OK.
It's well past time to clear the air. This thread isn't the place for gross hyperbole shouting the horrible new dangers of "blue light". It's a place for rational, science based discussion about the facts of indeed what - if any - direct scientific proof exists today, showing damage to human eyes from blue light emitting devices. Further, the exact nature of what devices are tested, the nature of their display technology, ambient lighting factors, and of course lifetime environmental, social, and lifestyle factors that can alter conclusions must be presented as well.
In particular, with the new glut in expensive "dangerous blue light blocking" lenses - none of which block the same frequencies of visible light, or at the same level - a fact based discussion on the exposure level, and what frequency or frequencies, and at what life stages is shown to be scientifically / clinically significant is prudent.
If labs and lens makers are going to throw out the scary Danger! card to the public, it incumbent on us, as fact based eye care professionals to do no less than cut through the fluff, eliminate the smoke and mirrors, and present fact based solutions. But only if/when truly harmful scenarios are proven, and can be mitigated with ophthalmic technology.
In particular, the questions I am personally left with are:
- What very precisely are the wavelengths deemed to be harmful?
- What very precisely is the exposure of those wavelengths required to be harmful?
- Is such exposure an immediate risk, or cumulative over time?
- What very precisely are the devices and/or displays currently thought to be most harmful?
- What screen/power settings were tested with each device?
- Can each device's display be easily modified by a user without the need for an added lens to achieve the same (or better) attenuation of earlier defined frequency or frequencies?
- How do variables such as genetics, age, lifestyle and location impact study results?
- Can study results be peer replicated, with clearly defined similarity proving damage or danger?
- HAVE study results been replicated?
- How specifically does sun exposure factor into potential or real damage to the eye from the same frequency or frequencies? And at what level is it hazardous?
I look forward to an interesting, fact based discourse. With so many ready to cash in on the "dangers" of this "new" light, I and the healthy scientific skeptics on this board (and of course off) are very interested in the discussion due to both the potential health and financial implications.
Bookmarks