioned' look.



--
Dave - The Medway Handyman
www.medwayhandyman.co.uk
01634 717930
07850 597257

In article ,
"The Medway Handyman" writes:

I don't think they are far away from doing that Bob. I had a chat about
them with a bloke I know in my local B&Q. When I asked how they were going
he gave me what can only be described as an 'old fashioned' look.

When they've knocked them down to £50 clearance,
I'll get one out of curiosity. I know it will never
even recover the £50...

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

"The Medway Handyman" wrote in message
.uk...
ARWadworth wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7170246.stm

This time I put the quotes in the header. I apologise for not doing
so on the migraine post.

Is there are conspiracy against low energy lamps going on? Is Npower
behind it all? What next "low energy lamps worsen VD/make you an
alchoholic/will not allow you to see in the dark?"

I think we should be told.

If they get the 'passive smoking' people to take on the cause, you won't
see a low energy lamp anywhere in a few years time.

But will they be standing outside of offices with a low energy lamp on a
lead?

mark