Fluorescent and other arc source lighting has more than
color temperature to study about it. If one searches the net under the concept of light box, one will learn lots of theories that also have similar substantiation and study about the effects of natural lighting verses fake lighting. This is all also directly opposed to just banning all
incandescent lighting and going
CFL’s.
There is it would seem some health benefits to a higher - within the 85 or 100 range for
CRI (Color
Rendering Index.) Wether or not this study took into account (doubtful) the effects of lighting on health in general as it relates to embryos is not known but not likely. Simple terms, we all feel better after a few days straight on a dark
stage to get out into the sun for even a few minutes. Sunlight is healthy as with natural sources of light that provide the full spectrum of light. A major question of this above study might be asked about
CRI of the lamps in the test. While not uniform, for the most part in common
fluorescent lamps, between the “bad” 4,1K Cool White lamps and normally 3,5 to 3,0K - these days at least warm white lamps, the
CRI of the lamps raises with the lower the
color temperature. On the other
hand, often neither simulates natural or
incandescent lighting sufficiently. Fluorescents can come close but are not.
What the study I think didn’t sufficiently study and would have been more important than
color temperature in general would be color
rendering index effects on the fetus. Let’s
face it, most cool white lamps are common to the market and little better than 65
CRI these days. Given IMPACT 1986, most warm white lamps have been removed from the market. Of those that still exist they are often much higher in overall range of color spikes in
color temperature thus more efficient. Very likely we are talking a 1950's car having less gas milage than that of 1990's car. Gee, ya think?
On the other
hand, and in my fiancee having read the article and become concerned, I did have to tell her with the expectations of two years from now our baby girl being born, that the shop lights are both warm white, and more important a much higher
CRI than a common
fluorescent. This given the lighting in the shop is insufficient and not persay the best lamps possible unlike in my work area, they should have no adverse effects on her. Scare type stuff sucks. Further study is needed. Again not the movie “Soilent Green” but another movie I think from the period if I remember correctly where people had to stand in formation in front of sun lamps so as to
gain healthy benefits. IT’s real, one needs some amount of that radiation from the full spectrum of light. However in general, most designed lighting even if
fluorescent wont have this problem. Offices that let some company come in and lamp them for them
etc. Electricians that do what’s easy, even classrooms, that’s more problematic. Study of lamps on the other
hand does not hinder it normalizes when you choose what’s used. Good study in concept to read about, not so much to worry about unless this is the case where you work. My theory, cool white lamps are evil. It’s the worst
color temperature available. Anything higher or lower than 4,1K is more natural be it simulating the sun or simulation of
incandescent.
More important is
CRI. While a fairly newer scale to measure lamps against, it is much more accurate when it comes to arc sources and the effects of such light on not just color
rendering but how the body reacts to it. A lack of citing this concept makes the article amature.