Well, light can certainly remove the color particles from my window paintings, so I have no trouble believing that is can destroy other things like viruses!
This video describes one of many incredible advancements in our ability to fight contagion. We have so many tools to help fix our viral problem. It’s so frustrating that we’re so damned troglodytic that we reject anything socially unpopular, politically unexploitable or industrially unprofitable. We have effective drugs! We have effective technology! We have effective behaviors! Why are we so content to wallow in our suffering and bicker over trivial tribal beliefs rather than play an active and effective role in our f*ng survival!? We have the tools and the means to save and improve our lives if we would just use them without weaponizing, stigmatizing, and politicizing them!
“Believe in yourself, take on your challenges, dig deep within yourself to conquer fears. Never let anyone bring you down. You got to keep going.” From a UA-camr 💛💛
John 8:23-24 And He was saying to them, "You are from below, I am from above; you are of this world, I am not of this world. " Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for unless you believe that I am He, you will die in your sins. "
There's a company in Europe (www.bioshox.eu) selling desktop UV-C lamps for home offices. Bought two recently for my desk and kitchen and just leave them on at night for about 45mins. It's comforting knowing my workspace and kitchen is sterilised every morning. Highly recommended!
Gerardo Argueta ??? You are reading alternative science, what next, when he says meat gamma irradiation kills bacteria you say he is right, we can apply it to human. Similarly like bible, you can always pretend that it is right. Just saying something does not mean it is correct. Dosage is must, just saying something idiotic like take zinc with hydroxychloroquine doesn’t make it effective even the ingredients are the same. But you just want your fake Jesus be right.
UV lights - we use this to sterilize our OR every weekends or after any "dirty" cases. It really kills viruses and bacteria, just be careful not to stare directly at the light, do not enter the room 30minutes to 1hr after sterilizing with UV, cover the transparent walls/windows/doors or any gaps to prevent the UV light coming in direct contact with you. I love the smell of newly UV light sterilized room - smells so clean, and it's like fresh sunshine (duh!) lol.
"do not enter the room 30minutes to 1hr after sterilizing with UV" - once the light is switched off - it is safe to enter the room. The "light" does not linger. - it is the light hitting the virus which destroys it. No light no destruction. What Professor Brenner is proposing is a FAR UVC LIGHT which at 222 nm appears to be safe to humans. I.e. you could in that instance be in the room with the UV light on - which would be killing the bacteria and viruses as they come out of an infected person.
I think lamps using these UVCs will play a big role in reducing coronavirus infections, so why can't these technologies still be reflected in coronavirus-related policies?
No it can't. Prevention is better than curing All you have to do is Wear mask Why do I say so? From the safest area in the world, Taiwan as my personal experience.
Fun idea but it would only be effective if the light could sterilize air instantaneously. He said it takes 2-3 minutes to sterilize the air in a room. That's air in a closed environment with continuous exposure to the far UVC light. The fan-light would move air out of the range of your wearable light too quickly to be sterilized.
Are you sure you are talking about the 222 nm far UVC? Sounds to me like it's 254 nm technology that has been around for a long time (which I ordered from websites). The latter generally relies on discharge in mercury vapour and quartz tubes (or xenon). It's dangerous to the skin and eyes, but it certainly is sterilising. The former generally uses "excimer" technology : discharge in a mixture of krypton and chlorine, although Brenner says that LED technology should be around the corner.
gets asked how uvc light can be used in situations where there is limited power. talks about how uvc light doesnt need more energy than normal light. gets asked how long the distance of the sterilization for uvc light is, talks about how you install 1 bulb in a small room and more bulbs in a large room.gets asked if the uvc light can kill aerosol. answers around the qeustion and talks about how they want the lvl of aerosol to be low. i feel like the question were kinda dodged by him.
Здесь даже субтитр нет на русском языке! Оставите русскоязычному населению канал "TED на русском языке"! Что ж у вас за жадные люди то! Спросите у тех кто выступают у вас согласны ли они с тем что бы их информацию запрещали распространять!! 👎🏻 минус вам за то что палки в колеса ставите.
Well by the time you let people get around each other the anger and insanity is increasing suicides and overdoses. will far compound the deaths from coronavirus. People aren’t meant to isolate 🤦♀️🤬🤬🤬🤬🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻
Killing the virus in the lab isn’t the same as preventing infection. Killing it on surfaces wouldn’t hurt, but most transmission is from the air. Do we know that it will kill the viruses embedded in a droplet of mucus from a cough or sneeze? Given what you said about tears and the outer layers of our skin blocking it I’m skeptical. I’m not saying it won’t work. It’s a hypothesis worth further testing. Calling it a “game changer” at this stage is an outrageous, irresponsible and dangerous overstatement. A great example of the very worst in science reporting. Of course it’s boring to announce that a group of scientists has had some promising results and that further study is warranted. I understand the temptation to overstate things because it gets the attention of your viewers or your readers. But this kind of bad science reporting ultimately makes the public distrust science. When the promising hypothesis fails to pan out after it’s been overhyped people interpret that as a failure of science and an excuse to ignore scientists.
Fair point about airborne transmission but you don't catch a virus by breathing in one or two stray virus cells, your immune system isn't completely useless until it is overwhelmed. If you can continuously sterilize the air (99.99% in 2-3 minutes as stated) while also using masks and distancing (also as stated) then you keep the potential presence of airborne viral particles dramatically lower than it would have been, not 100% sterile, but much better than the absence of any intervention where aerosols can float around in currents for 3 hours.
ciretose2 Unless you have citations of peer reviewed journals to back up those claims then they are hypotheses. Sensible hypotheses worthy of further research, but no more. Not conclusions. Not even theories. Not actionable and certainly not “game changers”. Science doesn’t work that way. A lot of things seem plausible. We call those hypotheses. A scientist tests them. They attempt to disprove their own hypothesis. After repeated testing they share the results of their experiments with the scientific community. They write up the results of their experiments along with their data and have it peer reviewed. If it stands up to peer review then it’s published in a journal. Then other scientists review their conclusions, attempt to replicate the results, and design experiments of their own. Other scientists build on the original work. They may perform further experiments to see if the initial work has practical applications. Or they may prove that the whole thing is a dead end. It often is. The popular image of a lone scientist shouting Eureka in a lab and immediately changing the world is a myth. In reality progress comes in small boring steps made by the scientific community as a whole. Every step along the way is published, reviewed, and scrutinized by scientists all over the world. We don’t start calling things facts until we’ve had several rounds of this kind of thing. That’s why we can actually trust what scientists tell us.
Thanks for the video. One answer - keeping the virus in the air as low as possible (quote) - well, restricting people out of the room is one way. I'm at 12:00 min. more or less, and that suggestion is both logical, and non-helpful in terms of immediate solutions. I know UV light, very well actually - and the concentration of it probably required is not practical, imho. UV light has been killing germs, and germs on infected material for years... and yes, some virus but not all. However the exposure level, and time duration required is probably not practical - and having said that I admit I am still a newbie, even though I have been around it for maybe two decades. We just don't have the equipment readily available yet. I would also suggest that we need to be working on the cure, more than avoiding the disease. Both are important, but one solution solves both problems, and that's the cure. Regardless I love hearing the tech background, which many may not know otherwise. I think it should be used right now to protect first responders, operating rooms, and post-op recovery, etc. UV light is definitely on our side in this battle.
"Ideas worth spreading", say TED and issue a copyright claim against Russian channel with translations of TED videos, demanding that the channel be closed. This is hypocrisy and violation of the rights of people who communicating in other languages.
I heard of a therapy a few years ago, I forget what it was used for, where they did sort of a UV blood dialysis... Blood out through a clear tube, exposed to UV light, then back into the body.
James W. You’re joking right?. Trump inferred that light could be used internally to get rid of virus as a cure. Like they said in this video, it cannot be used for this purpose because it cannot penetrate tissue.
No, once again he took some snippet of some briefing he wasnt paying attention to, decided he was smarter than everyone and came up with an absurd dangerous unscientific claim for publicity purposes to boost his numbers. Nice try
Andrew Austin Trump is a narcissist definitely not fit to be in charge of a country and if you yanks can’t see it I you are dumber than the stereotype that the world already has of you
@@bullittuk So ?? 95% of the world is according to all the selfies, what's your point obviously you only watch the bbc, you have no idea of American politics... FYI i used to loath Trump until he ran for office , and i said to myself why do you hate someone you don't know or even met, Hmmm MSM.. So i did my own research and i found out the media were lying... But hay i expect you might get there if you actually did a little research... I know i'm wasting my time corresponding with a looney lefty... I suspect your social media accounts are full of selfies so it takes one to know one @bullittuk the NARCIST !
Andrew Austin if you listen to trump and like what you hear I can only apologise for wasting your time and mine . And I’m not sure why you are talking about selfies or their relevance to me as I can’t remember ever taking one whereas your profile pic looks to be one...
@Roy Rodgers false talking points. The virus was going to ravage the world regardless. Trump could have prevented 20,000 deaths though so i will acknowledge that much. However, to say otherwise is uneducated and unsympathetic
Well, light can certainly remove the color particles from my window paintings, so I have no trouble believing that is can destroy other things like viruses!
You can't catch or spread a virus because it's your body's Natural way of detoxing. Learn some very important facts.
Rastaman Ralph what tf is this comment even supposed to say. Learn some very important English
@@larry5289 you need to do some research but not on Google. People who know the truth wouldn't be saying that.
@@larry5289 it's called not being able to see the screen for the sun and predictive text!
@@rastamanralph6670 Why don't you give us your source for that. When you make statements like that you've to back it up.
Wish he would get to the point in the first 5 minutes.
Who knew growing pot indoors could actually save your life!
Not you, I think you'll find no UVC comes from your lights
This video describes one of many incredible advancements in our ability to fight contagion. We have so many tools to help fix our viral problem.
It’s so frustrating that we’re so damned troglodytic that we reject anything socially unpopular, politically unexploitable or industrially unprofitable.
We have effective drugs!
We have effective technology!
We have effective behaviors!
Why are we so content to wallow in our suffering and bicker over trivial tribal beliefs rather than play an active and effective role in our f*ng survival!?
We have the tools and the means to save and improve our lives if we would just use them without weaponizing, stigmatizing, and politicizing them!
#SaveTEDRussia
What r we waiting for????????? I heard about this light 2 years ago in this very channel and there is still nothing in the market.
It makes no sense, i hear ya
Please let the light stop the coronavirus🙏
Great, but the panic masters are covering their ears ,
The light! It burns!
“Believe in yourself, take on your challenges, dig deep within yourself to conquer fears. Never let anyone bring you down. You got to keep going.”
From a UA-camr 💛💛
Tysm
John 8:23-24
And He was saying to them, "You are from below, I am from above; you are of this world, I am not of this world.
" Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for unless you believe that I am He, you will die in your sins. "
Hey.. science without direct propaganda. Ty.
SAVE TED RUSSIA
#savetedrus
There's a company in Europe (www.bioshox.eu) selling desktop UV-C lamps for home offices. Bought two recently for my desk and kitchen and just leave them on at night for about 45mins. It's comforting knowing my workspace and kitchen is sterilised every morning. Highly recommended!
You need to use Far UVC 222nm
Let There Be Light 😅
Be careful....can’t let Trump be right about something....
No danger for that, he was thinking swallowing the light or taking it from bum (his favorite).
He was correct about hydroxychloroquine as well. All the trials used toxic doses.
Gerardo Argueta ??? You are reading alternative science, what next, when he says meat gamma irradiation kills bacteria you say he is right, we can apply it to human. Similarly like bible, you can always pretend that it is right. Just saying something does not mean it is correct. Dosage is must, just saying something idiotic like take zinc with hydroxychloroquine doesn’t make it effective even the ingredients are the same. But you just want your fake Jesus be right.
This are the kind of things that if you see it on a infomercial, you will think "bullshit"
UV lights - we use this to sterilize our OR every weekends or after any "dirty" cases. It really kills viruses and bacteria, just be careful not to stare directly at the light, do not enter the room 30minutes to 1hr after sterilizing with UV, cover the transparent walls/windows/doors or any gaps to prevent the UV light coming in direct contact with you. I love the smell of newly UV light sterilized room - smells so clean, and it's like fresh sunshine (duh!) lol.
Cool!
"do not enter the room 30minutes to 1hr after sterilizing with UV" - once the light is switched off - it is safe to enter the room. The "light" does not linger. - it is the light hitting the virus which destroys it. No light no destruction. What Professor Brenner is proposing is a FAR UVC LIGHT which at 222 nm appears to be safe to humans. I.e. you could in that instance be in the room with the UV light on - which would be killing the bacteria and viruses as they come out of an infected person.
I think lamps using these UVCs will play a big role in reducing coronavirus infections, so why can't these technologies still be reflected in coronavirus-related policies?
Short answer (my friend's answer) : no
Nerd answer (my answer): Well, you see...
No it can't.
Prevention is better than curing
All you have to do is
Wear mask
Why do I say so?
From the safest area in the world, Taiwan as my personal experience.
If everyone wore a fan with a uv light, it could sterilize the air very quickly.
At first I thought you were implying that the light would be moved around by the fan. But i get you, I like the idea :D
Jack Richardson It’s kind of an off-beat idea, but I think the public would feel like they are taking part in something constructive.
Fun idea but it would only be effective if the light could sterilize air instantaneously. He said it takes 2-3 minutes to sterilize the air in a room. That's air in a closed environment with continuous exposure to the far UVC light. The fan-light would move air out of the range of your wearable light too quickly to be sterilized.
ciretose2 Yes. It was more of a joke than a practical idea 🤷♂️
The more important question is: Can November 2020 stop the coronavirus?
@Gerardo Argueta so a hard no. i see.
Gerardo Argueta What exactly is it that makes you feel like trump is the better option? That’s a genuine question, I just wanna have a conversation.
UVC is now being measured at ground level.
20 dollars @ Wallmart.
Are you sure you are talking about the 222 nm far UVC? Sounds to me like it's 254 nm technology that has been around for a long time (which I ordered from websites). The latter generally relies on discharge in mercury vapour and quartz tubes (or xenon). It's dangerous to the skin and eyes, but it certainly is sterilising.
The former generally uses "excimer" technology : discharge in a mixture of krypton and chlorine, although Brenner says that LED technology should be around the corner.
#tedrus
This sounds great !! Thank you .
gets asked how uvc light can be used in situations where there is limited power. talks about how uvc light doesnt need more energy than normal light. gets asked how long the distance of the sterilization for uvc light is, talks about how you install 1 bulb in a small room and more bulbs in a large room.gets asked if the uvc light can kill aerosol. answers around the qeustion and talks about how they want the lvl of aerosol to be low. i feel like the question were kinda dodged by him.
Bulbs have not been developed yet. Fixtures are usually the way they deliver the antiviral effects.
Trump said that it can do it must be wrong
Quite persuasive
how are plants or other animals going to out-survive selfish women who think they are more important than plants?
Hard too understand his language did he say fi UV c light?
far-uvc
I think it is far if c.
JAY REDHAMMER far uv-c 222nm
It's not just light. According to Sharry Edwards specific sound frequencies have the same effect on viruses and bacteria (aka bioacoustics).
Thanks to you I just had a look at her websites. Unfortunately they were really off putting, made me think of quackery.
Здесь даже субтитр нет на русском языке! Оставите русскоязычному населению канал "TED на русском языке"! Что ж у вас за жадные люди то! Спросите у тех кто выступают у вас согласны ли они с тем что бы их информацию запрещали распространять!! 👎🏻 минус вам за то что палки в колеса ставите.
GOD is the light
Suddenly the applause fails
I tell you how you stop the corona you turn your TV off
My country’s government hasn’t even made it official that there is such thing as aerosols
I think most people here don’t know what it is
Is he say 5UVC light or something else?
Far-UVC light.
Switching off the tell lie vision is the only known cure.
#savetedrussia
Who else is watching this again in 2020??
We use similar lights on baby chicks that leave our hatchery before going to the farm.
why is David moving his glass all the time? That is funny.
Still, thanks for the info!
#saveTEDrussia
If Takanuva resurrected Jaller with light and shadow as Takutanuva, then if one could use the elements of light and shadow, it could work.
Well by the time you let people get around each other the anger and insanity is increasing suicides and overdoses. will far compound the deaths from coronavirus.
People aren’t meant to isolate 🤦♀️🤬🤬🤬🤬🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻
Its 11:39 PM and I think I shall sleep later
Love from INDIA
Thank you so much
Sun gazing is the answer
Its so beautiful
Killing the virus in the lab isn’t the same as preventing infection. Killing it on surfaces wouldn’t hurt, but most transmission is from the air. Do we know that it will kill the viruses embedded in a droplet of mucus from a cough or sneeze? Given what you said about tears and the outer layers of our skin blocking it I’m skeptical.
I’m not saying it won’t work. It’s a hypothesis worth further testing.
Calling it a “game changer” at this stage is an outrageous, irresponsible and dangerous overstatement. A great example of the very worst in science reporting.
Of course it’s boring to announce that a group of scientists has had some promising results and that further study is warranted. I understand the temptation to overstate things because it gets the attention of your viewers or your readers. But this kind of bad science reporting ultimately makes the public distrust science. When the promising hypothesis fails to pan out after it’s been overhyped people interpret that as a failure of science and an excuse to ignore scientists.
Fair point about airborne transmission but you don't catch a virus by breathing in one or two stray virus cells, your immune system isn't completely useless until it is overwhelmed. If you can continuously sterilize the air (99.99% in 2-3 minutes as stated) while also using masks and distancing (also as stated) then you keep the potential presence of airborne viral particles dramatically lower than it would have been, not 100% sterile, but much better than the absence of any intervention where aerosols can float around in currents for 3 hours.
ciretose2 Unless you have citations of peer reviewed journals to back up those claims then they are hypotheses. Sensible hypotheses worthy of further research, but no more. Not conclusions. Not even theories. Not actionable and certainly not “game changers”. Science doesn’t work that way. A lot of things seem plausible. We call those hypotheses. A scientist tests them. They attempt to disprove their own hypothesis. After repeated testing they share the results of their experiments with the scientific community. They write up the results of their experiments along with their data and have it peer reviewed. If it stands up to peer review then it’s published in a journal. Then other scientists review their conclusions, attempt to replicate the results, and design experiments of their own. Other scientists build on the original work. They may perform further experiments to see if the initial work has practical applications. Or they may prove that the whole thing is a dead end. It often is.
The popular image of a lone scientist shouting Eureka in a lab and immediately changing the world is a myth. In reality progress comes in small boring steps made by the scientific community as a whole. Every step along the way is published, reviewed, and scrutinized by scientists all over the world. We don’t start calling things facts until we’ve had several rounds of this kind of thing. That’s why we can actually trust what scientists tell us.
ach! this is known very long time! far UV-C about 222 nm waveleght for safe use ;)
I am sure that we're gonna suffer for our actions.. It's not too late.. Let's protect our environment....
In that case,ghost rider has not chance to be infected by covid-19
I have several units!
I don’t know. You tell me, David.
Well Done!:0)
Yes
Thanks. The Chinese are currently selling UV sterilisation lamps on the internet.
not safe. They are exposing you to radiation. This does not.
Thanks for the video. One answer - keeping the virus in the air as low as possible (quote) - well, restricting people out of the room is one way. I'm at 12:00 min. more or less, and that suggestion is both logical, and non-helpful in terms of immediate solutions. I know UV light, very well actually - and the concentration of it probably required is not practical, imho. UV light has been killing germs, and germs on infected material for years... and yes, some virus but not all. However the exposure level, and time duration required is probably not practical - and having said that I admit I am still a newbie, even though I have been around it for maybe two decades. We just don't have the equipment readily available yet. I would also suggest that we need to be working on the cure, more than avoiding the disease. Both are important, but one solution solves both problems, and that's the cure. Regardless I love hearing the tech background, which many may not know otherwise. I think it should be used right now to protect first responders, operating rooms, and post-op recovery, etc. UV light is definitely on our side in this battle.
The Far UVC can be left on all night and there you go. 12 hours is more than enough time.
@@vickiwilliams1198 Thanks Vicki. Given enough time all solutions are possibly viable.
And melanoma is a myth...
Why is that?
Great video 👍
"Ideas worth spreading", say TED and issue a copyright claim against Russian channel with translations of TED videos, demanding that the channel be closed. This is hypocrisy and violation of the rights of people who communicating in other languages.
What kind of light? I can't tell what he saying. I UVC light? 5VC light?
Far-UV-C light
You look like bill gates
TLDW:
YES.
I wonder if blood could be treated with the far uvc light.
I heard of a therapy a few years ago, I forget what it was used for, where they did sort of a UV blood dialysis... Blood out through a clear tube, exposed to UV light, then back into the body.
Since covid infects primarily lung tissue and not red blood cells that is extremely unkikely to be be anything but harmful
@@bupdragon4694 something antiviral that could be inhaled might be more useful then, maybe something like an inhaler.
UV light ✔️
.... so what yur saying is I should inject bleach?
Get out! Covid!!
He looks like the guy from asap science 🤔
Light from near-Sun supernova can.
I Literally Finished Doing A Research Paper On One TED Talk And This Comes?
Im Watching It Even Though Its 11:50 PM
11:50? Lmao those are rookie numbers
Good job lads, goooood job
On ya go now to go create some more world solutions💡🌎!!
Wow 😍
Any video on UA-cam that is titled can something do something can always be summed up in one word, NO.
b
It helps yes but... 💓💓💓😘👍
So... thirty minutes on the value of UV light and.... NOT ONE MENTION OF HEALIGHT... wow, TED, BIASED MUCH?
Well look at that, Trump actually had a point
What's Jared Leto doing here interviewing with that weird hair cut in TED??!!!
oh so trump was right.. again..... thats craaaaaazy lol
James W. You’re joking right?. Trump inferred that light could be used internally to get rid of virus as a cure. Like they said in this video, it cannot be used for this purpose because it cannot penetrate tissue.
No, once again he took some snippet of some briefing he wasnt paying attention to, decided he was smarter than everyone and came up with an absurd dangerous unscientific claim for publicity purposes to boost his numbers. Nice try
I dont think TED stands for ideas worth spreading
Jesus is King love Yahshua
David looked absolutely gutted that Trump was right ! LOL Hahahahahahahah .. So nice to see a looney lefty gutted ..
Andrew Austin Trump is a narcissist definitely not fit to be in charge of a country and if you yanks can’t see it I you are dumber than the stereotype that the world already has of you
@@bullittuk So ?? 95% of the world is according to all the selfies, what's your point obviously you only watch the bbc, you have no idea of American politics... FYI i used to loath Trump until he ran for office , and i said to myself why do you hate someone you don't know or even met, Hmmm MSM.. So i did my own research and i found out the media were lying... But hay i expect you might get there if you actually did a little research... I know i'm wasting my time corresponding with a looney lefty... I suspect your social media accounts are full of selfies so it takes one to know one @bullittuk the NARCIST !
Andrew Austin if you listen to trump and like what you hear I can only apologise for wasting your time and mine . And I’m not sure why you are talking about selfies or their relevance to me as I can’t remember ever taking one whereas your profile pic looks to be one...
First
Last btw
25th 🙃
1st
👑
💙🌎💙
Trump 2020 🇺🇸
@Roy Rodgers It came from CHINA. Fact.
@Roy Rodgers false talking points. The virus was going to ravage the world regardless. Trump could have prevented 20,000 deaths though so i will acknowledge that much. However, to say otherwise is uneducated and unsympathetic
SAVE TED RUSSIA
#saveTEDrussia
Yes
#saveTEDrussia