Is Red Light the Key to Fighting Cancer and Increasing Plant Reproduction?

[baywax]

Perhaps that should have told you something.

For sure Moonbear but I like to think there might be some useful information in some of these links. Call me a dreamer.

Has anyone tried the fluorescent tube trick where you take a tube out to the power lines. You just hold up the tube and it lights up in the ambient energy?

http://www.vvork.com/?p=5103

http://ecoartblog.blogspot.com/2008/02/fluorescent-lighting-field.html

 

[lisab]

For sure Moonbear but I like to think there might be some useful information in some of these links. Call me a dreamer.

Has anyone tried the fluorescent tube trick where you take a tube out to the power lines. You just hold up the tube and it lights up in the ambient energy?

http://www.vvork.com/?p=5103

http://ecoartblog.blogspot.com/2008/02/fluorescent-lighting-field.html

I saw a science presentation on this at Lawrence Berkeley Labs when I was a kid. I don't remember what the power source was...but I clearly remember a classmate holding a fluorescent tube and it lit up...I was mesmerized.

 

[baywax]

Perhaps that should have told you something.

Here's the results of a controlled study about the effects of different types of light.

A Study Into the Effects of Types of Light on Children -A Case of Daylight Robbery

Warren E. Hathaway, Ph.D.

Hathaway Planning & Consulting Services
7607 - 183 St.Edmonton, AB T5T 2A8

Abstract:

Based on a review of the literature and a pilot study conducted from 1981 to 1985, a study was carried out that examined physical development and school performance effects of different lighting systems onelementary students. Students’ dental health, growth and development, attendance, and academic achievement were examined under four different types of lighting: (a) full spectrum fluorescent lamps, (b)full spectrum fluorescent lamps with ultraviolet light enhancements, (c) cool white fluorescent lamps, and(d) high pressure sodium vapor lamps. Data on 327 students, in Grade 4 at the end of the 1986-87 schoolyear, were collected at the start and at the conclusion of the study, which spanned two years.

The results indicated that over the two year period, students under full spectrum fluorescent lamps with ultraviolet supplements developed fewer dental cavities and had better attendance, achievement, and growth and development than students under other lights. Students under the high pressure sodium vapor lamps had the slowest rates of growth and development as well as the poorest attendance and achievement. On the basis of the findings of this study it was concluded that lights have important non-visual effects on students who are exposed to them on a regular basis in the classroom.

http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cach...of+fluorescent+light&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=ca

There's also this study from Oxford concerning fluorescent light and melanoma.
This is a pay per view article.

The Association of Cutaneous Malignant Melanoma and Fluorescent Light Exposure
Walter et al. Am. J. Epidemiol..1992; 135: 749-762

http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/135/7/749.pdf

 

[tribdog]

They are not very bright and they are annoying.

Wow, my girlfriend has described me using those exact words.

 

[Moonbear]

There's also this study from Oxford concerning fluorescent light and melanoma.
This is a pay per view article.



http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/135/7/749.pdf

They don't seem to be taking into account NON-occupational exposures to anything. For example, seems to mention the occupational sunlight exposure, but nothing about whether those who spend a lot of time working under fluorescent lights go out and work in their yard with their shirts off all weekend long (there was only an effect in men, not women).


From another study:
BMJ. 1988 September 10; 297(6649): 647–650.
Fluorescent lights, ultraviolet lamps, and risk of cutaneous melanoma.
A. J. Swerdlow, J. S. English, R. M. MacKie, C. J. O'Doherty, J. A. Hunter, J. Clark, and D. J. Hole
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pubmed&pubmedid=3140927
(Some errata found here, but don't change the conclusions: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/pagerender.fcgi?artid=1835008&pageindex=1 )

Beral et al reported an increased risk of
melanoma from occupational exposure to fluorescent
lights, the risk being related to duration of exposure,5
but several case-control studies since then have not
given consistent evidence of raised risk. Our results
also do not suggest any consistent relation. Like
most689 but not all57 studies we found no significant
relation between occupational or total exposure to
fluorescent light and risk of melanoma overall. As
in both studies that examined exposure at home
separately59 we found no association of risk with such
exposure, which, although often of lesser magnitude
than exposure at work, may be less susceptible to
reporting error.22

 

[baywax]

They don't seem to be taking into account NON-occupational exposures to anything. For example, seems to mention the occupational sunlight exposure, but nothing about whether those who spend a lot of time working under fluorescent lights go out and work in their yard with their shirts off all weekend long (there was only an effect in men, not women). From another study:
BMJ. 1988 September 10; 297(6649): 647–650.
Fluorescent lights, ultraviolet lamps, and risk of cutaneous melanoma.
A. J. Swerdlow, J. S. English, R. M. MacKie, C. J. O'Doherty, J. A. Hunter, J. Clark, and D. J. Hole
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pubmed&pubmedid=3140927
(Some errata found here, but don't change the conclusions: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/pagerender.fcgi?artid=1835008&pageindex=1 )

Thanks Moonbear. I wondered what the outcome from Oxford was.

You may wonder why I'm looking for negative side affects of fluorescent lighting. Its because the title of the thread is "Arrrrrg... fluorescent lighting". So, I was looking for the "Arrrrrg...g" factor. Other than that, I know how much I enjoy fluorescent lighting and I'll take care of my own likes and dislikes in that regard. Everyone else is free to live as they see fit!

 

[edward]

Thanks Moonbear. I wondered what the outcome from Oxford was.

You may wonder why I'm looking for negative side affects of fluorescent lighting. Its because the title of the thread is "Arrrrrg... fluorescent lighting". So, I was looking for the "Arrrrrg...g" factor. Other than that, I know how much I enjoy fluorescent lighting and I'll take care of my own likes and dislikes in that regard. Everyone else is free to live as they see fit!

I figure just off hand that I need the same light that plants need, so Ill opt for full spectrum when I can get it. Some green plants do fine on cool white fluorescent (blue), but flowering plants also need the reds of full spectrum. Maybe I am just a late bloomer. That or at some time during the last 20,000 or so years my ancestors got hooked on it.

 

[baywax]

I figure just off hand that I need the same light that plants need, so Ill opt for full spectrum when I can get it. Some green plants do fine on cool white fluorescent (blue), but flowering plants also need the reds of full spectrum. Maybe I am just a late bloomer. That or at some time during the last 20,000 or so years my ancestors got hooked on it.

I've studied a lot of light and colour therapy theories. I recommend Faber Birren who is my American hero because he helped win the 2nd world war with his colour theories. Number one is that he developed the red, green and yellow signals for intersections. He also organized the colour and lighting for munitions factories in the USA back in the 40s during the war. His theories kept people safe and awake in these 24 hour factories.

He also used light to reduce and enlarge tumours in cancerous subjects (lab animals). The blue light tended to freeze up hormone production in organisms (and resulted either in tumour growth or simply continued metastatic growth) Red light stirs up hormones to the point of reducing the tumours (possibly because of anti-growth hormone secretion). See: "Red Light District". When plants are growing throughout the spring and summer there is reduced red light in the spectrum of the sun. This is due to angle and atmospheric conditions I guess. At mid summer we get more red light and the plants stop growth and begin to produce reproductive cells (flowers, seeds etc). This may also explain the apparent "stop growth" order red light signals to cancerous cells. Cancer is a example of full on mitosis. There's no meiosis going on in preparation for reproduction.

Next time you see red brake lights, yellow yield signs or orange with diagonal black striped construction signs... you'll know you're looking at the results of Faber Birren's many years of research into the therapies and psychology of colour.