Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: BlueNotes- facts and myths around blue light...

  1. #1
    sub specie aeternitatis Pete Hanlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Hickory Creek, TX
    Occupation
    Lens Manufacturer
    Posts
    4,938

    BlueNotes- facts and myths around blue light...

    (Disclaimer- Essilor Employee)

    Anyone up for a conversation around blue light?

    I've taken on a personal project to write a series of articles on the topic (BlueNotes), and- if it's something that interests you- would appreciate any comments, feedback, or suggestions y'all may have. Specifically, I'd like to draw attention to some important points that tend to get lost in all the noise around blue light (e.g., the sun is far more likely to toast your retina than your iPad- so wear sunglasses).

    Article two contains a graph on IOLs that I personally find particularly alarming (I'm at a complete loss to understand why >50% of IOLs being implanted filter less blue light than a newborn's crystalline lens- especially when we know that the older the retina gets the less capable it is of dealing with the oxidative effects of blue light).

    Anyway, if we aren't already I'd love to connect with you on LinkedIn, and please feel free to critique away!

    I'm planning on 7 articles- 2 are already on line...
    Article one- How does blue light damage the eye? https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/how-d...e-pete-hanlin/
    Article two- How the eye defends itself against blue light. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/how-e...t-pete-hanlin/
    Article three- The good side of blue light.
    Article four- Do electronic devices really emit blue light?
    Article five- Protecting your eyes from blue light?
    Article six- Does blue light cause eye strain?
    Article seven- Living with blue light- a summary.

    Some of the topics lend themselves to talking about ophthalmic products, but the focus of the articles is intended to be on eye health (please feel free to flame away if I inadvertently stray from that intention :^).
    Pete Hanlin, ABOM
    Sr. Director Professional Solutions
    Essilor of America

    http://linkedin.com/in/pete-hanlin-72a3a74

  2. #2
    Rising Star
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Idaho
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    72
    Pete I found both articles very interesting. It's interesting to me that "half of those IOLs do NOT filter blue light" You would think that by now, they would be able to have the IOL have a little more protection than they do. Well done on the two articles.

  3. #3
    Rising Star McAnerin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    50
    Very well done on both articles! I learned a thing or two, will definitely be forwarding this to my colleagues
    -Poly is the best substrate for coatings.
    -Poly is extremely scratch resistant.
    -Poly is extremely impact resistant.
    -Poly is unparalleled in clarity.
    -Poly is much lighter than traditional crown glass.
    Like poly, you can trust me about 40% of the time.

  4. #4
    Master OptiBoarder optical24/7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Tx.
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    5,229
    Hi Pete;

    Are you familiar with this article?

    https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/...1111/opo.12406

  5. #5
    OptiBoard Professional
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    usa
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    170
    I really wish people didn't use the term "Harmful Blue Light", something like High Energy Visible Light is seems much more appropriate. To me, HBL sounds like scare tactics sales jargon, HEV sounds like a scientific/medical term with an accurate description. Most things are harmful in the right doses, we don't label them harmful. We don't call water Harmful H2O because it is possible to drown in it.

    That really grinds my gears. Almost as much as calling AR coating, "NO-Glare" coating. Seriously, do they just have people sitting in a room thinking up terms that will most confuse consumers?

  6. #6
    sub specie aeternitatis Pete Hanlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Hickory Creek, TX
    Occupation
    Lens Manufacturer
    Posts
    4,938
    Are you familiar with this article?
    optical24/7
    Thanks for forwarding the study (printed, read, and added to the library :^).
    -I've seen numerous studies (including one conducted by the USAF some time back) which agree that non-neutral (e.g., yellow) filters do not improve contrast perception for individuals with healthy eyes.
    -Howevever, there are definitely studies which have found certain types of lighting affect melatonin levels in blood. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3047226/
    -Also, the particular wavelengths responsible for disrupting the Circadian Rhythm have been defined https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11487664

    Point being, if a certain color of light reduces melatonin levels in the blood, it is not inconceivable that a filter could be used to reduce exposure to that light and raise melatonin levels in the blood (which is an important factor for sleep). Personally, I made up a pair of deep yellow tinted lenses and put them on at sunset each night for numerous weeks. I didn't measure my melatonin levels, but I definitely did feel more sleepy at 11pm than I usually do (I usually stay up to about 1am, but found I was asleep by midnight during the trial). Before a manufacturer makes a sleep-related claim; however, I'd want to see a scientifically sound study (not my n=1 trial) backing them up. I will also comment that wearing deeply yellow tinted lenses for any period of time was super annoying (which is why I now take a melatonin pill every other night at 9pm... subjectively seems to help)!

    I really wish people didn't use the term "Harmful Blue Light", something like High Energy Visible Light is seems much more appropriate.
    Kwill212- I totally get where you're coming from. In ophthalmology, HEV is defined as 400-450nm (pretty close to the 415-455nm used to describe HBL, and it would probably be a better scientific term). However, in recent years the definition many use for HEV has shifted to 400-500nm, which creates a problem- because that range includes two bands of light with very different issues.
    Essilor chose to use Harmful Blue Light and Beneficial Blue Light to distinguish between 415-455nm (which provides no benefit- but can harm the retina) and 465-490nm light (which is necessary to regulate the Circadian Rhythm and triggers pupil constriction). These terms admittedly are not without their own problems- one being that "Beneficial" Blue Light is only beneficial until the sun goes down- after which it should be avoided. I get the water analogy (I once made up a fake MSDS sheet on water and listed the result of over-exposure as "asphyxiation" :^), but water can be good for the body in moderation. Blue-violet light doesn't bring any benefit to the body (other than allowing us to appreciate the beauty of violets).

    The thing that grinds my gear (a phrase I use often- along with "burns my muffins") about the blue light conversation is the emphasis given to electronic devices- which is going to be covered in article four. Yes, electronic devices and lighting put out HEV light- but at nowhere NEAR the level emitted by the sun. Market research shows this emphasis on electronics has caused consumers (and even practitioners) to practically forget about the sun as a threat to vision. When asked to name significant sources of blue light, only 1 out of 5 consumers list the sun, which is the grand poobah of blue light sources.
    Pete Hanlin, ABOM
    Sr. Director Professional Solutions
    Essilor of America

    http://linkedin.com/in/pete-hanlin-72a3a74

  7. #7
    OptiBoard Professional
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    usa
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    170
    Quote Originally Posted by Pete Hanlin View Post


    The thing that grinds my gear (a phrase I use often- along with "burns my muffins") about the blue light conversation is the emphasis given to electronic devices- which is going to be covered in article four. Yes, electronic devices and lighting put out HEV light- but at nowhere NEAR the level emitted by the sun. Market research shows this emphasis on electronics has caused consumers (and even practitioners) to practically forget about the sun as a threat to vision. When asked to name significant sources of blue light, only 1 out of 5 consumers list the sun, which is the grand poobah of blue light sources.

    Well said.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pete Hanlin View Post

    Essilor chose to use Harmful Blue Light and Beneficial Blue Light to distinguish between 415-455nm (which provides no benefit- but can harm the retina)
    No benefit to the optical system. But light in that range is being used to safely treat of psoriasis, eczema, and acne.

    https://www.karger.com/Article/FullText/448000

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2923954/

    https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/...nalCode=ijdt20



  8. #8
    Eyes eastward... Uilleann's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Utah
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    2,680
    What about all the rest of the HARMFUL light out there though? You know, the frequencies between 430-750nm! Why is no one talking about the SUPER ULTRA DANGEROUS effects of those upper frequencies too? I happen to know for a fact, that when people stare at the sun (say, during a solar eclipse that isn't quite total) that they can go blind, or suffer permanent and irreparable damage to their retinas! The sun is a public health menace and should be stopped!!

    Seriously though people, STOP, just STOP with the "harmful" "dangerous" "evil" blue light BS. As much as I like Essilor's lens products, the marketing mooks got this one completely wrong. No one is going blind, nor damaging their eyes with uncontrolled blue light at a rate faster than any other. It's fear mongering to push sales. Literally nothing more. Of course, Essilor isn't the only guilty party, but we should absolutely be using massive caution and careful wording to *accurately* describe the realities of the visible spectrum, and the output of electronic devices so easily maligned for the flat out deadly blue mind control rays they put out. Or whatever...

    Last edited by Uilleann; 08-03-2018 at 09:35 AM.

  9. #9
    Master OptiBoarder OptiBoard Silver Supporter lensmanmd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    Maryland
    Occupation
    Optical Wholesale Lab (other positions)
    Posts
    607
    I was waiting for your response U!

  10. #10
    Eyes eastward... Uilleann's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Utah
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    2,680
    Now - having said I I've said - Pete, I want you to know I have mad respect for you, and your education efforts! So far as I know the only other optician who would have come remotely close to your level of dedication, and truly sorting out answers like these may have been Darryl. I know I'm not alone in saying how much we miss him, and his mind. Thank you for doing the work here Pete. It truly is very appreciated!

  11. #11
    Master OptiBoarder OptiBoard Silver Supporter
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Maryland
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    1,797
    CR39 lenses without UV coating still block more than enough UV light to lessen cataract development

    I am but a ham of an optician. When is your next CE Pete,The last one I attended helped me more than you will ever know.
    Last edited by Tallboy; 08-03-2018 at 09:07 PM.

  12. #12
    sub specie aeternitatis Pete Hanlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Hickory Creek, TX
    Occupation
    Lens Manufacturer
    Posts
    4,938
    Kwill212- I was unaware of the non-ophthalmic applications of blue-violet light, thanks for the info (which I included in my presentation on blue this evening).

    Uilleann- Tell us how you really feel! Seriously, I get your point- if the light is intense enough (i.e., staring at the sun), any color of light is going to cause photochemical damage to the retina. However, there's a pretty sound basis around why 435nm can be particularly troublesome. Regardless, I think we'd both agree protecting the eyes with sunglasses (or photochromic lenses) during outside activities is a reasonable recommendation practitioners should be making.
    Pete Hanlin, ABOM
    Sr. Director Professional Solutions
    Essilor of America

    http://linkedin.com/in/pete-hanlin-72a3a74

  13. #13
    OptiBoard Novice
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    Savannah Ga
    Occupation
    Optometrist
    Posts
    4
    [QUOTE=Pete Hanlin;548001]Are you familiar with this article?
    optical24/7
    Thanks for forwarding the study (printed, read, and added to the library :^).
    -I've seen numerous studies (including one conducted by the USAF some time back) which agree that non-neutral (e.g., yellow) filters do not improve contrast perception for individuals with healthy eyes.
    -Howevever, there are definitely studies which have found certain types of lighting affect melatonin levels in blood. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3047226/
    -Also, the particular wavelengths responsible for disrupting the Circadian Rhythm have been defined https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11487664

    Point being, if a certain color of light reduces melatonin levels in the blood, it is not inconceivable that a filter could be used to reduce exposure to that light and raise melatonin levels in the blood (which is an important factor for sleep). Personally, I made up a pair of deep yellow tinted lenses and put them on at sunset each night for numerous weeks. I didn't measure my melatonin levels, but I definitely did feel more sleepy at 11pm than I usually do (I usually stay up to about 1am, but found I was asleep by midnight during the trial). Before a manufacturer makes a sleep-related claim; however, I'd want to see a scientifically sound study (not my n=1 trial) backing them up. I will also comment that wearing deeply yellow tinted lenses for any period of time was super annoying (which is why I now take a melatonin pill every other night at 9pm... subjectively seems to help)!

    That was your "take-away" from optical24/7's ask/ link?















    Last edited by Skol; 08-13-2018 at 01:48 PM.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Blue light protection
    By EyeManDan in forum General Optics and Eyecare Discussion Forum
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 04-03-2018, 04:34 PM
  2. Blue light and sunglasses
    By Happylady in forum General Optics and Eyecare Discussion Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-26-2018, 05:02 PM
  3. blue light what to use for a photographer
    By Dave E in forum General Optics and Eyecare Discussion Forum
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 11-25-2015, 01:04 PM
  4. Beware the Blue Light!!
    By hgernant in forum General Optics and Eyecare Discussion Forum
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 10-03-2015, 09:31 AM
  5. Deflating the Sunglass myths vs facts
    By Uilleann in forum General Optics and Eyecare Discussion Forum
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 09-16-2008, 09:24 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
OptiBoard is proudly sponsored by:
BC College of Optics, Younger Optics and Vision Equipment