While living in Shenzhen, China my daughter's kindergarten rigged up UV lights in all their classrooms for night-time room, table, chair and floor sterilization back in 2009 during the Swine Flu epidemic. When you passed the school at night the windows glowed with the color blue from the UV lights.
A search of Amazon.com using the key words "far uvc light sterilizer 222nm" revealed several such products, but at this point I'd say "cavaet emptor" (buyer beware). I think I'll wait for product recommendations from reputable sources like Consumer Reports. Also, we probably should be searching for these devices from industrial suppliers rather than consumer suppliers.
Kathy, A small alcohol swab will lift the tape off the nose without pain. So you have to decide which is worse the alcohol smell or the pain of taking the tape off. (Old nursing hack).
As soon as he gets off you guys say cringed at when he said "virus dead and alive". The guest clearly knew that viruses are not dead/alive. His wording early on in that regard shows he already knows this. I think he was just trying to be relatable to the audience. When he answered "what is uv light?" He could have explained in a technical way, like "uv is higher frequency of violet than violet which is the upper end of the visible spectrum, then its UV range, then xray range, then gamma range etc.. " its first year physics, and I'm surprised after this "cringe about live or dead viruses " you guys go on to say "I didn't know uv was invisible" The irony. Yes uv , xray and gamma EMR above the visible spectrum are invisible. As are infrared, microwaves etc beneath the visible spectrum. Seriously guys, you guys should have used photospectometry to measure enzymes and proteins you should know about xray crystallography in your field for imaging proteins and viruses. Electronic microscopy to see viruses. So yeah he knows viruses are technically just a particle of packaged nucleic acid. He learnt that first year bio. As you should have learned the EMR spectrum first year physics. Lol
Sigh, someone told Trump about this, and he decided that we should put the light into our lungs (remember his impromptu musing at the podium about "a very powerful light"?). Insufficient knowledge can be a dangerous thing.
The notion of viral load continues to be unclear and is causing me some amount of consternation. There is the young Houston doctor (resident - 28 years old). How do young people DIE of covid 19? The story that many of us in HC tell is that it's the initial dose they got. Of course, there's just so much we don't know about her situation. But the young HCWs in China. How did they die? On the one hand, we have Osterholm and TWiV telling us viral load is not a "thing," and on the other hand we have practicing doctors and nurses, and Dr Monica Gandhi, telling us it very definitely is a thing. Also, one of the metrics doctors use to track progress in their HIV positive patients is...viral load. I (wearing a mask since early April) have been around / exposed / breathed on / cleaned up after patients with Covid 19, even those who later died, but so far no positive Covid test. We need a discussion of this NOW.
I think they use "viral load" to represent the amount of virus they find in X body part. That could be high due to replication but the patient's immune system is keeping it in check and it doesn't increase enough to overwhelm THEIR body where it counts. "Initial dose", is how many particles you get in beginning (which I found the timeline to be vague, like first 15 minutes? 1 hour? 1 day?). These guys are saying there's no evidence that links initial dose to "severity of disease". Only that it is linked to "infection probability". Even if they are wrong, but low initial dose can still potentially kill young healthy people via general biological principles, i.e. they are genetically weak vs. SARS-COV2. e.g. if you get 2 copies of C529Y-CDHR3 (one from each parent), Rhinovirus C infection (cold) can cause childhood asthma requiring hospitalization. So before they knew how to treat this, you would have probably died. Or be damaged so bad that you can no longer hunt or run from predators and die shortly I guess. So it was mostly selected out so we don't get as many as today's COVID weak genes in young ppl.
@@rasmasyean "I think they use "viral load" to represent the amount of virus they find in X body part." Yes, you are correct. I was not being very rigorous in my terminology, as there is a difference between "load" and (initial) "dose." "These guys are saying there's no evidence that links initial dose to "severity of disease". Only that it is linked to "infection probability". " Correct - this is what they are saying. That's taken me a bit of time to tease out. Initially it was causing me a lot of dissonance! They were basically saying Monica Gandhi is wrong (or that there's no evidence for what she's saying) and in my mind I was like, "What?" I just couldn't get past the notion that Dr Gandhi could be wrong or that her hypothesis could. If I understand what you're saying - it is that what accounts for Covid killing young people (and here my concern is HCWs), is genetics. ? Yes?
@@patriciahoke4722 Genetics (even though there's no "evidence" yet) can be bet on, if you believe survival of the fittest. In this case, those young people are not fit for SARS-COV2 circulation. Just like most Rhinovirus C weakings weren't fit when that was introduced. But it's possible it made them strong if some other virus was introduced instead. Mother Nature is random. Like, iirc people who have some sickle cell carrier trait are resistant to malaria. But anyways, genes play a role, and I know what you are saying. I would think viral "dose" (aka inoculum) can affect disease severity. It's repeated that packed apartments in Corona and Jackson Heights got hit really hard. Even hearsay from NYC'ers (I'm in Queens) has this theme. The only mechanism I can think of that supports their refute is that maybe each "spot" of infection will be responded to independently at the same rate with no limit to how many immune cells can be recruited to ALL spots at once. Then 1 vs 100 sieged alveoli is irrelevant. But the fault with that idea is that if your immune response is slow, then you'll lose 1 aveoli vs. 100 before you invent antibodies I guess. The former is preferable, right? Especially if they don't grow back.
I did watch that discussion about the specific topic refuting any idea that the virus was created in a lab (again, after having seen it in the original). I think it’s a great idea to make topical videos on some high-interest topics like that. Other topics may be vaccine study workflow/approval process/milestones discussion, value of masks and good making practices, things like that. Of course making those specific topical videos can be a lot of work, so I can understand the difficulty. There definitely would be value to it though.
David Brenner said the 220nm light was generated using krypton chloride. Krypton is a noble gas. How is it reacted with chlorine??? I would like to know more about this light’s gas mixture, is it published?
I used to install those in furnaces and since I've been seeing TWIV I know the heat exchanger is hot enough to kill most pathogens, A good use of UVC is water treatment but flow rate is crucial to sterilization in the last stage of filtration.
Baffled light boxes with air movers could be an improvement for a bar or restaurant. Charges of ozone can be leveraged for electrostatic particle collection. “Smoke eaters were electrostatic smoke collectors and scaled nicely can collect almost any particle. White LEDs use UV and phosphors to make white light. The semiconductor guys might make efficient UVC+ lamps. Filtration takes horsepower. .
Does UVC have any affect on Radon? I have UVC that I use to disinfect rooms of my house these are 60 watt corncob lights according to specs they are 240-265nm how can I know if they're working since I don't have an electron microscope?
A slight worry here. I can see some Chinese traders packaging up 250nm UVC lights and marketing them as 222nm Far-UVC. Loads of customers could then get skin damage or go blind. Especially bad if the lights are used around children or in a babies bedroom.
Vincent, I wish you would be more measured in your embrace of this new technology. He may have answered questions related to your field to your satisfaction, but there are many other fields that would need to chime in before the deployment of high energy radiation on humans and on the materials they surround themselves with. I imagine that material science folks could come up with some risks no one has addressed yet. Keep up the great work!
They do, in TWiV 664. Vincent also posted an excerpt focusing on debunking the “paper”, here you go :-) ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-sBQplOe8-LE.html
A co-worker just left the office defending a politician that's a self professed Voodoo Virologist, Nuclear Weapon weather system altering Meteorologist, a Conservation of Matter ignoring climatologist. Any utterance from his psychotic mouth was met with "OK" I'm very glad he left, I just got 10 IQ points back.
FAR UVC lamps are usually purple in color so they are not mistaken for 253.7nm units which are usually blue. Usually the units need a 24volt power supply to run them! Anything below 250USD is likely to be fake!!!
I never felt satisfied with the answer to how it inactivates viruses, are bonds broken? I heard dimerization but that was speculated. And while the intensity required being surprisingly low that is not a scientific answer. You have mentioned the positive aspects of some viruses in your lectures. Also, if it impacts viruses, does it degrade pheromones doi.org/10.1155/2014/253924 or other good particles?. There is always a trade off.
The UV energy triggers the formation of specific thymine or cystosine dimers in DNA and uracil dimers in RNA, which causes the inactivation of microbes by causing mutations and/or cell death as well as failure to reproduce: www.stouchlighting.com/germicidal-uv-c-light-disinfection-sterilization-systems
Regarding testing in a room with SARS-CoV-2 viruses floating around: Wouldn’t it be possible to install such a lamp in an ICU room with COVID-19 patients.
Michael Crichton's book "State of Fear" If ya read any part read Appendix I, "Why Politicized Science is Dangerous" and the Author's Message.. near the end. (c2004).
The Ushio brand "Care222® Filtered Far UV-C Excimer Lamp Module" is a 222nm lamp but I don't see pricing on their website. Important to realize the 275-280nm will burn your skin and eyes. Those are the standard sterilizing UVC lights you will find. Also be aware that most of the Amazon/Ebay/AliExpress UVC lights are fakes.
Please consider talking about hypochlorous acid and its effects on bacterial and viral contamination. That is what was being sprayed on people in China prior to entering hospitals etc. It is a fascinating product that we actually produce in our bodies. It is also being used in eye care to control bacterial infections of the eyelids and various uses in veterinary care. And you can make it at home!
Roundabout 1:32:00 you were talking about the need for dosctors to operate via 'basic science' rather than follow predefined pathways - but there is incidence of medical personnel getting together to publicise their own findings, thru practical experience, what about that? It has lead to a great rift, of these radical groups being at odds with an orthodoxy - compounded by the fact that there is no 'debate' between these groups, only shouting matches based on zero trust or respect between them. It may be that their results, their evidence is shaky, or not - but often their point of view is not taken seriously. That in turn creates another (public) army of 'followers of the persecuted' - who add to the shouting - all while failng to get at the underlying facts.
i search for them periodically on the amazon, but only the 254nm come up (which i purchased, better than nothing) , not 222. I believe the LED ones are fake, only get the tube kind.
@@richardmccartney2328 GO AWAY YOUR PESKY TROLL, YOUR SPOUTING OF IDIOTIC POLITICAL DRIBBLE WITH OUR SCIENCE ORIENTED DISCUSSIONS HERE ARE JUST NOT WELCOME.
This Richard person is asking all the questions I had been thinking of. And he's not letting this boring David Brenner wiggle out of any. Good for him. Boy, is Brenner slow. I have this speed at 1.5X out of necessity.
Is there actually a point to your attack? (Aside from conveying a superior attitude.) The guy agreed to take time out of his day to come on and explain his work. If it annoys you all that much, stop listening.
How condescending. I'd rather listen to an expert talking slowly and sensibly than an idiot talking quickly. (I often speed up speakers but there are some I have to slow down to make sense of what they're saying ...) Dr Brenner brought good news!
@@RussCR5187 Saying Dr. Brenner is slow is an attack? Aren't we sensitive today? He is slow. And how is saying he's slow show a superior attitude? Don't go psycho because someone voices an opinion.
@@berwynjones7073 You'd rather listen to an expert than an idiot? That's good. I'm glad for you. I don't want to be condescending, but you read a little too much into your tea leaves. Just an observation. Have you met Russ?
@@richardmccartney2328 GO AWAY YOUR PESKY TROLL, YOUR SPOUTING OF IDIOTIC POLITICAL DRIBBLE WITH OUR SCIENCE ORIENTED DISCUSSIONS HERE ARE JUST NOT WELCOME.
@@randmorf don't even let him get to you. He's looking for attention Hey guys, how about we completely ignore these trolls? perhaps we could delete our comments. Feel free to delete my reply. Actually, I will as soon as you (William) have read this.
@@personzorz let's grit our teeth and resist the temptation to respond. How about we delete all our replies? It's just a suggestion, of course, I'll delete mine in a bit.
