Low energy bulbs in the spotlight again over health fears
I can't help finding it a bit fishy that just as we declare the end of the road for the traditional lightbulb, a whole load of reasons why low-energy bulbs are 'bad' come out of the woodwork. Let's take a look at some of them:
First we were warned about the potential dangers of disposing of low energy lightbulbs. All fair enough, since fluorescent bulbs need to be handled differently from old-style ones. But then came the health scares: low energy bulbs are now being blamed for everything from migraine to skin cancer. So who should you believe?
The benefits of switching to low energy bulbs are undoubted: using up to 80% less electricity, they save both energy and money. But how seriously should we take these scare stories? I'm with the the Energy Saving Trust on this one, who argue that we should not let the concerns overshadow the fact that these bulbs are far better for the environment, and that the technology is improving all the time: A spokesman for the Trust said: "The technology has changed massively over the last few years. We would advise people to only buy bulbs with the Energy Saving Recommended - SR - logo.
Personally, I'd advice continuing to use these bulbs as long as they do not bother you or you don't suffer from any condition that requires keeping away from fluorescent light. But we've had fluorescent tube lighting for years, and presumably those who are affected by it will already know this!
