Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Blue light filters don't work – controlling total luminance is a better bet

neuroai.science

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 257 posts

Re: Blue light filters don't work – controlling total luminance is a better bet

#51

Post by debo_ »

m3047 wrote: post #29
loloquwowndueo wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What did you do to tackle your insomnia?

Disturbed sleep / inability to settle / anxiety can have physical causes although these are poorly recognized / diagnosed by regular allopathic medicine where I live. Anecdata: 1) A good friend whose anxiety was largely alleviated (and sleep improved) by recognizing and treating their iron deficiency. 2) I have to (can't take the Western drug which was prescribed any more, and the Western doctors can't seem to bang t…

Which herbs do you take?

Re: Blue light filters don't work – controlling total luminance is a better bet

#53

Post by thenewnewguy »

jack_pp wrote: post #36
thenewnewguy wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not an MD or expert in this field enough to know if OP is right or wrong, but I think it's fairly reasonable to be irritated people are claiming software has a health benefit based on vibes/feels. I thought we as a society had moved on from superstition to evidence-based medicine, but in this very post there are plenty of replies countering OP's scientific analysis and data with anecdotes (which is disappointing…

Is it superstition to deduce that I get gassy after eating beans? I need a scientific study to tell me this? Same for if a screen hurts my eyes (not long term, like truly my eyes hurt) when using bright white colors at night.

Yes, actually, if someone has direct scientific evidence contrary to the claim (I doubt such evidence exists for your first example as to the best of my knowledge the relationship between beans and gastrointestinal changes is well understood).

Your eyes could hurt for a variety of reasons - brightness, too long screen time, being dry for external reasons, etc. Most humans are poor at identifying the cause of one-off events: you may think it's because you turned on a blue-light filter, but it actually could be because you used your phone for an hour less.

That's why we have science to actually isolate variables and prove (or at least gather strong evidence for) things about the world, and why doctors don't (or at least shouldn't) make health-related recommendations based on vibes.

Re: Blue light filters don't work – controlling total luminance is a better bet

#54

Post by debo_ »

kqr wrote: post #11
debo_ wrote: post #3

> Everybody wants better sleep Bro, as someone who had brutal insomnia for a couple of years and now sleeps "normally" for whatever that means, I can tell you that I don't think about my sleep quality at all. I'm happy to be sleeping. If you too sleep "ok" for whatever that means, maybe stop worrying about optimizing it and go do something else less insane.

The charitable reading of "better sleep" is "sleep habits that allow for a healthy amount of sleep". A lot of people have habits that give them insufficient sleep.

My experience is being surrounded by people who sleep eight hours a night and then check their ring data or whatever nonsense to convince themselves that they could do better.

Re: Blue light filters don't work – controlling total luminance is a better bet

#55

Post by taco_emoji »

thenewnewguy wrote: post #17
aethrum wrote: post #9

They absolutely help my eyes not be so strained. If its placebo, its a working placebo. >Are people actually using Night Shift? >Aggravatingly, yes. What is the authors problem lol? It feels a lot better on eyeballs to use warm light things. Why does he care?

I'm not an MD or expert in this field enough to know if OP is right or wrong, but I think it's fairly reasonable to be irritated people are claiming software has a health benefit based on vibes/feels. I thought we as a society had moved on from superstition to evidence-based medicine, but in this very post there are plenty of replies countering OP's scientific analysis and data with anecdotes (which is disappointing…

> I thought we as a society had moved on from superstition to evidence-based medicine

Surely you didn't actually believe that unless you JUST landed here from space after being away for 60 years.

Re: Blue light filters don't work – controlling total luminance is a better bet

#56

Post by jack_pp »

thenewnewguy wrote: post #53
jack_pp wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it superstition to deduce that I get gassy after eating beans? I need a scientific study to tell me this? Same for if a screen hurts my eyes (not long term, like truly my eyes hurt) when using bright white colors at night.

Yes, actually, if someone has direct scientific evidence contrary to the claim (I doubt such evidence exists for your first example as to the best of my knowledge the relationship between beans and gastrointestinal changes is well understood). Your eyes could hurt for a variety of reasons - brightness, too long screen time, being dry for external reasons, etc. Most humans are poor at identifying the cause of one-off…

It's pretty clear, even on monitor, night and day difference at a push of a button. I'm not arguing if this helps you sleep better but it is pretty arrogant of you to tell me I can't figure out from my own experience if something is comfortable or not.

Re: Blue light filters don't work – controlling total luminance is a better bet

#57

Post by leni536 »

ctbeiser wrote: post #25

It seems pretty clear in the OP that headline is misleading—they do work, just not as well as he would like. I think that a 50% cut in light emission is pretty good—and you can stack that with the other interventions listed, like auto-dark mode and reducing light in your room.

Note that it's only 50% if you don't normalise back to absolute brightness.

Re: Blue light filters don't work – controlling total luminance is a better bet

#58

Post by crazygringo »

thenewnewguy wrote: post #53
jack_pp wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it superstition to deduce that I get gassy after eating beans? I need a scientific study to tell me this? Same for if a screen hurts my eyes (not long term, like truly my eyes hurt) when using bright white colors at night.

Yes, actually, if someone has direct scientific evidence contrary to the claim (I doubt such evidence exists for your first example as to the best of my knowledge the relationship between beans and gastrointestinal changes is well understood). Your eyes could hurt for a variety of reasons - brightness, too long screen time, being dry for external reasons, etc. Most humans are poor at identifying the cause of one-off…

> if someone has direct scientific evidence contrary to the claim

Except they don't. This is evidence about one potential mechanism. Not evidence saying there are no other potential mechanisms.

This is actually a very common mistake in popular science writing, to confuse the two.

Re: Blue light filters don't work – controlling total luminance is a better bet

#59

Post by nickthegreek »

Barbing wrote: post #50
snet0 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So what? If I could take a sugar pill that guaranteed I feel comfier looking at my screen, nobody can tell me it "doesn't work". I'm not trying to optimise my life, I'm trying to have my eyes feel better.

Placebo and “manifesting”—the latter sounds mockable but pretty much the same thing, harmless if helpful so hey!

The placebo effect is a real, measurable mind-body response where belief & expectation can change your symptoms or how you feel. However, it does not directly alter external reality. Manifesting claims your thoughts or intentions can cause _outside events_ to happen, which has zero evidence to support it.

Re: Blue light filters don't work – controlling total luminance is a better bet

#60

Post by Groxx »

SoftTalker wrote: post #40
Groxx wrote: post #27

So the main claim presented here is that reducing blue reduces total "light" (lumens? watts?) by 50% (totally believable), and that reduction in light is all that matters for sleep? That seems reasonable. The pseudoscience wankery that the fad has brought bothers me a lot too. ... but I'm not sure that's much of an argument against blue light filters, aside from color complaints. That seems to support that it's Usefu…

So buy 5mg, and split the tablet in half.

that'd give you 2.5mg, which is still almost 10x more than what I linked.

it's possible to split and separate them enough of course, but beyond "roughly half" it gets rather difficult. I've considered getting the liquid ones and a micro-dropper for smaller doses (if they'd even be small enough, many combinations are not), but 0.3mg pills are rather convenient and worth the small amount of money for me.

Post reply on HN