LOGIN  |  SUBSCRIBE  |  ADVERTISE  |  CONTACT US
LEDs MAGAZINEILLUMINATION IN FOCUSSTRATEGIES IN LIGHTTHE LED SHOWSTRATEGIES UNLIMITED
LEDs Magazine
HOMEARTICLESNEWSPRODUCTSSUPPLIERS DIRECTORYEVENTSMAGAZINENEWSLETTERSJOBSTOPIC CENTERRESOURCE CENTER
 INDUSTRY NEWS
< Previous  |  Next >  |  Contents (November 2010)
Share |
Light and human health: LED risks highlighted
15 Nov 2010
Issues relating to the effects on health and well-being of artificial light are discussed in three recent publications; including one that says the blue-light component in white LEDs causes toxic stress to the retina.
It is now accepted that artificial night-time lighting has various effects on humans (not to mention wildlife) and that exposure to optical radiation affects human physiology and behavior, both directly and indirectly. Many areas are not well understood, and a position statement from the Illumination Engineering Society (IES) emphasizes mainly the need for further research. At the other end of the scale, a French government report emphasizes the risks of LED lighting and makes various recommendations.

IES position statement and DOE white paper

The Illumination Engineering Society (IES) has released a position statement entitled "Effects of Exterior Lighting on Human Health (PS-03-10)," which is not specific to LEDs. The document states that "optical radiation detected by the retina impacts an individual’s behavior, psychology, and perception of the environment. The position of the IES is to promote and encourage a more complete understanding of human responses to optical radiation leading to improved designs for all lighted environments."

The way to achieve this, says IES, is through additional research with specific emphasis on additional field research to document typical exposures to optical radiation in exterior settings. The document also states that "the position of the IES is that typical exposures to exterior lighting after sunset have not been shown to lead to cancer or other life-threatening conditions."

Meanwhile, the DOE Solid-State Lighting program has produced a White Paper entitled "Light at Night: The Latest Science," which resulted from a panel session at the SSL Market Introduction workshop held in July 2010.

The white paper concludes that, given the available research, it is unclear what changes, if any, should be made to current best-practice lighting design. "It is clear that additional peer-reviewed research and validation are required to determine the relative significance of the visual and the photo-neural effects of typical light exposures," says the report.

ANSES highlights risks from LED lighting

ANSES, the French Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health & Safety, has published a report entitled (in English): " Lighting systems using light-emitting diodes: health issues to be considered," which focuses squarely on potential problems caused by LED lighting.

The full report is available in French only, but the report summary (in English) says that risks have been identified concerning the use of certain LED lamps, raising potential health concerns for the general population and professionals. "The issues of most concern identified by the Agency concern the eye due to the toxic effect of blue light and the risk of glare," says the report, adding that the blue light necessary to obtain white LEDs causes "toxic stress" to the retina.

Blue light causes a photochemical risk to the eye, says the report, the level of which depends on the accumulated dose of blue light to which the person has been exposed, which is generally the result of low-intensity exposure repeated over long periods. "Blue light is…recognized as being harmful and dangerous for the retina, as a result of cellular oxidative stress," says the report, adding that 3 groups are particularly at risk; children, populations which are already light-sensitive, and workers likely to be exposed to high-intensity lighting.

The other main risk is from glare. The report say that, for indoor lighting, it is generally agreed that luminance higher than 10,000 cd/m² causes visual discomfort whatever the position of the lighting unit in the field of vision. Because the emission surfaces of LEDs are highly-concentrated point sources, the luminance of each individual source can be 1000 times higher than the discomfort level. The level of direct radiation from this type of source can therefore easily exceed the level of visual discomfort. Other risks related to the use of LED lighting systems have also been raised, but futher study is required.

The report says that the photobiological safety standard (EN 62471) seems ill-adapted to lighting systems using LEDs, and that the Unified Glaring Rate used for the other types of lighting is unsuitable for LEDs. Among various recommendations, ANSES says that only LEDs falling into risk groups similar to those of traditional lighting systems be available to the general public, and that the highest risk lighting systems be reserved for professional use under conditions in which it is possible to guarantee the safety of workers.

Manufacturers and integrators of lighting systems using LEDs are encouraged to use optics or diffusers, for example, so that the beams of light emitted by the LEDs cannot be seen directly, to avoid glare. Manufacturers should also take account of the progressive wear of layers of phosphor in white LEDs, which in time could lead to devices being moved from one photobiological risk group to a higher one, according to ANSES.

About the Author 
Tim Whitaker is the Editor of LEDs Magazine.
COMMENTS
Name: edkarl   Posted: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 19:11
Interactions between Light and Melatonin on the Circadian Clock of Mice: Melatonin and light synchronize the biological clock and are used to treat sleep/wake disturbances in humans. However, the two treatments affect circadian rhythms differently when they are combined than when they are administered individually. You can read this at http://jbr.sagepub.com/content/14/4/281.abstract So light can affect hummans... More investigations need tobe done on this maters regarding LED lighting...
Name: gadget flyer   Posted: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 07:11
I have been working with cool white HP LED strobe R&D. I have noticed discomfort and pain even the next day. These strobe bursts are in the area of 30 watts. I intend to wear bronze colored sunglasses from hence. I enclose a warning with my products.
Name: light fantastic   Posted: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 12:11
Another aspect of LED ligts not considered yet as far as I can tell, are the dangers inherent in the current crop of LED lights on new cars.

I find that the arrays of point light sources, even from the running/side lights, are a) dazzling when the vehicle is oncoming and b) "pull" one's attention towards the vehicle and away from the road! Similarly, the rear light brake and fog light arrays can be dazzling and at slight angles, not very visible. This has caught me out on several occasions to have to do emergency braking to avoid an accident, simply because the vehicle in front was at a slight angle when it braked or indicated.

LED headlights!?

Name: gerry   Posted: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 22:11
I think IES can dance on the head of a pin. In one place they say that they accept photopic measurements only and only photopic measurements accepting no other for measurements of lighting efficacy and on the other they wish to use a completely different system for qualifying the effects of that light. Consequently, it will take a considerable degree of skill to evaluate all aspects of a lighting design consistently - thank god for computers.
Their one salient statement seems to be that they have discovered mood lighting -- hopefully they don't think that they are the first to discover this. The next step is obviously to equate mood altering light with mind altering drugs.
If I were a mugger, I might want LED lighting because that apparently makes people 'feel' safer which should create a tactical advantage.
It seems that everyone has suddenly discovered the photochemical effects of light on the human eye. Unfortunately, this is an area which is understood in general but not in particular. The 'best' data available comes from the study of necrotic monkey eyeballs! Then data from high intensity exposures of relatively short duration is extrapolated. On the other hand, general lighting is generally relatively low intensity long duration. Most actual data runs to as much as 10,000 seconds of exposure (2.7 hours)which is a long way from even the occupational exposure standard of 8 hours. And of course, they have to amp up the exposure to get measurable data (i.e. visible damage)over such a short time interval (but then what PhD is going to take the time to obtain 100s of samples of 8 hour exposures?). Of course, the behavior of necrotic tissue is that it doesn't have any recovery mechanisms - it can only degrade it can't heal.
When one applies the current blue-light exposure model to a longer time interval, the obvious conclusion is that anyone who has played a round of golf should have experienced at least temporary blindness. Oddly, when the health-related effects of light are charted the line between risk and no-risk is usually drawn a bit above the blue sky level but based no other evidence than the obvious fact we are not all blind.
And why does no-one care about UV? This stuff can actually give you cancer and there are a bag full of lighting devices that can produce substantial UV as well as blue light, pretty much anything that uses mercury or xenon to produce light directly or indirectly (and you have to pay extra for the lamps that actually filter out this radiation). IR is also harmful directly (as any radiant oven can prove) and indirectly by amplifying other photochemical effects. The quartz-halogen lamp is a poster boy for this. Seems like bluaphobia is 'in', carcinephobia is 'out'.
I'm ready to do my part by lobbying to have display manufacturers remove the blue pixels from all computer screens and TVs.
Name: jills   Posted: Sun, 21 Nov 2010 14:11
This is a question. I am going to buy a new computer monitor and I am not sure wither it is best to buy one with the brighter LED. The information I have read does not refer directly to computer monitors. I look at a computer screen almost all day at close range with glasses and watch television on the computer. I do not know what is the best type of light in a monitor for one's eyes.

I know by my own experience there is something I do n ot like about flourescent lights. When I go into a supermarket I cannot bear the lights and come out as quickly as I can feeling drained although I do not know the scientific reason.

I would be very interested to hear from anyone informed about this particularly related to computer monitors and the best way to protect oneself. Many thanks.

Name: gavin   Posted: Tue, 23 Nov 2010 15:11
There is a population who has been exposed chronically to bright lights, and has to keep their eyes open: stage and screen actors and news announcers. Has anyone studied their eye sight compared to the general population? If they don't have a problem (considering the UV and IR exposure they also get) then LEDs within limits shouldn't be a problem. If they do, we need to look more closely.
Name: jeffa   Posted: Mon, 03 Oct 2011 23:10
I agree with others posting here. LED car head lamps are a dangerous new development and definately cause glare. White LEDs in entertainment again given their intensity are also dangerous and the EU government in their rush to ban incandesent lighting have now created a monster in LED and CFL (mercury hazard).
Name: jonas   Posted: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 14:02
It is true that blue light from artificial lighting such LED may cause health problem. We are looking from the danger of LED which emit blue light and used in artificial lighting. We can impose rules and regulation for the use of LED, but we also has to do the same with existing artificial lighting source such as fluorescent lamp. As compared to LED fluorescent lamp produced UV light and also blue light which actually more harmful to the user. worse some user frequently keep the fluorescent lamp on at point the edge of the tube turned black and purple light emitted from the lamp. I think the standard should not only apply to LED.

Administrators Reply

Blue light can be a problem and it can be very good for your well-being when applied properly early in a day. But the topic needs more research.

LINKS
Channels
Outdoor Illumination
Programs, Funding, Regional Initiatives
Related Stories
Debate continues over the impact of light at night on human health (Aug 10)
Author
Tim Whitaker
Copyright © 2007-2013 PennWell Corporation, Tulsa, OK. All Rights Reserved. LEDs Magazine is part of PennWell's Technology Group, which also includes:
Designed by Kestrel Web Services