Share this page!

Enter URL or ID to Unroll

You can paste full URL like: https://x.com/threadreaderapp/status/1644127596119195649
or just the ID like: 1644127596119195649

How to get URL link on X (Twitter) App

  1. On the Twitter thread, click on or icon on the bottom
  2. Click again on or Share Via icon
  3. Click on Copy Link to Tweet
  4. Paste it above and click "Unroll Thread"!
  5. More info at Twitter Help
Lazarus Long Profile picture
@LazarusLong13
Dec 20 • 13 tweets • 5 min read • Read on X
Scrolly
Not sure what is going on with @HealthcareGlob1 - they sure seem to have it out for @NukitToBeSure.

They blocked me after I pointed out that they were incorrect. I could care less about being blocked.

I do care they did not address the issues I raised. 🧵
They retweeted this tweet from DisabledDoctor, which has numerous issues.

1. FARUVC has been safely
& extensively tested on the eyes. There are a rather large number of studies on the topic.

2. FARUVC will not cause AQ issues, besides a Yup. Not even considering the fact that she recommends using her far-UV devices in ways that are possibly unsafe (pointed at face as they are untested on eyes and in poorly ventilated indoor spaces where it is likely it will cause air quality issues leading to or exacerbating respiratory problems). She's harming vulnerable people while profiting off of them and she seems to give no fucks while somehow managing to get people to aggressively support her when she is (fairly) criticized. She's a master manipulator 8:08 AM 11 Sep 29, 2024 7,975 Views
negligible amount of ozone.

But that's not me saying that, but the studies. Two studies in well sealed rooms - about 5 parts per billion, 5 ppb.

If you are in a well sealed room, you would want that window cracked, anyway, right?

If not, and you are In summary, the two published measurements of far-UVC associated ozone in real-world settings, both around 5 ppb, are likely to be upper limits in terms of real-life far-UVC usage; this is both because of the far-UVC doses used in the studies, but also because both rooms were comparatively well sealed (respectively 0.4 and 1.4 ACH, see Table 1), whereas far-UVC will predominantly be used in public indoor spaces, which typically feature higher air-exchange rates.18 Overall it is reasonable to assume that far-UVC-associated ozone levels in real-life settings are extremely unlikely to exceed 1...
gobbling a quick bite in an airport, not a problem, anyway, (I will only be doing a sipmask and shakes, myself) - the ozone will dissipate.

Guess what gobbles ozone? VOC carbon filters. Hit my account plus MEGA VOC to find the build.

But 5 ppb? I am not worried about it.
But, IS 5 ppb a risk?

No risk as low as 10 ppb per this study...and we are 5 ppb below that, with ways to mitigate even that. In summary, based on multiple very large epidemiological studies focusing on the relationship between outdoor ozone concentration and long-term human health, there is no significant evidence for increased ozone risks at ozone concentrations as low as 10 ppb, and there is persuasive evidence for a threshold in risk at ozone exposures below about 35–50 ppb; this pattern does not change whether or not other associated pollutants are included in the risk estimate. Although far-UVC lamps are not classified as medical devices, the epidemiological results are consistent with current FDA guidelines...
VOCs and ozone? You are right to be concerned - and now not be concerned 👇.

But...cleaning with limonene based cleaners (Citrus King , citrus smelling cleaners probably) ?

Turning off the FARUVC would be a reasonable thing to do.

onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.11…Indoors, at the low induced ozone concentrations of relevance here, ozone does not react rapidly enough with preexisting airborne VOCs to compete with even extremely low levels (e.g., 0.1 ACH) of room ventilation, so significant ultrafine particle production via far-UVC-induced ozone is unlikely. Experimental measurements in a real-life hotel room support this conclusion. One specific exception is the cleaning material limonene, which has an unusually high interaction cross-section with ozone; in the far-UVC context, turning off far-UVC lights during cleaning with limonene products would be...
Is Nukit just trying to just make a buck, taking advantage of the vulnerable?

No - lol. They are a huge influencer.

The vulnerable? They are the reason Nukit started w/UVC, to provide Covid free air to the poor jammed into tiny apartments with no room for CR boxes. Indoors, at the low induced ozone concentrations of relevance here, ozone does not react rapidly enough with preexisting airborne VOCs to compete with even extremely low levels (e.g., 0.1 ACH) of room ventilation, so significant ultrafine particle production via far-UVC-induced ozone is unlikely. Experimental measurements in a real-life hotel room support this conclusion. One specific exception is the cleaning material limonene, which has an unusually high interaction cross-section with ozone; in the far-UVC context, turning off far-UVC lights during cleaning with limonene products would be...
Finally, there has been a fair amount of discussion of the picture on the Cybermarket website.

Does it depict closer than 50 cm, which is the safe distance as amply discussed by Nukit?

cybernightmarket.com/products/mini-…Cybermarket 75 cm from faces.
Suggested use: Assuming no more than four hours of use in a single day, and an approximate room size of 9-12m², each lamp should be positioned no closer than 50cm away from a room occupant. The more widely the lamps are spread, the more air volume will be exposed. If there are children or pets present, the lamps should be placed well out of reach. For more information, see: How to use your Nukit Torch Far-UVC Lights
No. It is 75 cm. I DM'd that party.

I am in blue, they are in gray. Unless you are IN your dinner plate with your head, these are about an arm length away from your eyes 10:17 PM 3 feet then? At least 91 cm ? I have some long arms....but I went to be accurate. 10:18 PM Between 2 and 3 feet, so roughly 75cm 10:18 PM Ok, thank you.
Here is more by Nukit.

"... 200nm to 230nm is often described as “eye and skin safe” but is perhaps more accurately described as “safer”. There is still an exposure limit- just much, much higher than with other portions of the UV spectrum." Description: The germicidal properties of ultraviolet light are well established and have been in use for almost 100 years, but that effectiveness has always come at a price- the potential for eye and skin damage. Far-UVC, the portion of the ultraviolet spectrum that ranges from 200nm to 230nm is often described as “eye and skin safe” but is perhaps more accurately described as “safer”. There is still an exposure limit- just much, much higher than with other portions of the UV spectrum.
What are my biases?

I have disagreed with Nukit in the past on a couple of non-technical issues, but these are times fraught with tension.

On the technical issues, I have found them
incredibly knowledgeable, and I very much appreciate their engineering.

Anyone accusing Nukit of endangering others are simply not knowledgeable on the topic.

Do I have a Cybermarket light? No. Do I anticipate getting one? Maybe in the future, if they are still available.
I have other projects I am currently interested in.

Am I an expert in FARUVC? No, but I can sure read a study.

And so can you.

Where can you buy the lights?

Right here:

cybernightmarket.com/products/mini-…

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
　

Keep Current with Lazarus Long

Lazarus Long Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @LazarusLong13

Lazarus Long Profile picture
Dec 21
Ozone. FAR-UVC. GUV222.

New preprint.

Room with 1.3 ACH (1.3 h-1) (like your home).

1 lamp was good enough to disinfect room. Produced "negligible" ozone. -0.62 ±0.03 ppb

Even with 4x the needed strength? 6.98 ±0.24 ppb. -0.62 ±0.03
We refer to this room as “Room A.” Room A has no window, and is connected via a door to a large, open plan lounge area in the office suite. This Lounge space was used for baseline measurements. The door between Room A and the Lounge was closed during experiments. The air exchange rate in Room A was measured using the CO2 tracer method [33] with portable CO2 sensors (Aranet4) to be 1.3 h-1 (Supplementary Information). Room A and the lounge are carpeted. Room A is equipped with a conference table, a small wooden desk, and chairs. It also has room lighting and a wall-mounted computer monitor. ...
Tests with a single fixture used a Lumenlabs Lumenizer 300 (Lumenlabs, Shanghai, China) and tests with four fixtures used Lumenlabs Zone devices. Each of these fixtures contains three optically filtered KrCl bulbs with a peak emission wavelength of 222 nm. The optical output of a Lumenizer fixture is 55 mW and the optical output of a single Zone fixture is 190 mW. According to the manufacturer, each Lumenizer 300 fixture is capable of disinfecting a 4m x 4m room; therefore, a single Lumenizer 300 unit would be normally deployed for a room the size of Room A in this study. That is to say, th...
The conclusion? One lamp does not impact the air quality.

With 4 times OVERKILL.

Under 10 ppb. Secondary organic aerosols (SOA)? minor increases in particulate matter (16% increase particulate matter, 10 % increase in particle number count). We have observed the effects of far-UVC on indoor ozone and particulate matter under conditions of real-world application in a small conference room with low ventilation. We find that a single Lumenizer 300 far-UVC lamp, specified by the manufacturer to be sufficient for disinfection of the space, does not negatively impact indoor air quality through net generation of O3 or PM under the conditions of our experiment. Far-UVC may be a valuable component of a multilayer approach to reduce the risk of transmission of respiratory viruses, used in combination with ventilation and other interventi...
This was not Nukit's lamp.

But it was the same wavelength.



Context.... chemrxiv.org/engage/chemrxi…The far-UVC average fluence used for the lower-intensity (single lamp) experiments in this study was 0.2 μW cm-2. According to the manufacturer, one lamp is recommended for disinfection of a room the size of Room A. The modelled average fluence and irradiance values are consistent with conditions observed by Eadie et al. in a chamber study to reduce airborne pathogens (S. aureus) by 92% or more [16]. Under these conditions, we did not measure significant changes in ozone level or particulate matter in Room A, despite the relatively low ventilation conditions in the room
Read 5 tweets
Lazarus Long Profile picture
Dec 15
Got HEPAs and or a #CorsiRosenthalBox and still have VOC's?

(New furniture, left over smoke damage, odor, etc)

Welcome to @TheFandelier Quick VOC BUILD!

Goal below.
Slap filter on counter.
Slap fan on filter.
Slap USB adapter on fan.
Go.

/1 TruSens DuPont Odor & VOC Filter with True HEPA for Z-3000 TruSens Air Purifier with SilverStone fan.
THE FILTER.

TruSens DuPont Odor & VOC Filter with True HEPA for Z-3000 TruSens Air Purifier

This filter has more carbon than the others from this brand.

"The filter comes w/foam surrounds that make a seal w table and fan."

UPC is 038576802810

a.co/d/gcKIL5KBrandTruSens MaterialCarbon Fiber MERV Rating16 Compatible DevicesAir Purifier Item Weight1050 Grams UPC038576802810 ODOR & VOC DEFENSE : Activated carbon filter helps combat cooking and cleaning odors, and reduces airborne VOCs such as ammonia, acetone and formaldehyde. True HEPA filter captures common pollutants.
the Odor & VOC carbon drum has 3 layers of carbon
The link above will go dead eventually - that's why I am listing the full name above, so you can search for it.

THE FAN.

Silveratone AP183 140cfm is the one you want. The Silverstone AP 180mm is a great choice for the Maxx Core. It comes in a few flavors with varying price and cfm. They are all very sturdy. AP181 100cfm AP182 167cfm AP183 140cfm AP184 143cfm The 181 is very much slower than the others/cheapest. Get 183 if poss best bang/$
Read 15 tweets
Lazarus Long Profile picture
Dec 14
The CDC decides if you, the other patients, and your HCWs wear surgical masks, N95s, or no masks in hospitals. Where you go to get better, not sicker.

They obey the HICPAC, who voted for NO MASKS - based primarily on one study to justify it.

A 🧵 of an inadvertent giant lie? N95 Respirators vs Medical Masks for Preventing Influenza Among Health Care Personnel: A Randomized Clinical Trial
I suspect it's not actually a lie - except it kind of is. You read and decide.

The study is Radonovitch (2019). It was done from 2011-2015.

Back then, most everyone, including the authors 👇, thought respiratory viruses were primarily transmitted by actual large droplets. Respiratory viruses are primarily transmitted by large droplets. Because a fraction of respi- ratory viruses may be transmitted by aerosol, N95 respirators have been presumed to pro- vide better protection than medical masks against viral respiratory infections in health care settings.2 However, definitive evidence of
Design and Oversight This cluster randomized, multicenter, prag- matic effectiveness trial 16 conducted between September 2011 and May 2015, with final fol- low-up on June 28, 2016, compared the effect of N95 respirators, used as recommended dur- ing the 2009 H1N1 pandemic, 13 and medical masks, used as recommended to prevent sea- sonal influenza 17,18 and other viral respiratory infections and illnesses, among HCP.17 The in-
Would N95s really be worth the extra cost, if that was true? (No.)

The study was a massive undertaking. It was done at 137 sites, spread over 7 healthcare systems, 5 states and Washington DC.

The investigators were blinded to who had N95s and who had surgical masks. year of participation. Study intervention sites included outpatient settings at the Children's Hospital Colorado (Aurora), Denver Health Medical Center (Denver, Colorado), Johns Hopkins Health System (Baltimore, Maryland), Michael E. DeBakey Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Center (Houston, Texas), VA Eastern Colorado Healthcare System (Denver), Washington DC VA Medical Center, and VA New York Harbor Healthcare System (New York). Sample storage and data analysis sites
Read 30 tweets
Lazarus Long Profile picture
Dec 14
There's a version of the "Had a bit of a health scare last night..." going around with laughing faces.

This is not that.

He went on to die the next day.

Short🧵 https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/montreal-man-dies-er-hospital-wait Montreal man, 39, dies from aneurysm after giving up on six-hour wait at ER 'Had a bit of a health scare last night, but thankfully it wasn’t a heart attack,' Adam Burgoyne said in a Dec. 5 post on social media. He died the next day Author of the article:Chris Lambie
He had no compassion for others, but I am not looking for compassion for him. Look, people can try the whole "you're so selfish!" routine to try to get me to wear a mask or stay home, but I couldn't possibly care less. Yes, I do care about my own life more than your 90 year old grandmother. Wish her all the best, but she's not my responsibility. 8:06 AM · Aug 31, 2023 · 3,517 Views Ⓐ @big_figgot · Aug 31, 2023 Wear all the masks you like, get 56 boosters this year and show the world how compassionate and virtuous you are by wishing death on everyone who doesn't think like you. Hiss and shriek at those who violate your 2m distancing bubble at the grocery s...
No, I just want to point out the failure of public health messaging here.

He goes after the Bangladesh study. A @big_figgot. Aug 31, 2023 ... The best they could do was the Bangladeshi mask study that showed only a 11% decrease in cases and only for people over 65 (IIRC - been a while since I read it). No difference in younger people. That was their best and they ran with it lying that it proved "masks work". 1 1 182 A @big_figgot. Aug 31, 2023 ... So EVEN IF we accept the results of the study which I find suspect for many reasons, it still doesn't justify the kinds of measures they were pushing.
Read 7 tweets
Lazarus Long Profile picture
Dec 12
@naomirwolf - if you want to avoid inhaling shed vaccines, then you'd be wise to get an N95.

You might be tempted to ignore this thread, but I have 5 years of experience of helping people get into respirators that avoid the problems you have mentioned previously.

/1
To paraphrase you, wearing an N95 is better than a surgical or cloth masks for protection.

/2

You mentioned that wearing a respirator can have some problems.

And it can....but let me go to the original source and, more importantly, show solutions to those problems.

Read 9 tweets
Lazarus Long Profile picture
Dec 9
@propublica - opening the window is not the only solution for formaldehyde.

In fact, formaldehyde is the most abundant VOC from fires. Like wildfires and wood burning stoves.

It is also found in tobacco smoke and automobile exhaust.

/1

acp.copernicus.org/articles/21/18…. x.com/propublica/sta…Formaldehyde (HCHO) is one of the most abundant non-methane volatile organic compounds (VOCs) emitted by fires. HCHO also undergoes chemical production and loss as a fire plume ages, and it can be an important oxidant precursor. In this study, we
Formaldehyde is also a byproduct of combustion. When burning natural gas, kerosene, gasoline, wood, or tobacco, formaldehyde is produced. Automobile exhaust is a common source of formaldehyde in our environment. Tobacco smoking in the home is another source of the chemical in the indoor environment.
A good rule of thumb? Open the window and smell smoke or auto exhaust? Formaldehyde.

Also, windows are at the edges of a room.

What if you want to hurry the process along and clean the air in the middle of the room, too?
Portable Air Cleaners with activated carbon filters will remove formaldehyde.

Here is Smart Air providing a very easy to read demonstration of this.

smartairfilters.com/en/blog/activa…
Read 6 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

Send Email!

:(