Do I need cacti near the computer

I've always been interested. When visiting someone and seeing two or more prickly guards guarding a proudly standing monitor, they usually said, “Do you believe in it?”, But he himself doubted, he suddenly needed it, suddenly a few years later (in a year like this). scientists all over the world will exclaim, “So it was true! Well done the one who has a cactus, and who does not, will soon die. ”

Therefore, I decided to conduct a little research on this issue and find out if I am right or wrong.

What will the topic be about?

About cacti of course. And also about radiation, chandeliers, fido, as well as sansevierii , chlorophytum and scandapsus .

Myths and Beliefs

Like any religious movement, the "kustsyatniki" must believe in something. And it is desirable that it was difficult to prove.
Let's start with ionization .
As wiki tells us

Ionization is an endothermic process of the formation of ions from neutral atoms or molecules.

I remind you just in case. Ions of gases are called Aeroions .

Aeroions, besides being positive and negative, are divided into light, medium and heavy ions. In its free form (at atmospheric pressure), an electron exists no more than 10–8 seconds.

These heaviest aerions are those that, because of their charge, “stick” to small particles, dust, dirt, etc. And these same dust and dirt themselves become charged and stick everywhere, and especially to us. This I, of course, simplified and reduced everything, but I hope I conveyed the meaning. On the Internet, sellers of all sorts of ionizers are closely connected with this topic, so opinions differ in the algorithms of influence on the organism.
By the way, the Wikipedia article on depression mentions the study “Goel N, Terman M, Terman JS, Macchi MM, Stewart JW. Randomized controlled study of the effectiveness of bright light and negatively charged ions in chronic depression. "There she is in the original (abbreviated of course). As a result of research, as far as my English allows me to understand, the conditions of patients from phototherapy improved by 53.7% and from ion therapy by 51.1%. Therefore, ventilate the rooms and do not close the curtains - and you will not have any depression. But it was me who was distracted.

And this is not our topic, because we are talking about cacti.
So, supporters of the theory of cacti tell us that the spines of the cactus are located like in the Chizhevsky chandelier , thereby passively ionizing the air and adding life to us. Let's get a look. Here is its simple drawing:

And what seems to be like a cactus. Not here it was! There is a wonderful article (by the way, from there I borrowed a picture) on how to make this very chandelier with your own hands. And it is clearly written there:

To the "chandelier" connect "-" power supply voltage of at least 25 kV. Only with such a voltage, sufficient "vitality" of air ions is ensured, their ability to penetrate into the human lungs is retained.

And a high voltage converter circuit . Now, if we solder such a circuit and connect a power supply of at least 25 kV to the cactus, then we can safely put such a high-tech cactus near the monitor.
This was perhaps the most plausible myth, which is (hopefully) destroyed under the pressure of evidence.
')
The rest of the myths tell us that plants collect negative energy, they remember when a cat wrote in them and who of the big relatives broke off the petal of a newly-grown flower. Although it may not be myths, who knows ...
Here, by the way, there is an active discussion of the usefulness of cacti. Particularly touching is a copy from somewhere that cacti need to be put in a “pentagram” in order for them to work. Although, again, who knows, maybe in a few years scientists ... :)

Somehow this is all unconvincing

Then a little more google. And we find an article by Artyom Platonov about the "cactus in front of the monitor." It turns out that not only this question bothers me, but you probably already thought that I was the only one who was so paranoid.
Let me quote something (talking about CRT monitors):

The radiation value of any monitor at any point of the housing or screen does not exceed 10 μR / h (micro X-rays per hour). The value of the natural radioactive background of the Earth - 10-15 μR / h, depending on the region. So, as you can see, the radiation value of the screen is not greater than the natural radioactivity. So, from this point of view, the monitors are clean, like mountain air.
That is why posing in front of a cactus monitor for X-ray protection is similar to posing a portrait of Karl Marx or orthopedic ski boots of the 45th size. It brings absolutely no benefit, except for aesthetic pleasure (if at all someone is able to admire ski boots).

The size of the shoes, as I understand it, also does not affect the effect of them. Although, given that the electron gun is increasingly being encountered in museums, nursing homes and offices with very greedy bosses, we have nothing to fear at all.

Where did this stupidity about cactus come from then?

In the same article, the author tells us this secret:

Year in the ninetieth in the FIDO already existed a conference devoted to the discussion of monitors. Once, a heated discussion ensued to discuss screen filters - which one is better. Of course, the debaters did not come to a common opinion and quarreled. And one of the participants, while the editor-in-chief of Computerra, in order to defuse the situation, sent a message: “Well, you still have a cactus in front of the monitor to reduce radiation, put :)”.
This message was accidentally read by some not-so-distant correspondent of a provincial newspaper, and soon published a large article about the benefits of cacti to protect health from the harmful radiation of computers. In turn, this “revolutionary” material was reprinted one after another by several central tabloids. And it started ...

I hope everything was so, because I did not find the glorious times of Fido :(

Why then was it to dirty the keyboard with fat fingers?

But why? I remembered my not very distant childhood, specifically the lessons of computer science. Our informatist (if you read Habr, I hope to remember me with a kindly quiet word) often liked to take a bow from the topic and tell us all sorts of interesting things. And once he told us that when printing, laser printers and copiers emit ozone , because after printing this smell of freshness is like a thunderstorm. Ozone is essentially a triatomic oxygen molecule, very aggressive and not very healthy. Almost like tooth decay. There are even special ozone filters for office equipment. And during my googling studies, I got the news that a group of scientists conducted research, as a result of which it turned out that plants (and cacti including) have the ability to process this very ozone back into oxygen.
Yes, I also don’t get excited by the phrase “British scientists have figured out,” because (as above) I’ll give you a proof link: this is the very same HortTechnology magazine with a short research content. To read the full, you need, respectively, to buy a magazine. There are also the names of the people who investigated it, and the places where they came from.

So, if you have a lazer house, then you should just put a ficus or cactus next to it. And air more often.

And now what?

I do not know. I provided a bunch of text, a couple of pictures and some facts. I was interested in this question, maybe you will be interested. Conclusions do you :)

UPD1: a good habrachelok ajaxtelamonid tells us that the author of that joke in Fido was Lleo Kaganov . Here in his blog someone also confirms this thought.

UPD2: at the request of readers, I transfer to "I'm crazy."

UPD3: moved back, because friends want to read, but they are not allowed.