“Our study revealed that the response of healthy skin cells to UV emitted from CFL bulbs is consistent with damage from ultraviolet radiation,” said Professor Rafailovich. “Skin cell damage was further enhanced when low dosages of TiO2 nanoparticles were introduced to the skin cells prior to exposure.” Rafailovich added that incandescent light of the same intensity had no effect on healthy skin cells, with or without the presence of TiO2.
“Despite their large energy savings, consumers should be careful when using compact fluorescent light bulbs,” said Professor Rafailovich. “Our research shows that it is best to avoid using them at close distances and that they are safest when placed behind an additional glass cover.”
Glad I stocked up on incandescents. Which apparently are still for sale.
It seems UVC radiation ( a kind of UV) is the main problem,
damaging radiation normally absorbed by the ozone layer
Good about Stony Brook study, the UV radiation and effects
with diagrams comparing with other light bulbs!
http://tonn.ie/2012/07/new-study-on-cfl-uv-radiation.html
The site also in 13 points extensively argues
“How product regulations are wrongly justified”