{"id":692,"date":"2017-03-27T14:21:56","date_gmt":"2017-03-27T18:21:56","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/designinglight.com\/?p=692"},"modified":"2017-03-27T14:21:56","modified_gmt":"2017-03-27T18:21:56","slug":"lrc-responds-to-ama-on-leds","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/designinglight.com\/?p=692","title":{"rendered":"LRC Responds to AMA on LEDs"},"content":{"rendered":"

You may remember that in June of last year the American Medical Association (AMA) released a report called \u201cHuman and Environmental Effects of Light Emitting Diode (LED) Community Lighting<\/a>.\u201d The report made some noise in the general press because it supported the idea that blue light from blue-pump white LEDs contribute to disability glare and retinal damage.<\/p>\n

In the lighting community there was a considerable amount of frustration and anger over the report for several reasons. First, there were quite a few references cited that were either hearsay, such as a New York Times article about Brooklyn residents who didn\u2019t like their new LED street lights, or were irrelevant, such as several articles about the effect of skyglow on nesting turtles. The other reason was that there was not a single lighting designer or researcher on the panel. Overall, it was a poorly researched paper that didn\u2019t deserve the attention it received.<\/p>\n

Shortly after it was issued, the Lighting Research Center at RPI issued a response paper<\/a>. On March 15 the authors of that paper held a webinar to further address the AMA report. A video of that webinar is now available. If you\u2019ve got an hour, take a look.<\/p>\n