Subject of Coil UVB bulbs

[jojackson]

Jeez Guys, dont go to war! I think the specifications of any such product should be made both avail and understandable to the consumer, be that on the box or a slip inside, whatever.
Personally Id avoid ANY product that didn't make freely avail (somewhere) that info, to me, the customer.
Without consumer satisfaction, you dont get consumer loyalty, no matter who the company is.

Even were this info on CFL's avail (and current), I still wouldnt use them. I prefer broader coverage of output if Im going to use an artificial UV source at all.
I still perfer natural Uv, and no company has marketed anything as being 'better than nature'.

 

[PardalisGirl]

Wow.........

Wow Kevin.......I did read that site very thoroughly. I understand words and I can interpret charts. There are issues with large amounts of UVB below 300. Not small amounts like Exo-Terra produces. But large amounts like the Zoo Med compact lights did in fact produce. I see no evidence that this has changed. Until I do, I won't try ZooMed or R-Zilla compacts.

Maybe you should examine the first chart in the link below (the one that shows Vitamin D3 synthesis, DNA damage and the real sun). The peak DNA synthesis happens below the range real sun produces and in the range of DNA damage. The report says that although the higher wavelengths don't produce as much D3 synthesis per unit you get what you need because you get a lot of it.

http://www.uvguide.co.uk/phototherapyphosphor-tests.htm

I don't belong to your "club". I used to think it sounded like a good club to belong to. It doesn't sound like discussion and other opinions are welcome there. Or that you think anyone thats not in your club can know what they are talking about. I've done nothing but present some information. I've spent over four hours total looking at all this stuff at a minimum. Probably much more than that. Dismissing my effort by saying I've done no "foot work" or can't read a chart is not very kind...in fact your wording was really very unkind and not merited.

Sorry if I've offended you in some way to get this reaction from you. But I'm standing by my opinion and advise to others. Nothing you posted has changed my opinion or interpretation of what is available on the subject. I think consumers should expect more technical information on these products. Sure, I can call ZooMed. The novice who goes into a store to purchase a product without the benefit of this forum would have no idea there might or could be a problem from reading the product packaging or by going to the ZooMed or R-Zilla website. They certainly would never think they had to call the manufacturer first to find out if the product had been changed so it did not burn or blind chameleons.

 

[summoner12]

Wow Kevin.......I did read that site very thoroughly. I understand words and I can interpret charts. There are issues with large amounts of UVB below 300. Not small amounts like Exo-Terra produces. But large amounts like the Zoo Med compact lights did in fact produce. I see no evidence that this has changed. Until I do, I won't try ZooMed or R-Zilla compacts.

Maybe you should examine the first chart in the link below (the one that shows Vitamin D3 synthesis, DNA damage and the real sun). The peak DNA synthesis happens below the range real sun produces and in the range of DNA damage. The report says that although the higher wavelengths don't produce as much D3 synthesis per unit you get what you need because you get a lot of it.

http://www.uvguide.co.uk/phototherapyphosphor-tests.htm

I don't belong to your "club". I used to think it sounded like a good club to belong to. It doesn't sound like discussion and other opinions are welcome there. Or that you think anyone thats not in your club can know what they are talking about. I've done nothing but present some information. I've spent over four hours total looking at all this stuff at a minimum. Probably much more than that. Dismissing my effort by saying I've done no "foot work" or can't read a chart is not very kind...in fact your wording was really very unkind and not merited.

Sorry if I've offended you in some way to get this reaction from you. But I'm standing by my opinion and advise to others. Nothing you posted has changed my opinion or interpretation of what is available on the subject. I think consumers should expect more technical information on these products. Sure, I can call ZooMed. The novice who goes into a store to purchase a product without the benefit of this forum would have no idea there might or could be a problem from reading the product packaging or by going to the ZooMed or R-Zilla website. They certainly would never think they had to call the manufacturer first to find out if the product had been changed so it did not burn or blind chameleons.

It isn't a "club", it is a discussion board, similar to this, where people can go to find information. If you read through the posts, there is lots of data from Dr. Baines, herself, talking about her tests and how the lamp is good and how she hasn't had time to post the data. I think she even might have links to pages not yet public. I might be thinking of charts I have seen from her presentation that isn't public or data that she has talked about before.... but regardless, I don't understand the obsession. Saying a lamp performs one way and is safe and then rejecting that claim just because you can't see a chart that reflects the finding spoken about, doesn't make sense to me

I am not really sure where you get the impression that you can't express your opinion on the UVB yahoo group. I mean it isn't a place to stand up on a soap box and preach, it isn't there for opinions. The UVB meter group is there as a place to discuss your UVB meter, how to use it and to network data. People post to the group once or twice a month with general questions. It seems to me that with the UVB group, if you don't contribute you don't get much feedback, so sure, read and soak it up. Freeloaders don't stick around very long (which is nice) because people won't do the work for you. I think it's good because it works itself out, if you don't do research and ask something obvious, you either don't hear a peep or someone tells you to check the data files. This, I believe is how a forum should be run so that people don't fill the place up with annoying repeated questions that cover up the data that would have been easy to find if people didn't have to sift through countless, useless posts. The idea is to create a space where people can put data out in the open to be talked about, not a Q&A machine. You don't go to the library and ask someone a question do you? no, you go to a computer or librarian to search for a book on the topic so you can find the info you need. She isn't gonna read the book to ya, or conclude the data for you, it's up to you.

Now about the chart. The chart you are referring to has a bit at the begining of the page that states: This report was written in 2007 and these test results refer to the versions of ZooMed Reptisun Compact Lamps, Big Apple Herpetological Mystic Lamps and R-Zilla Desert 50 Series lamps which were on sale at that time. The chart you are referring to talks about the sun vs. the harmful rays you are concerned about. It says that natural sun doesn't get lower than 300nm. All of the lamps you seem to think are 'safe' have readings in the 'bad zone' that is below 300nm. The amount of 'bad' that is below 300nm is marginal. The red line is showing how much of that spectra would be needed to be harmful. The levels shown in the next diagram are half that of the 'damaging' amounts. This means you get half the amount of UVB that could cause issue. Sorta like saying electricity can hurt.... but you need 110v to 'get hurt' and you subject someone to only 30v... sure there is electricity, but not enough to hurt you.

The main issue with the CFL lamps, is that if you don't use it right, it will harm the animal. This is possible even with the linear tubes. You could still take the new lamps from any manufacturer, and if you didn't let your cham get far enough away, they would STILL get hurt. It doesn't matter the spectra, too much is still too much, and not good.

I believe if you go to the CFL page of the site the majority of the data has been removed and sited as 'out of date' and that new data is on it's way.

This is what is stated on the CFL page of the UV guide:

http://www.uvguide.co.uk/compactlamps.htm

This page is currently being revised, because the specifications for ZooMed compact lamps
have been altered significantly by the manufacturers, since the 2005 survey - the results are no longer applicable.
The 2005 test results for the ZooMed Compact Lamps have now been removed.
Please bear with us and accept our apologies for any inconvenience that removing part of this page may cause,
but we believe that the information about the previous style of ZooMed compact lamps could be misleading.

We are currently completing tests on the new generation of ZooMed Reptisun Compact Lamps.

We have also now tested several other brands including Lucky Reptile, ESU, Ferplast, Zilla
and Namiba Terra Replux compact lamps. These results will also be featured on the new page.

Please remember: always follow the manufacturer's instructions when positioning a new lamp.

So my point is, I don't think you've looked enough if you can't conclude the new lamps are safe, with or without the chart.

 

[PardalisGirl]

I don't understand the obsession. Saying a lamp performs one way and is safe and then rejecting that claim just because you can't see a chart that reflects the finding spoken about, doesn't make sense to me

People find their way to this forum without ever seeing or wanting to see all the stuff at the UVB forum. The issue of the CFL bulbs has been a very important one here. Average or novice chameleon people shouldn't have to go to your forum to understand things. I think I have a right to expect to see a manufacturer provide information on their product or website since this situation has been so serious in prior years. A table or chart would suffice. I do want to see it in writing from the manufacturer. It's a disclosure issue which is part of ANY good business. Then people like you and your buddies can do your testing to verify the disclosure. I'm not sure why adequate disclosures by manufacturers does not make sense to you. Why should any consumer have to rely on you to say something is safe?

You don't go to the library and ask someone a question do you? no, you go to a computer or librarian to search for a book on the topic so you can find the info you need. She isn't gonna read the book to ya, or conclude the data for you, it's up to you.

I don't want anyone to read anything to me. I want to see the information from the manufacturer that was provided on the UK lighting site (a third party). ExoTerra and other manufacturers provide the information with the product on their website. My question is why is it taking ZooMed so long to update things? This has been an issue for years. I shouldn't have to go to a third party to figure out the specifications of a product.

Now about the chart. The chart you are referring to has a bit at the begining of the page that states: This report was written in 2007 and these test results refer to the versions of ZooMed Reptisun Compact Lamps, Big Apple Herpetological Mystic Lamps and R-Zilla Desert 50 Series lamps which were on sale at that time. The chart you are referring to talks about the sun vs. the harmful rays you are concerned about. It says that natural sun doesn't get lower than 300nm. All of the lamps you seem to think are 'safe' have readings in the 'bad zone' that is below 300nm. The amount of 'bad' that is below 300nm is marginal. The red line is showing how much of that spectra would be needed to be harmful. The levels shown in the next diagram are half that of the 'damaging' amounts. This means you get half the amount of UVB that could cause issue. Sorta like saying electricity can hurt.... but you need 110v to 'get hurt' and you subject someone to only 30v... sure there is electricity, but not enough to hurt you.

You are just repeating things I've already figured out. I know the site is years old. But nobody has updated it, the two questioned manufacturers have not updated their package/website issues, and their products had very significant levels of UVB in the range for damage. Geez I get the concept that a little doesn't hurt. But a lot does and these products did cause problems. I had burning on one chameleon when I used the Reptisun coil 5.0 before the whole thing hit the fan. I threw it away figuring it was the problem before the issue ever came out.

The main issue with the CFL lamps, is that if you don't use it right, it will harm the animal. This is possible even with the linear tubes. You could still take the new lamps from any manufacturer, and if you didn't let your cham get far enough away, they would STILL get hurt. It doesn't matter the spectra, too much is still too much, and not good.

We already know that is true with all bulbs, including the linear tubes. We try to get complete information on products used and how things are set up when people come here. A lot of people that buy these products are not experienced and are steered to products that are not appropriate for their species of reptile. They don't get enough information from the product packaging to make an informed decision on their own as to position, etc. of the product.

This is what is stated on the CFL page of the UV guide:

http://www.uvguide.co.uk/compactlamps.htm

This page is currently being revised, because the specifications for ZooMed compact lamps
have been altered significantly by the manufacturers, since the 2005 survey - the results are no longer applicable.
The 2005 test results for the ZooMed Compact Lamps have now been removed.
Please bear with us and accept our apologies for any inconvenience that removing part of this page may cause,
but we believe that the information about the previous style of ZooMed compact lamps could be misleading.

We are currently completing tests on the new generation of ZooMed Reptisun Compact Lamps.

We have also now tested several other brands including Lucky Reptile, ESU, Ferplast, Zilla
and Namiba Terra Replux compact lamps. These results will also be featured on the new page.

My point exactly. Let me know when everything is updated with completed tests and updated information. You can also let us know when your friends at ZooMed decide to update their own information. It would be a REALLY smart business decision for them to do so.

So my point is, I don't think you've looked enough if you can't conclude the new lamps are safe, with or without the chart.

My point is that I've gone far more into this than the average keeper and I can't conclude that they are safe for my own use. After all the prior issues I want to see the manufacturer put things in writing which nails them down to a certain product standard. I'm a business oriented person. I've run companies. I've consulted and provided advice for a number of nationally known companies. I've written all sorts of disclosures for public use regarding technical issues. This whole CFL thing was handled very poorly, in my opinion, by ZooMed from a marketing and consumer position. R-Zilla won't even talk to people so they are in a whole other realm that causes me concern about them as a company. And yeah, I've made a living interpreting and analyzing charts and data for all sorts of industries and investment markets. I don't have to make the product myself to analyze data..........

 

[PardalisGirl]

I forgot to say I generally adore Zoomed.....

With all of this, I forgot to say that I love ZooMed products. I buy cases of Reptisun linear tubes every year. I've bought a countless number of their other products. I'm very impressed with their overall line of products. Nothing I said you prevent me from continuing to buy those items or try new ones as they are brought to market.....

 

[summoner12]

I think I have a right to expect to see a manufacturer provide information on their product or website since this situation has been so serious in prior years. A table or chart would suffice. I do want to see it in writing from the manufacturer.

 

[PardalisGirl]

Better.......

That's part of the story. That "chart" needs a form of measurement along the side to give it context. The way it's done I can't tell how much of that rapid increase in the first peak is in what I call the DNA damage zone. Is that a package that is out in stores now? It' better than no disclosure but not what I call a good one or complete one.

 

[summoner12]

tue p huhst ucfk

Average or novice chameleon people shouldn't have to go to your forum to understand things.

lol you are all over the place. You want it simple for noobs.... you want it more complicated so your happy... why don't you just call them for answers already?!

They will probably not understand why you want a more complicated chart for people you think shouldn't need to go to other sites to learn about how to read it.

 

[PardalisGirl]

lol you are all over the place. You want it simple for noobs.... you want it more complicated so your happy... why don't you just call them for answers already?!

They will probably not understand why you want a more complicated chart for people you think shouldn't need to go to other sites to learn about how to read it.

Kevin, you are the one that's all over the place. I don't want a more complicated chart. I want one that's more informative. The ExoTerra charts on their website are complete and give me the information I need. Based on what I see in them I would choose an ExoTerra compact light if I felt the need to use one.

I don't have a horse in this race. You seem to be riding one complete with blinders. I'm looking at it from the outside in. You are seemingly too involved in the process to be impartial about it anymore. The chart you furnished doesn't answer questions, it caused me to ask questions. I'm not a stupid person. I shouldn't have to call anybody or surf the internet to find your forum.

In any case, I don't want to read rambling posts like the ones you've been writing on this thread and the one I read in a link to a post from Frances Baine earlier. As a person who has edited technical books, articles and other publications these posts have been painful to read. I get a strong urge to get out my "red" pen. I've tried hard not to insult or hurt anybody on this forum over the years. But you've gone too far with your unkind and insulting words and tone. You don't even seem to have the ability to stop for a minute and consider whether your words are unduly unkind and make any attempt to appologize for them. You just plow on with more insults complete with emoticons.

I will continue not recommending the ZooMed compact UVB products for now. As I previously mentioned, I had an adult Panther that rapidly developed severe burn lesions after a 5.0 product was installed. It cost me a lot of treatment time and money to get him recovered. It's perfectly reasonable for me to question this product until I see what I want in writing. I don't really care if you can understand that or not. I'm done with this thread.

 

[summoner12]

I don't know why you keep referring to it as 'my forum' because it isn't mine. I am just a member.

The reason I say you are all over the place is that you expect a chart on the box for people to understand the light they are getting from the lamp. You can bring that chart to any consumer at any reptile show or reptile store and I am willing to bet less than 5% of the people you talk to have ANY clue what it is. For those who don't know, and want to know, they can search the internet and find the data. Most people looking for data still don't know really what they are looking for or at. They might learn what the chart represents and get a better idea how to understand the data, but they still won't have much understanding. Then there are people like Dr. Baines who study this stuff and like to make it more understandable to the public, to make it simple. She wants to find out what is the best on the market and she wants to keep animals out of harms way, so she made a site. I am unsure if she made the UVB meters group forum on yahoo... but she participates heavily and the forum is a great conduit for communicating with her. I don't understand why you can't just do what I said... foot work. If you aren't happy with what zoo med puts on the box or you aren't happy Dr. Baines hasn't updated her site(which she will do soon enough), THEN DO SOMETHING about it. Don't start a thread about how you don't have the right data. Start a thread about how YOU went to these people and sought out the info and are now sharing it with the community.

People just want stuff handed to them. No one makes any money sharing data. If someone made a site that had all the data people needed to care for chams, people would then bitch about how they had to pay..... The data is free because it is out there and you have to spend your time finding it. Zoo Med doesn't owe you crap. I am not in bed with them nor do I really give a crap about there product. I too lost an animal to their CL lights (it was a 10.0). When I learned all about the issues of the light on the UV guide, I turned off the light, but it was too late. So now I tell people 'the old one is bad, the new one is better and safer.... but STILL follow the instructions!' There are many people out there that have used the old style lamps without issue. they read the instructions and it seems if ya did that, people didn't hurt their animal.

I find it hard to believe you had UVB burns from a 5.0 CFL if you used it right. That lamp wasn't really even in question. The 10.0 was the big issue. There weren't many cases reported with the 5.0. Maybe your lamps got mixed up, maybe you used it wrong, maybe it wasn't even the lamp and your animal had other issues? I don't really care. I know you use short cages with 10.0 linear tubes and red heat lamps at night. not good cham care in my opinion. So it leaves me questioning your claim of the 5.0. Is that insulting? sorry.

People need to go out and educate themselves. Sure, these sites (cahm forums, uv guide, reptile rooms, fauna, reptile culture.....GOOGLE) are here to help us find the data.... but you can't hand feed everyone. if ya don't find what your looking for, keep looking.

Another thing I don't get... you want this data from zoo med... yet before you said you shouldn't trust that. Why do you trust the charts from Exo Terra so much? There isn't third party data out yet that backs up those charts either.... how do YOU know they are actually safe? Did Exo Terra even reformulate their lights? I don't recall them ever doing that.

The bottom line is that CFL lamps produce LARGE, HUGE amounts of UVB at close range. 1000micro watts within one inch of the lamp. Don't you think that placing something on top of the cage that produces higher amounts of UVB than you would even find in nature in the most extreme conditions, is bad?? The site talks about the most UVB found in nature as being around 450 micro watts. The CFL does 1000! Maybe this product isn't for everyone? maybe it's only for those who can read instructions correctly? These issues of output aren't restricted to the zoo med brand no matter what chart you've seen on the other sites. That chart isn't telling you very much, it's eye candy.

 

[summoner12]

In any case, I don't want to read rambling posts like the ones you've been writing on this thread and the one I read in a link to a post from Frances Baine earlier. As a person who has edited technical books, articles and other publications these posts have been painful to read. I get a strong urge to get out my "red" pen. I've tried hard not to insult or hurt anybody on this forum over the years.

But you felt you should insult Dr. Baines? She is a great lady. I'd like to see your information site... do you have one?

I don't mind you insulting my grammar and spelling.

 

[PardalisGirl]

Don't start a thread about how you don't have the right data. Start a thread about how YOU went to these people and sought out the info and are now sharing it with the community.

FYI I didn't start this thread. It started as a thread with questions from a novice about CFL's. Several other experienced keepers on the forum expressed the same opinions as I have. Then a Moderator cut the thread and used one of my posts as a starting point for a whole new thread. I didn't just post out of the blue like it appears I did.

I find it hard to believe you had UVB burns from a 5.0 CFL if you used it right. That lamp wasn't really even in question. The 10.0 was the big issue. There weren't many cases reported with the 5.0. Maybe your lamps got mixed up, maybe you used it wrong, maybe it wasn't even the lamp and your animal had other issues? I don't really care. I know you use short cages with 10.0 linear tubes and red heat lamps at night. not good cham care in my opinion. So it leaves me questioning your claim of the 5.0. Is that insulting? sorry.

First you say the 5.0 wasn't in question. Then you say there weren't many cases, meaning there were some. And a lot of people, like myself, did not report the issue to that particular site. I reported it to ZooMed and Big Apple. Big Apple was very helpful and responsive. They also totally pulled their product off the shelf after numerous reports were received and decided to sell none at all, rather than sell something that might have an issue. I got a form letter in response from ZooMed. And they kept selling the products in question.

I don't use 10.0 bulbs on short cages. You have a habit of saying things I didn't say. Now you are saying I do something I don't do. I use them on full size large adult cages. I use 5.0 tubes on "short" cages and tubs for babies. I do use red heat lamps at night and have never had a single issue (health, sleeping, activity) EVER. I'm up to 1:00 almost every night. My chams are sleeping quite soundly and many prefer to sleep under the light. I'm not changing because there is NO reason for me to do so.

The only burn issue I have ever had is when I bought one Reptisun 5.0 compact and one Big Apple Mystic compact. They were placed 15" above the basking spot. This was before the subject ever appeared on this forum. The Panther under the Reptisun developed a burn lesion. The Panther under the Mystic had eye closure issues. I suspected the issues were the new products that I tried because it happened within days. I tried them because the companies marketing them made them sound so wonderful. These Panthers were not sick from other issues. The vet agreed that my suspicions were correct. The issues NEVER happened again when I switched back to my 10.0 linear Reptisun tubes on those two cages. And yes, their injuries healed under those 10.0 tubes you say I am so incompetent for using.

I responded to the issues in your post that are flat out not true and were said in a way to portray me as a person who doesn't take care of my chameleons properly. You have never been to my house to see my extensive collection. The many forum members that have been here have all complimented me repeatedly on the condition and health of my collection and my cage set ups. The rest of your post was another numbing lecture on how everyone should spend a bunch of time surfing the internet to sift through all the words written on the subject of UVB, the testing results which may or may not be current, etc. You assume that most people know they should do this or have the free time to do it. The vast majority of people buy a product and rely on all the great things manufacturers say on their websites or packages. I don't trust ExoTerra anymore than I do ZooMed. But I do think they offer more information about the product. I also know that Chris Anderson uses their compacts and is very happy with them for certain applications. That was part of the original thread. If one of the manufacturers is presenting false information, I am sure that it will come out after people who like to test things, do so.

If you want to continue insulting my intelligence go ahead. But do not say that I am not caring for my chameleons properly when you have no supporting evidence. That takes the tone of your posts from being merely unkind to being malicious.

 

[PardalisGirl]

But you felt you should insult Dr. Baines? She is a great lady. I'd like to see your information site... do you have one?

I don't mind you insulting my grammar and spelling.

I'm sure she is a very smart capable person, I never said she wasn't. Post #12 in this thread provided the link that I referred to. I'll be happy to read and use any updated site she contributes to that has been organized and edited for reading purposes like any good published website is. I'm just not interested in spending hours sifting through long informal posts in another "group" or "forum" to glean technical data the way you seem to enjoy doing. I never said that anything she wrote was not valid or was wrong. It just took a lot of space to get the pertinent information presented. She does get lots of points for not lecturing her audience and treating them like idiots if they dare to question something.

 

[summoner12]

I am just not very nice. And sorry you are bored reading the helpful data to better your understanding of UV.

 

[summoner12]

Actually I must be nice, I just stopped to help a motorist who flipped his suv over into a ditch.

 

[jojackson]

Actually I must be nice, I just stopped to help a motorist who flipped his suv over into a ditch.

Its nice to hear your dealing with the 'road rage anger monkeys' Kev!

"Goos Fra Bah!"

 

[VeiledOwner87]

i use an exo-terra 26W 5.0 compact in a compact top, my girlfriend and i both use these fixtures, we are running them in a 38 and 22g flexarium and our chams always like to bask close to it. nothing i/we should worry about right?

 

[summoner12]

The bottom line is that CFL lamps produce LARGE, HUGE amounts of UVB at close range. 1000micro watts within one inch of the lamp. Don't you think that placing something on top of the cage that produces higher amounts of UVB than you would even find in nature in the most extreme conditions, is bad?? The site talks about the most UVB found in nature as being around 450 micro watts. The CFL does 1000! Maybe this product isn't for everyone? maybe it's only for those who can read instructions correctly? These issues of output aren't restricted to the zoo med brand no matter what chart you've seen on the other sites. That chart isn't telling you very much, it's eye candy.

I have a 10.0 CLF that I got at the Pomona show to do some tests on. I finally got a hold of the 'deep dome' from Zoo Med that they recommend you use for their CFLs... these are preliminary readings... but very shocking...

This first reading at 2", the meter is maxed and can't even read the amount of UVB.

at 2.5" it can get a ready....... natural sunlight is about 350 tops on the meter...

At 6" we are at 385....... at 6" you should have about 20-35 micro-watts......

This data isn't very scientific because of how this meter reads the UVB. It is reading the amount of UVB in a range of spectra. It does not read quality of UVB because it can't differentiate specific bands of spectra. These meters are good for setting up your lights so you have an idea of your lamps degradation and a basic understanding of how much UVB there is at your basking spot. To get a good idea of the lamps benefits to your cham.... you could use this meter and a 6.5 (UV index) meter to get a better idea of the lamps benefits. UVI is a very important value when looking at these CFL lamps because they create unearthly amounts.

Its nice to hear your dealing with the 'road rage anger monkeys' Kev!

"Goos Fra Bah!"

lol Jo, the guy had flipped over because of the bad rain we were having that week. the car was upside down in the ditch(9-12 foot drop off). the rain was pouring down and he was on the side of the road waving his arms for help. we pulled over and called 911 for them.

 

[AnimalLovers]

Awww no one answered
- VeiledOwner87's question
Can someone answer ? I'd like to know if the lamp/ UVB him an his girlfriend are useing is safe. I have the same ones in the same domes