Self-reported Side-effects of Ultraviolet-C Disinfection Devices.

The COVID-19 pandemic increased sales of portable UV-C devices as a means of inactivating the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Research suggests that excessive UV-C exposure to the eyes and skin can lead to side-effects, primarily photokeratitis and erythema, but these findings are limited to case studies. This study explores self-reported side-effects of UV-C devices by collating five waves of UK consumer survey data from April 2020-December 2021 (N = 26 864). 30%-46% of owners report a side-effect after using a device claiming to emit UV-C. However, detailed analysis of Wave 4 data (N = 309) highlights inconsistencies between reported and plausible side-effect(s) associated with skin or eye exposure from UV-C devices. Alternative explanations are considered, namely that the reported side-effect(s) were psychosomatic or misattributed to direct exposure of UV-C radiation. Data regarding awareness of warnings about device side-effect(s) supports the misattribution explanation. For risk assessment purposes, limited reliable information about specific irritation or injury to the eye and skin was found from self-reporting surveys. To optimize future data collection, we recommend addressing recall errors by: reducing the period under investigation, supplementing responses with empirical measures, and incentivizing respondents to provide accurate information about the make and model of the UV-C device.

Impact of High Solar UV Radiant Exposures in Spring 2020 on SARS-CoV-2 Viral Inactivation in the UK†.

Potential for SARS-CoV-2 viral inactivation by solar UV radiation in outdoor spaces in the UK has been assessed. Average erythema effective and UV-A daily radiant exposures per month were higher (statistically significant, P < 0.05) in spring 2020 in comparison with spring 2015-2019 across most of the UK, while irradiance generally appeared to be in the normal expected range of 2015-2019. It was found that these higher radiant exposures may have increased the potential for SARS-CoV-2 viral inactivation outdoors in April and May 2020. Assessment of the 6-year period 2015-2020 in the UK found that for 50-60% of the year, that is most of October to March, solar UV is unlikely to have a significant (at least 90% inactivation) impact on viral inactivation outdoors. Minimum times to reach 90% and 99% inactivation in the UK are of the order of tens of minutes and of the order of hours, respectively. However, these times are best case scenarios and should be treated with caution.

Survey of Home-Use UV Disinfection Products†.

The COVID-19 pandemic provided a commercial opportunity for traders marketing a range of ultraviolet (UV) radiation products for home-use disinfection. Due to concerns about the efficacy of such products and the potential for harmful levels of UV exposure to people, a range of products were purchased from on-line trading platforms. Spectral irradiance measurements were carried out to determine whether the products could be effective against the SARS-CoV-2 virus and whether they were likely to exceed internationally agreed exposure limits. It was concluded that many of the devices were not effective and many of those that were potentially effective presented a risk to users.

Opinion: To UV, or not to UV – That is the question

Opinion: To UV, or not to UV - That is the question The COVID-19 pandemic has seen a rush of initiatives to stem the spread of SARS-CoV-2, the coronavirus that causes the disease. UVR sources have been available for disinfection for many years, the main one being the low-pressure mercury lamp, with the primary emission at 253.7 nm in the UV-C part of the spectrum. [Extracted from the article] Copyright of Lighting Research & Technology is the property of Sage Publications, Ltd. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)