After reading the study of "The Influence of Low-powered Family LED Lighting on Eyes in Mice Experimental Model" in Life Science Journal, I am wondering who will help us to get away from dangerous lighting--LED. They have proved following result ," Histological results showed that the photoreceptor layer is significantly reduced in thickness after 4 weeks of LED exposure 2h every day or LED illuminated environment."
In this study, the light from low-powered white house LED output mainly falls greater than 400 nm. Moreover, as showed in the spectrum distribution, it exhibited a power-peak of at 450 nm within the wavelength range of the blue light. Consequently, theses data indicate that white house LED lamps might have additional risk of degenerative factors on photoreceptor cells of retinal tissues after lighting.
As higher-powered blue light from LED is known to induce retinal damage and dysfunction, they demonstrated the effect of photoreceptor cells on light-induced photoreceptor degeneration by irradiation from low-powered white family LED in mice with hematoxylin staining. Several studies were indicated that the thickness of the ONL in retina decrease after 1 day. In this study, histopathology study showed significant atrophy of the ONL thickness after 4 week period of LED exposure 2 hr/day, and more serious atrophy over time. Overall, the findings of the present study demonstrate that the thickness of ONL is decrease by low-powered white family LED exposure over time.
So who will help us to get away from this dangerous products ? Who can prove LED is available for human using before they are selling ? If all manufacturers are not ok to do it, just dont let them sell harmful products in the markets.
Are these the light bulbs that are in our makeup mirrors that we look into very close on a daily basis , sometimes several times a day?
I had an ERM show up (scar tissue on the retina) after 50 + years of 20/20 vision and no other health issues. I am now wondering if this makeup mirror light bulb may have had something to do with it ? Also have IS/OS junction interruption in the photoreceptor area...coincidence, or light bulb???
Maybe you can get the answer here in the same study.
"However, the significantly protective effects of yellow intraocular lens filter through its blocking of the transmission of light against shorter (420 nm) peak wavelength blue light, but not against longer (446 nm) peak wavelength blue light. The light source from white house LED was detected the450 nm peak wavelength of longer blue light (Fig. 2). Accordingly, the longer blue light from the LED lamps was not filtered through the yellow intraocular lens and might was hazardous to the photoreceptor cells of retina."
I think after 446nm to 450nm , there is no way we can protect if we can them in the market.
In this study, LED exposure and study groups is as following ,
The 40 mice were randomly split into four groups (each contained 10 mice), including (1) white family LED irradiation for a consecutive 2-week period (2 hr/day), (2) white LED irradiation for a consecutive 4-week period (2 hr/day), (3) environmental light source with white family LED lamps (the illuminated light of 12-hr light/ 12-hr dark cycle with white family LED lamps), and (4) blank control (no LED exposure), as summarized in figure 1. All experiments were reviewed and approved by the Animal Care and Use Committee in Chung Shan Medical University.
The result is " Histological results showed that the photoreceptor layer is significantly reduced in thickness after 4 weeks of LED exposure 2h every day or LED illuminated environment."
In LED illuminated environment, it will affect our retina and also how long you use , how worse you will get.
Copyright 1994-2016 MedHelp International. All rights reserved.
MedHelp is a division of Aptus Health.
This site complies with the HONcode standard for trustworthy health information.
The Content on this Site is presented in a summary fashion, and is intended to be used for educational and entertainment purposes only. It is not intended to be and should not be interpreted as medical advice or a diagnosis of any health or fitness problem, condition or disease; or a recommendation for a specific test, doctor, care provider, procedure, treatment plan, product, or course of action. Med Help International, Inc. is not a medical or healthcare provider and your use of this Site does not create a doctor / patient relationship. We disclaim all responsibility for the professional qualifications and licensing of, and services provided by, any physician or other health providers posting on or otherwise referred to on this Site and/or any Third Party Site. Never disregard the medical advice of your physician or health professional, or delay in seeking such advice, because of something you read on this Site. We offer this Site AS IS and without any warranties. By using this Site you agree to the following Terms and Conditions. If you think you may have a medical emergency, call your physician or 911 immediately.