4 ms·

Pretty sure they mostly (entirely?) put out UVA.

• burlesona 8y ago
  Interesting. According to the article that’s the “bad” UV. I wonder if there’s a market for UVB lights?
  • groestl 8y ago
    Sure! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UV-B_lamps https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UV-B_lamps Or do you mean market as in "consumer market"?
    • crazygringo 8y ago
      Is there a consumer market? A quick search on Amazon reveals UVB lamps are mainly either expensive ($250) and for people with skin problems, or else cheap and low-powered ($30) for reptiles. There doesn't seem to be anything for a kind of full-body health use?
  • medymed 8y ago
    This article gives a short, uncited and unorthodox summary of UVA vs UVB effects. Most chemical effects may be unknown, but a few are well-characterized like pyrimidine dimer related mutations from UVB that are also seen in skin cancer sequencing samples. UVB has therefore been thought to be directly carcinogenic (likely indirectly as well through other mechanisms), whereas UVA is often associated with photo aging (longer wavelength, penetrates deeper through epidermis into dermis leading to solar elastosis) and may have carcinogenic role that is less chemically obvious compared to the dimers.