UV light kills viruses. Why isn't it everywhere?

Author Avatar

Vox

Joined: Mar 2024
Spread the love


UV light kills viruses. Why isn't it everywhere?


The promise and pitfalls of using light to stop germs.

Subscribe to our channel! http://goo.gl/0bsAjO

When you think of disinfecting a space, what comes to mind? Wipes? Gels? Sprays? Maybe air purifiers or effective HVAC systems? All of these are great defenses against viruses and bacteria, but one thing has been missing from the toolkit…

source

Reviews

0 %

User Score

0 ratings
Rate This

Sharing

Leave your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

26 Comments

  1. I find it curious that Ms Barber was pessimistic about UV being ebiqutous with disinfection. I don't see why having a device in your house the pulls air from the room and pass it by a UV light would be an issue. I didn't hear anything in this doc that would suggest there would be a downside. If the light is contained in a seal device there is no light exposure. The O3 issue while is present, doesn't seem to be an issue. The fact that no one knows how much O3 is created by UV light seems intentionally ignorant. It would be simple to fill a know vessel volume with standard room air, measure the O3, expose it to UV the remeasure the O3. Am I missing something?? Run that experiment several times, different size vessels, stagnant vs moving air. Seriously shouldn't there already be a standard metric for UV generated O3. Also, if UV creates a toxic amount of O3 why isn't the sun turning our atmosphere toxic with O3?? I am not saying conspiracy because I rather follow facts than guess. For me, something isn't adding up here.

  2. Have we learned nothing from using anti-viral and bacterial cleaning products? They ALL cause damage to us in various different ways. If one thing that kills viruses and bacteria also harms us, it's like 99% likely that anything else will ultimately be found to do the same if directly used on us.

    It's just that we haven't studied Far-UV or whatever enough to see the damage it does.

    Like seriously, they only looked at it causing cancers in mice? What about the other 1000's of issues it can cause?

    Also, you know manufactures are gonna release subpar bulbs that release more UV then they are supposed to and cause more damage that way. .. and that these bulbs will be like 80% of what people buy.

    Just stick to the ceiling UV treatments. It's enough to lower the over all presence of bacteria and viruses in the room to make a difference.

  3. "even though they operate at a low wavelength, it still isnt great to directly blast humans with it day in and day out."
    how does that make any sense? lower wavelengths have higher energy?

  4. How about putting them inside air conditioners, where the heat exchange takes place. That way people won't get exposed and the flow is probably not slow enough for ozone to be created. Plus it'd probably be cheaper than air filters.

  5. A bigger question is why the doctors and hospitals not using it to treat diseases and infections… of course it would interfere with the J.D. Rockefeller model to make healthcare costly as possible… That's why the American Medical Association ( AMA ) was created to us dry. Yon can thank him and J. P. Morgan for that creation!!!😢😢😢😢😢😢

  6. You can have far UV lights turn on before/after school/workplace while people are not there. to sterilize the surfaces more effectively and economically than chemical / manual cleaning

  7. To actually answer the question: because electron beam sterilization is both more effective and works through packages. Maybe don't use it on a human, though.