Comment on "The Photosensitizing Potential of Compact Fluorescent vs Incandescent Light Bulbs" by C.F. Chignell, R.H. Sik and P.J. Bilski, Photochem. Photobiol. (2008)/Response to Comments by Ciani to our Rapid Communication on "The Photosensitizing Potential of Compact Fluorescent vs Incandescent Light Bulb" by C.F. Chignell,[dagger] R.H. Sik and P.J. Bilski. Photochem. Photobiol. (2008)

(I) reports on their measurement of the emission spectrum (from 300 to 750 nm) of a 14 W compact fluorescent light (CFL) bulb, a 60 VV soft white incandescent light (SWIL) bulb and two 40 VV cool-white fluorescent (CWF) tubes. [...] the spectral distribution from the incandescent bulb is continuous...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Photochemistry and photobiology 2008-11, Vol.84 (6), p.1596
Main Authors: Ciani, Anthony J, Bilski, Piotr J
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Behavior
Circadian rhythm
Environmental health
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:(I) reports on their measurement of the emission spectrum (from 300 to 750 nm) of a 14 W compact fluorescent light (CFL) bulb, a 60 VV soft white incandescent light (SWIL) bulb and two 40 VV cool-white fluorescent (CWF) tubes. [...] the spectral distribution from the incandescent bulb is continuous and similar to that of sunlight, while the light energy from the fluorescent bulbs is grouped around the Hg emission lines with a notably higher relative contribution around 450 nm for cool white. From a photobiological point of view, it is obvious that the different visual receptors will be sensitized to a different degree via different temporal modes of each light source, which may or may not have long-term effects on human behavior unrelated to the safety matters under discussion.
ISSN:0031-8655
1751-1097