Banning Incandescent Light Bulbs?

[Bri]

Well, I think you can get incandescents for like 50 cents compared to $2 or more for CFL's. But considering the energy savings and the longer life of CFL's, they are quite a bit cheaper than incandescents over the life of the bulb.

ETA: If a CFL were to burn out prematurely, it might cost more than a comparable incandescent.

-Bri

 

[Antiquehunter]

Sure - but lets assume you need to replace 50 lightbulbs in your house. If incandescents cost $25 and CFL $100, there really are very few people in such a financial situation that $75 will cause a significant hardship, especially considering that the bulbs could be replaced over a matter of time (ie as they burn out).

 

[Bri]

That's true. The price of CFL's is definitely not prohibitive for most people, particularly if you're just replacing bulbs as they burn out. And despite a higher up-front cost a CFL is cheaper than an incandescent over the life of the bulb.

-Bri

 

[mhaze]

..... Flicker rates at or lower than 100 - 120 Hz can cause headaches in some people who are sensitive to it. Increasing the frequency by use of an electronic ballast reduces headaches even for people who were sensitive to flickering. Old fluorescent lighting may have used magnetic control gear that would have resulted in 120 Hz flicker, but most now use electronic control gear that increase the rate of flickering from 20,000 to 60,000 Hz.

Sources:

http://www.sustainablehealthybuildings.org/PDF/2nd/Peter R Boyce.pdf

http://www.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca/obj/irc/doc/pubs/nrcc43097/nrcc43097.pdf

http://www.essex.ac.uk/psychology/overlays/Energy93.pdf

-Bri

nope, you've only shown a generalized hypothesis regarding "most people". In the meantime, there is well understood science about migraine headaches and flicker from lights (etc), which you've actually confirmed, not negated....

So if you start with the average population, you can easily reach a conclusion regarding that group. But if you start with a population that has migraines, or which states they don't like flourescent/cfl/whatever, your results would be quite different.

Statistically insignificant in the former case, becomes statistically significant in the latter.

Another issue:

And there would be dramatic differences in color perception between incadescent and CFL by people with partial or complete color blindness, because the power spectrum of irradiance of CFL has gaps, peaks and valleys, compared to incadescent. The two are "not the same" and noting color temperature is not a assertion of near or complete similarity in illumination.

Your "one size fits all" method does not work with shoes, dresses, suits, let alone with light bulbs.

 

[mhaze]

Sure - but lets assume you need to replace 50 lightbulbs in your house. If incandescents cost $25 and CFL $100, there really are very few people in such a financial situation that $75 will cause a significant hardship, especially considering that the bulbs could be replaced over a matter of time (ie as they burn out).

That's $75 less beer, dude!

 

[Bri]

nope, you've only shown a generalized hypothesis regarding "most people". In the meantime, there is well understood science about migraine headaches and flicker from lights (etc), which you've actually confirmed, not negated....

The study confirms that there is evidence that visible flickering can cause migraines, but that there's no evidence that higher frequencies cause migraines.

So if you start with the average population, you can easily reach a conclusion regarding that group. But if you start with a population that has migraines, or which states they don't like flourescent/cfl/whatever, your results would be quite different.

(bold mine) Do you have evidence that the results would be "quite different" as you claim?

If I'm not mistaken, the second study I mentioned specifically studied a group of people prone to sensitivity to flickering, and found similar results -- that higher frequencies didn't cause the problems that visible flickering did.

And there would be dramatic differences in color perception between incadescent and CFL by people with partial or complete color blindness, because the power spectrum of irradiance of CFL has gaps, peaks and valleys, compared to incadescent. The two are "not the same" and noting color temperature is not a assertion of near or complete similarity in illumination.

All complete speculation on your part without evidence. Do you have any?

-Bri

 

[mhaze]

The study confirms that there is evidence that visible flickering can cause migraines, but that there's no evidence that higher frequencies cause migraines.



(bold mine) Do you have evidence that the results would be "quite different" as you claim?

If I'm not mistaken, the second study I mentioned specifically studied a group of people prone to sensitivity to flickering, and found similar results -- that higher frequencies didn't cause the problems that visible flickering did.



All complete speculation on your part without evidence. Do you have any?

-Bri

You seem to be just making things up again. That's getting tedious.

Here's some basic info about migraines.

http://www.migraines.org/myth/mythreal.htm

A Migraine is induced by various controllable and uncontrollable triggers. Uncontrollable triggers include weather patterns and menstrual cycles, and controllable triggers include bright light, aspartame, and alcohol. The severity and frequency of Migraines for one person depends upon how many triggers an individual must experience before a Migraine is induced. The combination of triggers is different for each person.

 

[mhaze]

Quote:
And there would be dramatic differences in color perception between incadescent and CFL by people with partial or complete color blindness, because the power spectrum of irradiance of CFL has gaps, peaks and valleys, compared to incadescent. The two are "not the same" and noting color temperature is not a assertion of near or complete similarity in illumination.

....All complete speculation on your part without evidence. Do you have any?

-Bri

Does the phrase "power spectrum of irradiation" mean anything to you?

A couple statements of well understood optics and physics with an obvious conclusion is what I see in the above.

 

[Bri]

You seem to be just making things up again. That's getting tedious.

Here's some basic info about migraines.

http://www.migraines.org/myth/mythreal.htm

A Migraine is induced by various controllable and uncontrollable triggers. Uncontrollable triggers include weather patterns and menstrual cycles, and controllable triggers include bright light, aspartame, and alcohol. The severity and frequency of Migraines for one person depends upon how many triggers an individual must experience before a Migraine is induced. The combination of triggers is different for each person.

What is the relevance of this quote? It says nothing about CFL's causing migraines. Sure, bright light can trigger migraines but that would be true of incandescent bulbs as well, making it irrelevant to our discussion.

Quote:
And there would be dramatic differences in color perception between incadescent and CFL by people with partial or complete color blindness, because the power spectrum of irradiance of CFL has gaps, peaks and valleys, compared to incadescent. The two are "not the same" and noting color temperature is not a assertion of near or complete similarity in illumination.

Does the phrase "power spectrum of irradiation" mean anything to you?

A couple statements of well understood optics and physics with an obvious conclusion is what I see in the above.

(bold mine) What is the "obvious conclusion" that you see in the above? Please spell it out for me. Is it evidence of your claim that CFL's cause headaches?

-Bri

 

[mhaze]

What is the relevance of this quote? It says nothing about CFL's causing migraines. Sure, bright light can trigger migraines but that would be true of incandescent bulbs as well, making it irrelevant to our discussion.

(bold mine) What is the "obvious conclusion" that you see in the above? Please spell it out for me. Is it evidence of your claim that CFL's cause headaches?

-Bri

No, and "migraines" ARE NOT HEADACHES.

Many things trigger migraines, including the visual spectrum light and emf from CFL and other bulbs. The reference clearly says that precipitating factors for the medical condition "migraine" vary from individual to individual.

Thus, it is ridiculous for you to think that CFLs do not, can not, and that someone should have to prove everything to you. If an individual that has the condition says that a precipitating factor is XYZ, this is not a situation where a medical practicioner would ridicule the person and suggest that they were deluded and that double bind tests would prove it.

 

[Bri]

No, and "migraines" ARE NOT HEADACHES.

Many things trigger migraines, including the visual spectrum light and emf from CFL and other bulbs. The reference clearly says that precipitating factors for the medical condition "migraine" vary from individual to individual.

The issue is whether or not the phase-out of inefficient bulbs will eliminate all lighting options for any significant number of people. If there is a significant segment of the population for which all available high-efficiency bulbs cause migraines (such as Phelix's initial statement) then that would be a problem. As it turns out, there is no evidence of anyone having this problem, much less a significant number of people. Unless you have evidence that you're keeping to yourself.

Thus, it is ridiculous for you to think that CFLs do not, can not, and that someone should have to prove everything to you.

Another straw-man, since I don't claim that CFL's do not or can not cause migraines. In fact, I said that there is evidence that older CFL's with visible flicker can cause migraines. However, I have seen no evidence that newer CFL's with higher frequency electronic ballasts cause migraines. If you claim otherwise, then yes you'll have to provide evidence of that if you want to convince anyone.

If an individual that has the condition says that a precipitating factor is XYZ, this is not a situation where a medical practicioner would ridicule the person and suggest that they were deluded and that double bind tests would prove it.

I'm not sure what you're talking about here (nobody suggested that a medical practioner ridicule anyone -- sounds like another straw man), but if someone claims to get migraines from XYZ, then are you suggesting that they couldn't be wrong about the cause?

-Bri

 

[Bri]

<double post>

 

[Bri]

No, and "migraines" ARE NOT HEADACHES.

Migraines (migraine headaches) aren't headaches? That's news to me.

According to the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, migraines are headaches:

migraine - headaches that are usually pulsing or throbbing and occur on one or both sides of the head. They are moderate to severe in intensity, associated with nausea, vomiting, sensitivity to light and noise, and worsen with routine physical activity.​

http://www.ninds.nih.gov/disorders/headache/detail_headache.htm#156713138

The National Headache Foundation concurs:

More than 29.5 million Americans suffer from migraine, with women being affected three times more often than men. This vascular headache is most commonly experienced between the ages of 15 and 55, and 70% to 80% of sufferers have a family history of migraine.​

http://www.headaches.org/education/Headache_Topic_Sheets/Migraine

-Bri

 

[mhaze]

I meant that migraines are not within the normal, everyday definition of "headache".

head·ache   
[hed-eyk] Show IPA
–noun
1.
a pain located in the head, as over the eyes, at the temples, or at the base of the skull.

A migraine can involve flashing lights generated within the brain and occluding part of the vision, or it can involve a suppression of part of the visual field.

These sorts of effects can and do occur with no "pain".

Thus, migraine should not be confused with the everyday "headache" which is very different.

 

[Belz...]

I meant that migraines are not within the normal, everyday definition of "headache".

 

[mhaze]

The issue is whether or not the phase-out of inefficient bulbs will eliminate all lighting options for any significant number of people. ....

Who exactly says that's "the issue"? That's something you just made up.

You've taken an issue of consumer choice, and you are trying to create some sort of ethical or moral issue around it, then justify a law on that basis.

However, there is no ethical or moral issue about choice of light bulbs by a consumer.

There is, however, a moral and ethical issue about nanny-state procedures, policies and mindsets.

Yes indeed....

 

[Bri]

I meant that migraines are not within the normal, everyday definition of "headache".

If you're just saying that migraine headache differs from other non-migraine headaches, then that kind of goes without saying.

However, I still don't understand your objection to my use of the word "headache" to include migraine and non-migraine headaches. You'll have to explain that one.

Thus, migraine should not be confused with the everyday "headache" which is very different.

What is an "everyday headache?" If you're using that phrase to mean "a headache that's not a migraine" then of course they are different.

Of course, that has nothing to do with what I said, since I wasn't confusing a migraine headache with an "everyday headache." I asked if you could provide evidence that CFL's cause headaches (migraine or otherwise)?

-Bri

 

[Bri]

Who exactly says that's "the issue"? That's something you just made up.

That was Phelix's issue. That's what we were talking about. At least, that's what the rest of us were talking about.

-Bri

 

[mhaze]

LEDs in, CFLs in the regular trash.

Yes!!!

I finally decided to dump these crap CFLs, 4 floodlight style in the ceiling on one old dimmer swithc. Off to Home Depot, took one with me to be sure the new ones would match. Figured on getting incadescent, but there was a dimmable 60 watt equivalent LED for $32. Bought four.

Bulb Truthers keep talking about there being somewhere at Home Depot to "recycle old CFLs", but hey, what the hell....that'd take another three minutes to walk around and find it and I got stuff to do.

So home with the goods and all four of those worthless, fickering headaches in the REGULAR trash.

Up with the four new LED bulbs. They dim great, about 20-100% (Incadescent does 0-100%, the CFL maybe 40-80%).

Nice!!!!

And the resident Bulb Truthers don't worry....before too long I'll be out completely of CFLs, so there won't be any more to toss in the regular trash.

 

[ladmo]

A Migraine is induced by various controllable and uncontrollable triggers. Uncontrollable triggers include weather patterns and menstrual cycles, and controllable triggers include bright light, aspartame, and alcohol. The severity and frequency of Migraines for one person depends upon how many triggers an individual must experience before a Migraine is induced. The combination of triggers is different for each person.

"bright light" should be quantified. Light is a lot more sophisticated than just a couple of words. I realize you did not make up the definition but clarity is helpful in understanding what the "author" is attempting to convey.