Not all Friends have happy encounters with energy preservation. Laura Jefferies in Shrewsbury started out with the best intentions. 'Progressively', she tells Eye, 'the incandescent lights in my household were replaced with "energy-saving lamps". Progressively I became conscious that my eyesight was failing. I could no longer read for long periods in the evening and I found that the television screen was becoming blurred too.'
Obviously it was time for an eye-check. But before that she installed an environmentally friendly standard lamp adjacent to her armchair. No improvement, so Laura fitted a more powerful bulb. 'Still no improvement in visibility, but I did gain a painful and persistent rash on the right-hand side of my face nearest the lamp.' She applied creams but the rash worsened.
Then Laura heard a radio interview with a dermatologist who suggested that energy-saving bulbs could radiate ultra-violet light and cause dermatitis in some skins. That was enough for our Friend trying to do her bit for the environment.
'My next act was to purchase all of the remaining incandescent lamps in my local supermarket. These lamps were fitted into the light-fittings in my sitting-room. Predictably, despite my determination to use only a simple moisturiser on my face, the rash gradually disappeared.' Her eyesight improved, and now she can read for long periods again, and she and her partner can actually see their TV screen once more.
If these energy-saving measures become widespread, Laura fears she will have to smuggle incandescent bulbs from countries which continue to supply them. 'Otherwise I shall need to go to bed as darkness falls and rise again at sunrise.'
Eye thinks that's not such a bad idea.

Labels: lightbulb