Re: Response to Marc re LEDs
Posted by
charles-4 on
Sep 12, 2008; 6:29am
URL: https://www.es-forum.com/Response-to-Marc-re-LEDs-tp1547243p1547253.html
Regarding lamps, and LED, as well as filters, the latest issue of *het
bitje* september tells something about that.
Greetings,
Charles Claessens
member Verband Baubiologie
www.milieuziektes.nl
www.milieuziektes.be
www.hetbitje.nl
checked by Bitdefender
----- Original Message -----
From: "wijyotishi" <
[hidden email]>
To: <
[hidden email]>
Sent: Friday, September 12, 2008 4:04 AM
Subject: [eSens] Response to Marc re LEDs
>
>
> After reading Magda Havas' remarks on dirty electricty and CFL vs. LED
> bulbs, in which she says:
>
> "Alternative light bulbs are available that
>> are much more energy efficient than CFL, do not contain
>> mercury, do not produce radio frequencies or UV radiation,
>> and do not make people sick. Unfortunately these bulbs are
>> still too expensive for residential use (CLED lights
>> produced by www.realuvcorp.com)"
>
> ...Mark asked:
>
> "So, is this paper saying that the only good LED lights
> on the market (from an ES/health standpoint) are those
> sold by www.realuvcorp. sold by www.realuvcorp.<wbr>
> better than all the other LED lights on the market?"
>
> It is not at all clear to me why she threw in the reference to that
> company, Mark.
> Personally, I am waiting for LEDs to come down in price and be
> available in a warmer color than the harsh blueish white. Meanwhile,
> I am still using incandescents.
>
> Shivani Arjuna
> www.LifeEnergies.com
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>