Far-UVC light: a magic bullet?

Covid-19 discussion, bring your own statistics
Post Reply
User avatar
Brightonian
Dorkwood
Posts: 1040
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 3:16 pm
Location: Usually UK, often France and Ireland

Far-UVC light: a magic bullet?

Post by Brightonian » Wed Mar 23, 2022 4:32 pm

This press release suggests SARS-CoV-2 particles can be zapped with "Far-UVC" light, ultraviolet light with (I think) a wavelength in the 122 to 200 nm range. Given that Covid infections generally happen indoors, I'm tempted to buy a UV sanitiser lamp as it seems you can get ones emitting in this range.

Or is it a bit more complicated than that? E.g. only works in idealised conditions, or unintended consequences?

User avatar
science_fox
Snowbonk
Posts: 394
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:34 pm
Location: Manchester

Re: Far-UVC light: a magic bullet?

Post by science_fox » Wed Mar 23, 2022 4:34 pm

I'm sure most viruses are susceptible to UV in any form. Even good old sunlight. And Covid is hugely spread by inhaling aerosol droplets rather than any surface to surface transmission.

Masks and good ventilation go a long long way further than shining a funky light at them for a few minutes.
I'm not afraid of catching Covid, I'm afraid of catching idiot.

User avatar
shpalman
Princess POW
Posts: 6879
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 12:53 pm
Location: One step beyond

Re: Far-UVC light: a magic bullet?

Post by shpalman » Wed Mar 23, 2022 4:51 pm

Brightonian wrote:
Wed Mar 23, 2022 4:32 pm
This press release suggests SARS-CoV-2 particles can be zapped with "Far-UVC" light, ultraviolet light with (I think) a wavelength in the 122 to 200 nm range. Given that Covid infections generally happen indoors, I'm tempted to buy a UV sanitiser lamp as it seems you can get ones emitting in this range.

Or is it a bit more complicated than that? E.g. only works in idealised conditions, or unintended consequences?
To sanitise something in particular or to illuminate the whole room? In not entirely sure it's a good idea to illuminate the whole room when you're in it.
molto tricky

User avatar
basementer
Dorkwood
Posts: 1284
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:03 pm
Location: 5713, Aotearoa
Contact:

Re: Far-UVC light: a magic bullet?

Post by basementer » Wed Mar 23, 2022 7:10 pm

The release makes it clear that they tested it on bacteria, not viral particles. So making the headline about COVID seems a bit of a stretch.
Money is just a substitute for luck anyway. - Tom Siddell

User avatar
dyqik
Light of Blast
Posts: 5223
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:19 pm
Location: Masshole
Contact:

Re: Far-UVC light: a magic bullet?

Post by dyqik » Wed Mar 23, 2022 11:25 pm

basementer wrote:
Wed Mar 23, 2022 7:10 pm
The release makes it clear that they tested it on bacteria, not viral particles. So making the headline about COVID seems a bit of a stretch.
It'll definitely work on CoVID. And skin cells.

UVC lamps are already used in HVAC systems to kill off mold that can grow on cooling coils and to sanitize air. They're about $70 on Amazon.

WFJ
Snowbonk
Posts: 462
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2021 7:54 am

Re: Far-UVC light: a magic bullet?

Post by WFJ » Thu Mar 24, 2022 7:11 am

Brightonian wrote:
Wed Mar 23, 2022 4:32 pm
This press release suggests SARS-CoV-2 particles can be zapped with "Far-UVC" light, ultraviolet light with (I think) a wavelength in the 122 to 200 nm range. Given that Covid infections generally happen indoors, I'm tempted to buy a UV sanitiser lamp as it seems you can get ones emitting in this range.

Or is it a bit more complicated than that? E.g. only works in idealised conditions, or unintended consequences?
I'm not sure what you mean by the bolded part, but if you're suggesting the reason there's less transmission outdoors is because of UV killing the virus then that's false, as no UVC reaches Earth's surface.

User avatar
TAFKAsoveda
Clardic Fug
Posts: 163
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 7:15 pm

Re: Far-UVC light: a magic bullet?

Post by TAFKAsoveda » Fri Mar 25, 2022 7:57 pm

dyqik wrote:
Wed Mar 23, 2022 11:25 pm
basementer wrote:
Wed Mar 23, 2022 7:10 pm
The release makes it clear that they tested it on bacteria, not viral particles. So making the headline about COVID seems a bit of a stretch.
It'll definitely work on CoVID. And skin cells.

Indeed, even Big Clive is wary of those lamps

Post Reply