Jump to content

Bring me Sunshine


Bill

Recommended Posts

All through this pandemic one of the main questions asked is why it affects some countries more than others. There’s a whole raft of obvious answers but if we could somehow average out the entire planet, making each country have the same population density and the same control measures, then I think we might see a clearer picture of what’s happening.

We know that the virus seems to thrive when the average temperature is around 5c and die off during the summer months, so it stands to reason that there’ll be two zones between the poles and the equator where during the course of the year that these ideal virus conditions exist during which time we see the seasonal peaks.

We can’t change the weather, it’d be nice if we could, but is it just warmer temperatures that the virus doesn’t like or is it anything to do with the amount of sunshine? During the summer we get more ultraviolet light and that’s known to kill off or sterilize viruses and bacteria, so given we can quite easily create the ultraviolet component of sunshine, could something like this, rolled out on a global scale be almost as effective as a vaccine?

The thing is that if the virus is airborne, then indoors it’s going to stay there for quite some time and the only thing we can do is to wear masks and open windows. But if we introduced some ultraviolet, it could destroy the virus in the air and the surfaces on which it lands. I know ultraviolet light can be harmful but if doses are kept to the same level as a pleasant summers day then the protection benefits could outweigh any danger.

More food for thought.

 

Bill 😊

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Knowing our luck Asp, we’d end up just getting the floods and no sunshine.

I’ve just been doing a bit more reading up on this and UV sterilisers are already widely used but mainly in short high dose enclosures rather than in the open air. One report however suggested that by choosing a higher frequency (uvc) then this is effective against the virus but not damaging to the skin or eyes and as such can be used in public indoor locations.

They used to do loads of UV in the discos but I’m not sure if people now would prefer covid rather than have their dandruff lighting up.

 

Bill 😊

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just watched a film based on a covid pandemic, in which the hero plays a delivery man, who "miraculously" has total immunity, which allows him to ride his bike around deserted streets, patrolled by armed police.  Each and every flat, has a letter box style box fitted in the wall, fitted with UV, presumably cleansing anything going in or out. Just wonder how much they'd cost to get fitted ? !      😷

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is what you need Obs

The chip device she had costs between £10 to £23 each from the manufacturer in the states but similar led chips that would do the same job can be found on eBay for a fraction of that price. Before these were available, the lamps were the fluorescent type that were cheaper and more powerful but they tended to wear out and become less effective in less than a year. I used to have to change my bulb in the water filtration for my pond every year to stop the water turning green but with LED technology I'd guess they'd probably last maybe ten or more times longer.

The lady say's she only just heard about Ebola so the video is obviously pre covid.

 

 

Bill 😊

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No Davy sunbeds are just for silly women who want to be a bit more than just half baked. 😊 Yet again I have to say I’m no expert, but I do know it takes a certain type of UV lamp in order to sterilize things (UVC) while tanning uses a mixture of (UVA & UVB) and that sunlight contains a mixture of all three types.

Back on the global question though, I know it’s difficult to visualize what I’m trying to say because the world is full of highly populated areas where the virus could have a field day even in the middle of the summer. But we can’t deny the fact that all viruses become more prevalent in the colder winter months and almost die out during the summer. So if we could replicate the exact same population densities together with the exact same mitigation measures we should be able to see the true effects that seasonal weather has on the virus.

The question is though why does the virus seem to die off when things get warmer? To be honest I’ve wondered this all my life because I’d have thought a good hard frost would kill off most viruses, yet we still have the cold and flu season peaking every year at about this time. So when the weather starts to warm up I’d have also thought a virus would spread more but it doesn’t but I bet under lab conditions in a warm incubator it would.

I’m not saying that sunlight with it’s UVC content is wholly responsible for the drop off during the summer months but just that it could be playing a bigger part than we currently think. And UVC is capable of killing all the different virus’s and their mutations without any chemicals or vaccinations so maybe a good idea for indoor places like pubs and restaurants.

 

Bill 😊

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Observer II said:

The battle was lost over 12 months ago, in Dec 2019; when we didn't lock down and close all access into the UK.   We've now passed the 100,000 deaths marker;  N/Zealand which had a full lock down last March has a total of 29 deaths.   😷

You are Captain Hindsight and I claim my reward!

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can’t compare New Zealand with the UK Obs, it’s a tiny country where not that many people live and they’re all upside down anyway. We have fifteen times more people crammed into each square mile compared to them so they’re more like Norway where people are so spaced out it difficult for the virus to spread. Plus they're six months out of step with us and I'd bet their numbers will increase when they get to their winter although not on he same scale that we saw here.

 

Bill 😊

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The biggest problem with this virus is that nobody in the world expected it ,nobody knew how aggressive it was & what harm it would do to worldwide populations. Disease happens frequently on earth & kills thousands at a time but this is unprecedented & foresight would have been a wonderful thing.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Bill said:

No Davy sunbeds are just for silly women who want to be a bit more than just half baked. 😊 Yet again I have to say I’m no expert, but I do know it takes a certain type of UV lamp in order to sterilize things (UVC) while tanning uses a mixture of (UVA & UVB) and that sunlight contains a mixture of all three types.

Back on the global question though, I know it’s difficult to visualize what I’m trying to say because the world is full of highly populated areas where the virus could have a field day even in the middle of the summer. But we can’t deny the fact that all viruses become more prevalent in the colder winter months and almost die out during the summer. So if we could replicate the exact same population densities together with the exact same mitigation measures we should be able to see the true effects that seasonal weather has on the virus.

The question is though why does the virus seem to die off when things get warmer? To be honest I’ve wondered this all my life because I’d have thought a good hard frost would kill off most viruses, yet we still have the cold and flu season peaking every year at about this time. So when the weather starts to warm up I’d have also thought a virus would spread more but it doesn’t but I bet under lab conditions in a warm incubator it would.

I’m not saying that sunlight with it’s UVC content is wholly responsible for the drop off during the summer months but just that it could be playing a bigger part than we currently think. And UVC is capable of killing all the different virus’s and their mutations without any chemicals or vaccinations so maybe a good idea for indoor places like pubs and restaurants.

 

Bill 😊

Some words of caution: https://youtu.be/2T39BHvrHZ0

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes Asp, you need to be careful with anything like this. From what I’ve read though, the solid state (LED) devices produce a very narrow band of light frequencies, whereas the old tubes like the one shown in the video are not so well defined and will also contain some UVB which is the really bad stuff.

The UVC radiation can easily destroy the thin cell wall of a virus but it can’t get anywhere near penetrating the skins epidermis which in comparison is thousands of times thicker and comprised mainly of dead cells anyway. So providing you don’t go silly, there should be no more risk than going for a walk on a sunny day.

Also the big tubes like the one in the video are intended to flash disinfect a room with a big dose as quickly as possible so you have to get out while it’s doing that. How effective and safe one of these small devices would be if left permanently running in a room I wouldn’t know but I doubt it would harm anyone. They'd certainly be perfect for Observers letter disinfector albeit a bit pricey. 

The ones that look like a portable air conditioner seem like a good option. They’re just a fan and filter but inside the air passes over an LED UVC module before being returned to the room so no harm to anyone except those pesky viruses.

 

Bill 😊

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lots of good advice there Sid. Unfortunately there’s lots of people at the moment jumping on the bandwagon with cheap products mainly from the far east that could be dangerous. That said, a bottle of bleach is probably a lot more dangerous in the hands of a carless person, so providing you understand the basic safety issues and are not deliberately trying to harm yourself, using ultraviolet sterilization is a good option.

While it was aimed mainly at the cheaper products with dubious claims, it did confirm exactly what I said in my previous post.

It’s possible that light disinfection may be more of a thing in the future though. A type of light known as Far-UVC light can deliver the germkill effects of UV-C without the harmful side effects, so we may start to see more technology harnessing this.

I remember a time when you’d need to take out a mortgage to buy a blue LED, now they’re ten a penny and prices of these Far-UVC LEDs will eventually do the same. This development with it’s ability to wipe out all viruses and bacteria could be medically more significant than the discovery of penicillin.

 

Bill 😊

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Bill said:

I've heard about that spray that kills everything in seconds.

They call it Napalm don’t they?  :)

 

Bill 😊

Surprised the Chinese didn't use it.     😉

 

22 minutes ago, Davy51 said:

Talking of sunshine ,Mrs Davy is on industrial strength Vitamin D off her GP ....in his words, "nobody in Britain gets enough vitamin D ".

Vitamin D supplements can assist, but light skinned folk can get a boost on a sunny day;  it's the brown folk who tend to suffer, as they evolved to exist in hotter, tropical environments.     😷.     

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mrs Davy need one of my lamps by the sound of it.

Vitamin D deficiency is associated with osteoporosis, rickets and other metabolic bone diseases and is more prevalent in northern and southern latitudes where sunlight is limited for a significant part of the year. This device for making vitamin D is ideally suited for patients with fat malabsorption syndromes including inflammatory bowel disease and gastric bypass surgery.

The research shows that RayVio's UV LEDs could be used for treating patients that are vitamin D deficient. A vitamin D3 producing UV LED device could be used on skin areas that experience less exposure to sunlight such as upper legs and arms and abdomen and back thus minimizing risk for developing non-melanoma skin cancer. The UV LED device also emits a much narrower band of UVB light and thereby decreasing likelihood of skin damage that can occur when the skin is exposed to higher wavelengths of UV radiation.

"The potential of digital UV technology for phototherapy is enormous," said Dr. Robert C. Walker, RayVio's CEO. "Dr. Holick's research with our UVB LEDs demonstrates the potential for new applications that can potentially improve and save hundreds of thousands of lives.

 

Bill 😊

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...