Exposure to Backlit Displays Reduces Melatonin Production

alphadogg writes "Researchers have discovered that relatively little exposure to tablets and other electronics with backlit displays can keep people up at night by messing with their circadian rhythms. The study from the Lighting Research Center at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute showed that a 2-hour exposure to electronic devices with such displays causes suppression of the melatonin hormone and could make it especially tough for teens to fall asleep. The study, funded by Sharp Laboratories of America, simulated usage of such devices among 13 people using special glasses/goggles and light meters"

Comments

Orly?

[Anonymous Coward]

My eyes! The goggles, they do nothing!

Turn the damn brightness down!

[fustakrakich]

Seriously, I fall asleep reading the thing just as easily as with a regular book.

Re:Turn the damn brightness down!

[queazocotal]

I find that works.
But.
Almost all my devices will not dim adequately.
Typical dim range is down to 1:128 or so.
1:1000 is much better for use in true dark.
I have to in addition use extra software to increase the dimming, or set dark fonts and backgrounds to get it truly comfortable in a dark room.
This would be a free mod to do in hardware.

Re:Turn the damn brightness down!

[fustakrakich]

It could be the 'auto-brightness' Turn it off if you can. After that, on mine, sliding your finger along the edge of the screen controlled the brightness.

Re:Turn the damn brightness down!

[fustakrakich]

And.. I can just as easily control the brightness with my own finger. It works with anybody's finger. I just pick the one closest to me.

Re:Turn the damn brightness down!

[Larryish]

Kpdf can be set to use a black background.

Of course that means installing QT on an otherwise worthwhile system :/

Re:Turn the damn brightness down!

[shutdown -p now]

Almost all my devices will not dim adequately. Typical dim range is down to 1:128 or so. 1:1000 is much better for use in true dark.

Get a phone with an OLED screen (so that black is actually black, no pesky backlight), and a reader that lets you specify arbitrary text color. Set text color to #201000.

Re:Turn the damn brightness down!

[ankhank]

Yep. I use a tool for the Palm OS 5 PDAs that does brightness control excellently, down to a bare glow entirely adequate for reading with dark-adapted eyes. Combined that with Mobipocket Reader's ability to choose a dark background and a yellow font -- and lo, no sleep problems at all. Of course those aren't currently available, they're history. Because you won't keep buying crap if you start falling asleep over the screen now will you? Wake up! Click icons! Spend money! Choose any walled garden you like, just make sure you're inside the walls. "'General Purpose Computer" sounds so militaristic, doesn't it? You wouldn't want civilians to get their hands on those. Might be dangerous to the economy.

Re:Turn the damn brightness down!

[ceoyoyo]

You shouldn't be reading in true dark anyway. Just because you can do it with a backlit display doesn't mean you should.

Re:Turn the damn brightness down!

[lonecrow]

Which software? For android?

Re:Turn the damn brightness down!

[queazocotal]

On what grounds?
I find it quite relaxing, and do not suffer any effects whatsoever of eyestrain.

Sample size too small?

[Anonymous Coward]

Surely 13 people is too few to draw meaningful conclusions?

Re:Sample size too small?

[cyclopropene]

Surely 13 people is too few to draw meaningful conclusions?

Yes. Especially if not compared to people reading a book under a 60 watt incandescent light bulb.

Re:Sample size too small?

[Anonymous Coward]

Since this is a well-known effect, it should be no surprise. The benefits of e-ink in not causing this effect were one of the original selling points of e-readers.

Re:Sample size too small?

[Cato]

Yes, this is really junk science, but I believe there are other studies that show similar results - see http://stereopsis.com/flux/research.html for a list, including links to the full papers (the site is for F.Lux which I really recommend to adjust colour temperature to get more sleep, for Windows, Mac and Linux, and jailbroken iOS).

Re:Sample size too small?

[Anonymous Coward]

The main conclusion I see from the article is that melatonin regulation is disrupted when people use whacky goggles.

Re:Sample size too small?

[Cenan]

My thought too, I remember being told in high school that about 1000 people was minimum to draw any sorts of conclusions from polls. I would expect that to hold for lab science with people too?
Also i saw a documentary some time ago, i believe it was on BBC about sleep where they followed a morning news host who got up at like 4 am. They used a blue colored light to simulate the sun's effect on the human brain to suppress melatonin on her. The sleep expert guy said it was the color of the light more than the intensity of it that had an effect.

Re:Sample size too small?

[Anonymous Coward]

my thought exactly, I used to read all night under the covers with a torch..

Re:Sample size too small?

[arth1]

Yes. Especially if not compared to people reading a book under a 60 watt incandescent light bulb.

You must be somewhere with 110-120V mains.
60W is way too bright a bulb to use for reading in areas with 220-240V, unless you sit in the next room.

As I remember this study as described on public radio last week, there were comparisons to incandescent lights, and also an interview with someone who had studied the effect of difference in color temperature and filtered frequencies.

My night time reading? Mostly halogen lamp and e-ink. Previously LCD and green backlight. I have still not found any device that is as good for night time reading as my old Palm Vx was. Effortless to both hold and read, with none of the ghosting of color devices.

Re:Sample size too small?

[ballpoint]

There's no difference in light output by a lamp with the same technology and the same power but with a different voltage. Or were you trying to be funny or sarcastic ?

Re:Sample size too small?

[tibit]

Not funny, not sarcastic, just confused. Thoroughly.

Re:Sample size too small?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes. Especially if not compared to people reading a book under a 60 watt incandescent light bulb.

You must be somewhere with 110-120V mains.
60W is way too bright a bulb to use for reading in areas with 220-240V, unless you sit in the next room.

Someone doesn't understand the difference between power and current, eh? P=EI, chump!

Re:Sample size too small?

[OldTOP]

Depends. You don't have to hit 1000 people on the thumb with a hammer to conclude that some people sustain damage when hit on the thumb with a hammer.

If you're trying to find correlations between events in a complex situation where you can't directly observe the relationship, large samples are necessary. If you give someone a radioactive tracer and track it with suitable instrumentation, you can figure out where that pill went without trying it out on 999 more people.

Re:Sample size too small?

[MozeeToby]

This sentence puts rather silly images into the minds of Americans who read it. This side of a pond a torch is less a battery powered light and more a flaming stick.

Unless of course, that's what you meant. In which case all I can say is "NICE!"

Re:Sample size too small?

[RobertLTux]

as it it defined Watts = Voltage Times Amperage so a bulb running on 220 will take half the amperage of a bulb running on 110 (and produce the same amount of light)

Now this does assume that we are talking about the same Type of bulb so there is a difference between an old Glass Ball type bulb and one of those new fancy "twisty straw" type bulbs (and those little 'ricegrain" things are right out)

does that help??

Re:Sample size too small?

[Anonymous Coward]

Watts = Amps * volts
If he referred to a .55 amp light bulb, you would be correct, that would be 120 watts at 220V.

Re:Sample size too small?

[Anonymous Coward]

Blue light in particular has been linked to suppression of melatonin production. The RGB nature of backlight displays could explain the enhanced effect as compared to light emission from resistive heating of the filament.

N = 13?

[schitso]

Should this even be considered relevant?

Re:N = 13?

[anom]

Furthermore, why didn't they just use actual backlit displays instead of some approximation? It's not like there is a shortage of them.

Re:N = 13?

[MagusSlurpy]

Because they wanted to control the exposure. People use tablets differently. Different distances, different brightnesses, different sized font (larger black letters means less light emitted), different tablets=different displays=different wavelengths emitted.

Too small of a group, but an interesting start.

Re:N = 13?

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe you should actually look at the paper before deciding its statistical significance. From the paper: "For the tablet-only condition, suppression was not significantly different than zero after 1-h exposure (t(10) = 1.80, p = 0.103) to the tablet, but was significantly greater than zero after 2 h of exposure (t(11) = 3.39, p = 0.006)."

Re:N = 13?

[Anonymous Coward]

They did use actual tablets, iPads to be exact. The goggles were for controls. They had no goggles, which was the test treatment. They had goggles with blue light which they know will cause a change in melatonin production. Then they had orange goggles which blocked out any blue light, thereby acting as a negative control.

Re:N = 13?

[artor3]

You can't determine statistical significance by looking solely at the sample size. There's actual math involved, and they did that math.

Re:N = 13?

[cultiv8]

OK so they did a couple t-test and apparently, based on my limited understanding of how they calculated degrees of freedom, one or two people were dropped from the sample for each test, most likely because they were outliers (I would RTFA but the site appears to be slashdotted). And this is supposed to prove what?

Re:N = 13?

[multimediavt]

No kidding. I was thinking shenanigans for not using actual devices, let alone a ridiculously insignificant sample size. Sharp must be running low on funds. That study couldn't have cost more than a few thousand to conduct, even paying the grad students to do it. That's about two weeks worth of work ... 13 participants and no devices. Pffff! No wonder some people laugh at science when they have such poor examples to point at.

Re:N = 13?

[VIPERsssss]

I'm sorry but I can't take a sample population of 13 seriously.

Re:N = 13?

[Mista2]

Control the conditions accurately, and limit the variable to the amount of light, not the content.
Reading RSS feeds for 2 hours might keep you much more stimulated than watching a movie, or podcast, or reading an ebook.

Re:N = 13?

[bgeezus]

Nice one... you should have been a coauthor of this paper: Ten ironic rules for non-statistical reviewers by Karl Friston.

As an expert reviewer, it is sometimes necessary to ensure a paper is rejected. This can sometimes be achieved by highlighting improper statistical practice. This technical note provides guidance on how to critique the statistical analysis of neuroimaging studies to maximise the chance that the paper will be declined. We will review a series of critiques that can be applied universally to any neuroimaging paper and consider responses to potential rebuttals that reviewers might encounter from authors or editors.

Re:N = 13?

[nightcats]

Yeah, that and: how does exposure to goggles and light meters = tablet usage? I realize that I'll never get research funding for pointing such things out, but why is a simulation of experience X better than a direct test of experience X? And what God decides that the simulation accurately reflects the real world experience supposedly being "tested" by the sim?

Re:N = 13?

[artor3]

So, if I were to give thirteen people a pill, and ten of them grew wings and flew away, you would complain that my study hasn't proven that my pills can make people grow wings?

I don't know or particularly care whether or not the study in the article is significant, but it's ridiculous to hold up sample size as the end-all-be-all of what determines significance.

Re:N = 13?

[tlhIngan]

Should this even be considered relevant?

Depends what you're using the results for.

If you're arguing that it's too small to be definitive, you're right. It's too small to generalize to the general population.

However, if it's an initial study to see if there *might* be something worth studying (people have been arguing that exposure to screens before bed ruins sleep, after all), then a small sample might be fine to see if it's even worth studying. Rather than spend lots of money studying lots of people and controlling for all variables - try to see if a small subset even matches the hypothesis.

This study is small to determine if the general agreement that screens-before-sleep might be an issue. If it proved otherwise, it means the hypothesis was invalid and needs to be revised, as per the scientific method (it could be you were completely unlucky and picked people who happened to disprove the hypothesis, but if it's as common as you believe, it would be unlikely).

This study has proved that there might be something to that, but it's not definitive. In other words, more comprehensive studies are required (perhaps you got lucky and picked the 13 people who were affected).

There's nothing wrong with small sample sizes - it's just used to cheaply identify if the hypothesis is remotely correct before spending the time, effort and money studying a much larger sample that may generate inconclusive results.

Also, if you're depending on grant money, it means you can walk to the grant committee and show them that you have results that prove interesting, but need further study to confirm. Grant committees don't like hypothesis, they like preliminary studies.

Re:N = 13?

[retchdog]

the omitted cases were due to not generating enough saliva for a melatonin assay. probably not much worry of confounding there.

it doesn't prove a whole lot, if anything. we already knew that blue light suppresses melatonin, and they give the predicted effect in the study along with their measurements. annoyingly, they don't give the two-hour theoretical effect, which is the regime in which they have statistical significance in their results. neither do they formally compare the tablet-only effect to high-blue-light (enforced by goggles) effect, but it's pretty obvious that the tablet isn't as bad. which, of course, isn't surprising since the lumens are lower.

conclusion: it's an almost completely useless study, but the statistics they give seem legit enough. they don't do multiple comparisons correction, but if they did, the two-hour effect would still be significant.

look, guys, if an experiment shows a statistically significant effect which also mostly conforms to the predicted effect (and there aren't blatant design errors), then there isn't much to complain about. i could, quite likely, have done this with n=6 (two for each treatment) and still gotten significance.

Re:N = 13?

[Anonymous Coward]

fuck the paywall. here's the table. the intervals for measured melatonin suppression are +/- one standard error.

http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=33bfl8o&s=6

Re:N = 13?

[dutchwhizzman]

Apart from my joke response, yes, N = 13 is way too small here. Not only that, but the circumstances are questionable as in to how the light was administered. No tests have been done with other light sources generating other spectrums either.

Someone I know has done some rather ground breaking studies in the past, resulting in Philips selling light therapy lamps to cure winter depression. This was the first, or at least the first serious commercial supplier of such lamps, working with clinically proven effectiveness. I know what type of things he had to study to come up with what exactly works and what doesn't, so he would have scientific proof as well as proper clinical tests to prove that the light therapy fixtures he came up with actually worked and what was the "effective ingredient". He also had to make them in such a way that using them would not be too much of a burden to people, getting a usable balance between comfort while the light was on and duration. The higher the light intensity, the shorter exposure required.

One of the things he found, was that below a threshold, your body simply wouldn't react when it came to winter depression treatment. For sleeping (another study he's continuously working on), however, any light source he tried, was an influence, even at very low intensities. He found that things like dream intensity, REM patterns and all that increased when people were in a totally dark room. Even with your eyelids shut, your body still reacts to the light.His most recent study found that by exposing senior citizens to a high dosage of "day light" slows and even can improve conditions like dementia and is very effective against depression.

For all these, to get absolute proof, he had to do double blind field tests on large control groups, in their natural environments, because the plain effect of just exposing them to a test was itself an influence already. Also, as mentioned before, the spectrum and getting over a certain threshold was significant in the senior citizen experiment. He had to do tests in several elderly homes for long periods of time, using different light sources and amounts of light per center, for 6 months time and gather all the data on depression, dementia, number of complaints, amount of people taking an afternoon nap and all that, plus the comparison to the situation a year before, to get any significant data to work with. All in all, his study in senior citizens used more than a thousand subjects. Even with that number, it was hard to get to a level of clinical proof that using intense artificial daylight exposure inside elderly homes was beneficial to the health of the inhabitants.

For the sleeping pattern tests, he is exposing people to different intensities and spectrums for months, using dozens of test subjects each year, for years in a row. People tend to have different sleeping patterns depending on how their day went, the temperature, their general health and the season already. It was common sense to assume that and he quickly found out that the deviation was such that he had to work with large groups and take a lot of samples to deal with that. In order to get any significant results, he'll have to figure out what the standard deviation is per subject, for the entire group and use that to come up with base levels in which he can find differences that can only be attributed to his light testing.Now, how do thirteen lab monkeys with apparatuses stuck to their eyeballs just before they were sent to bed compare to that again?

Re:N = 13?

[Anonymous Coward]

That was my thought, an experiment like this is perfectly fine as a preliminary finding. But, the way that the article is written up makes it sound like it's much more reliable that it perhaps is.

The idea that late night computing is bad for ones sleep is relatively reliable, but the real question is why and can anything be done about it other than shutting down the computer earlier.

Re:N = 13?

[MozeeToby]

To be fair, the phase response curve is well known and well understood. If 100% of your 13 people saw shifts in it, I think you could have a statistically significant result. You could for instance say that there's a 95% chance that at least 80% of people are so affected, assuming your sample was properly diversified. And of course it's not enough to say "proven beyond any shadow of a doubt" but it's certainly enough to say "that's funny..." which is the more interesting result to an experiment anyway.

Re:N = 13?

[Anonymous Coward]

It depends on the statistical likelihood of those people growing wings if they had been given a placebo pill. For something that is virtually impossible to happen spontaneously then a sample of 13 where 10 grow wings would likely be sufficient to prove your pill works (but the study will still need to be independently replicated), for something like how light affects sleep patterns it is a lot less clear if it proves anything.

Re:N = 13?

[Anonymous Coward]

The author Beats By Dre Sale mentioned an ad exec named Lee Clow, who talked about his work on Beats by Dr.Dre Studio the Pedigree dog food brand in the movie "Art & Copy". His ad Dr Dre Beats communicated the importance of loving dogs, not merely feeding them. At the end of the day, successful advertising is advertising worth sharing. Ads that aren't engaging are ignored, and definitely not Dre Headphones shared. A recent article on salebeatsdreuk.com. challenged marketers to create a message Beats by Dr.Dre MLB with a deeper purpose than simply Beats By Dre UK selling a product.

I can attest...

[suprcvic]

I've found that over the last year or so I've had trouble falling asleep and getting deep restful sleep. I started getting off the computer about an hour before I plan to go to bed, taking 3mg of Melatonin and reading a book. Now I'm getting the best sleep I've ever had. On that note, good night.

Re:I can attest...

[slackware 3.6]

Yah the melatonin helps you sleep but the zombie nightmares get much more realistic.

Re:I can attest...

[baker_tony]

Haha, solution is to pop a pill. I take it you're an American? No offence, but that seems to be the American way...

Re:I can attest...

[Anonymous Coward]

Haha, solution is to pop a pill. I take it you're an American? No offence, but that seems to be the American way...

I am offended! In California, Colorado, Washington, and more than a dozen other states, we don't take pills for many medical problems: we smoke a joint. Legally. And we benefit from it. And for the other problems yes, we take pills. And I'm damn proud that our healthcare system and economy are good enough to make this possible. If you discount obesity (which I can not defend) and obesity-induced conditions, we're as healthy, as happy and live as long as anyone, anywhere.

Many Ameericans are fat and take antidepressants and other pills for silly reasons that could be addressed in other ways, but there are an awful lot of us who are fit, happy and healthy. And don't forget about our top shelf security and economic standard of living. And no, we don't all drive giant Cadillacs, wear stetsons (cowboy hats), smoke tobacco, or ignore the rest of the world. I refuse to hide my pride to make up for a minority of idiots.

Re:I can attest...

[Anonymous Coward]

I am offended! In California, Colorado, Washington, and more than a dozen other states, we don't take pills for many medical problems: we smoke a joint. Legally. And we benefit from it.

You may even benefit from it permanently if you do it under the age of about 20: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-19372456

They've found smoking joints under about the age of 20 can permanently lower your IQ.

Re:I can attest...

[arth1]

And don't forget about our top shelf security

Wot? Is that why you can feel safe walking the streets at night, leave your home door unlocked, and there are next to no murders and assaults compared to other Western countries?

Of course, you might mean mandatory stickers saying "Warning: The top shelf is not meant for storage. Keep away from children and animals. Do not use if damaged. Failure to follow these safety instructions may lead to injury or death. Known by the state of California to contain substances that may cause cancer."
In which case, yeah, we got that...

Re:I can attest...

[Anonymous Coward]

I've had the same effect of improved sleep using blue-blocking glasses before going to bed. The pair I have is a cheap pair of safety glasses that blue light forum-goers recommended that are comfortable and wrap around to keep light out around the edges of my vision. Putting them on a couple hours before bed has allowed me to use light sources without adversely affecting my sleep. I highly recommend it, as do many other anecdotes. Playing immersive video games still messes with my dreams, though, concurrent with the results of another study that found playing them before going to bed reduced the quality of sleep.

Re:I can attest...

[Anonymous Coward]

Benefit?
http://science.slashdot.org/story/12/08/28/1311212/study-shows-marijuana-use-in-teens-correlates-to-decreasing-iq?utm_source=rss1.0moreanon&utm_medium=feed

Re:I can attest...

[cavebison]

I started getting off the computer about an hour before I plan to go to bed, taking 3mg of Melatonin and reading a book.

So then you actually don't know which of those is helping the most. Try doing just one of them at a time. It would be more interesting to know which has the most effect. Personally, I can use my laptop in bed before sleep with no issues. I just use a simple mental relaxation technique and I'm asleep in no time. In many cases, problems falling asleep is just a case of an over-active brain, racing thoughts. Calming ones thoughts is a good trick to know.

Worry about it in the morning

[ewg]

I'll worry about this in the morning.

Re:Explains a lot

[Anonymous Coward]

Now we know why geeks are so pale.

You're thinking of Melanin, not Melatonin.

And this is different from TV how?

[thesupraman]

In breaking news:

"Researchers have discovered that relatively little exposure to television and other electronics with backlit displays can keep people up at night by messing with their circadian rhythms."

"Researchers have discovered that relatively little exposure to home lighting can keep people up at night by messing with their circadian rhythms."

And finally:

"Researchers have discovered tha tspending too much time reading obvious 'scientific' reports can keep people up at night by messing with their circadian rhythms."

Re:And this is different from TV how?

[Anonymous Coward]

There may be a little more to it though. I don't think normal computer monitor LCD's are that bad but handheld devices like tablets and phones use PWM to dim the display by turning the LED backlight on and off at a high frequency. That flicker is that's probably what's screwing up the circadian rhythms more than anything.

I know some times I wake up at night and will use my phone to check my mail or something and when I close my eyes and try to go back to sleep I can still see the flickering for a good while afterwards. Pretty annoying.

Re:And this is different from TV how?

[norpy]

A normal computer monitor controls it's brightness in the exact same way nowdays.

LED backlighting has replaced cold cathode flourescent backlighting pretty much universally

Re:And this is different from TV how?

[cheater512]

Except the flicker you describe occurs at kHz.

Keep telling yourself that you see it. You don't, and biologically can't.

Re:And this is different from TV how?

[Anonymous Coward]

Well "normal" computer LCD's for me are fluorescent backlit.

Modern "computer" LCD's are nothing more than TV's with poor resolution and crappy aspect ratios. I'll stick to my 10 year old high resolution units.

Re:And this is different from TV how?

[queazocotal]

You actually can see up to a few kHz.
Admittedly, not directly, but if you sweep your eye past a fast flashing light, it becomes a dotted, not solid line.
(The brain tries to turn off the eyes for a hundred or two ms during a saccade (rapid sweep), but this does not quite work.)

Re:And this is different from TV how?

[jones_supa]

Except the flicker you describe occurs at kHz.

That's not the whole story. There are badly implemented displays where the frequency is much lower. For example the one in Acer Ferrari One 200 subnotebook. Even at max brightness I found it annoying (but the glossy coating and small pixel size contributed to it, too). At lower levels the flicker was clearly visible. In a good display I should be done at the kHz range, though.

Re:And this is different from TV how?

[mirix]

Yeah, shaking your head will allow you to see pulsed/multiplexed stuff, but I'd think a few kHz is really stretching it. I wouldn't think much more than a couple hundred Hz at the most?

Guess it depends on the duty cycle too. I'd imagine 5% duty would be more obvious than 50% or 95% for a given (fixed) frequency.

Guess I'll have to write some LED blinkin' when I get home and see at what speed flailing the LED quits working. (yeah, I suppose speed of the person moving relative to the light matters, also - not to mention persistence of the phosphor, or filament, or (lack of persistence) for LEDs.)

Re:And this is different from TV how?

[norpy]

normal
adjective
1. conforming to the standard or the common type; usual; not abnormal; regular; natural.
2. serving to establish a standard.

Just because you don't like it doesn't make it not normal.
Also, just because it has a TV resolution does not make it a TV. Televisions are defined by their built in tuners that conform to broadcast standards, any screen that does not supply it's own video signal is considered a monitor.

I will give you the crappy resolution thing, but we are finally getting that pushed into the market thanks to apple. Although i'm skeptical about your "10 year old high resolution units" being much more than 1080p. Most of those panels that weren't stupidly expensive were still the same number of horizontal pixels as 1080p but were 16:10 instead of 16:9

Re:And this is different from TV how?

[Anonymous Coward]

there's an xkcd comic about this, someone will find it. But before that happens.. my 10 year old CRT has a max resolution of 3200x1600. That's what, 3x the resolution of 1080p? And this was a decade ago. This has nothing to do with apple.

Re:And this is different from TV how?

[cheater512]

Erm by definition, at full brightness there is no flicker from the backlight.
Any effect you noticed must have been something else.

Re:And this is different from TV how?

[cheater512]

Yes thats valid for about 60 - 100 Hz. Not kHz.
Especially not say 100 - 250 kHz which you'll get with LEDs.

Re:And this is different from TV how?

[aXis100]

Depends. LED's are more efficient when overdriven with high current pulses, with the duty cycle controlling the overall power level. 100% brightness might be 5x rated (continuous) current at a 20% duty cycle.

Re:And this is different from TV how?

[norpy]

Yes, I miss my CRTs too.

However this conversation was about LCD panels and they were always a tradeoff between small dot pitches and compact size

Re:And this is different from TV how?

[Anonymous Coward]

Although i'm skeptical about your "10 year old high resolution units" being much more than 1080p. Most of those panels that weren't stupidly expensive were still the same number of horizontal pixels as 1080p but were 16:10 instead of 16:9

Suck my T221. GP didn't say "my 10 year old, not stupidly expensive, high resolution units", and surplus T221s from the Japanese market aren't stupidly expensive these days, either. And there's just a shitload of 2048x1536 medical LCDs from that era.

Re:And this is different from TV how?

[jones_supa]

Erm by definition, at full brightness there is no flicker from the backlight. Any effect you noticed must have been something else.

Many times there is PWM running at max brightness too. However sometimes even in cheap devices there is good quality LED displays with which you don't sense any flicker at any brightness levels.

Re:And this is different from TV how?

[jsepeta]

I would guess that reading the results of scientific tests would help one to fall asleep.

Re:And this is different from TV how?

[Anonymous Coward]

Here you go. http://xkcd.com/732/

Re:And this is different from TV how?

[queazocotal]

The eye saccades (sweeps) at 720 degrees a second or so (for large changes)

For a half degree source (the apparent diameter of the sun), this is 1400 diameters of the sun per second, so you can fully resolve 700hz on/off.
The sun is quite large, and it's easy to get a fair bit above this.

Re:Explains a lot

[TemperedAlchemist]

That's melatonin not melanin. Melatonin regulated sleep.

Pretty Obvious + Plug for Awesomeness

[Wrath0fb0b]

I think all /.ers have known this since about age 15. I used to go into a phase where I'd be up every night later and later until I was going to sleep at 6AM and waking up at 2PM. Eventually I'd lose a day and "reset" to a normal time only to inch back later ...

Anyway, here's a plug for the awesomesuace that is f.lux, which removes the blue hues from your monitor (since blue light is more associated with circadian rhythm than red) when it's supposed to be night. I am not associated with the makers of f.lux in any way except being a hopeless devotee and mentioning them to anyone within earshot that mentions difficult keeping a normal sleep cycle.

Re:Pretty Obvious + Plug for Awesomeness

[ad1217]

I would also say that F.lux (or Redshift for Linux, which works about the same, but is less buggy) is extremely helpful, though I use it because the red tint does not hurt my eyes as much.

Re:Pretty Obvious + Plug for Awesomeness

[Anonymous Coward]

Thanks for this. Woke up in the middle of the night, as is a regular occurrence, read this comment and installed f.lux. Much better now.

Re:Pretty Obvious + Plug for Awesomeness

[Trogre]

This.

Not that I use f.lux, but the GPL'd Redshift on my laptop. When switching it on, it feels like my eyes breathe a sigh of relief - it really is much easier to read off a red-orange-tinted surface at night.

Now if only they'd port it to Android.

Re:Pretty Obvious + Plug for Awesomeness

[Anonymous Coward]

i've been on a 26 hour day since i was about 16.

i just take melatonin supplements when i HAVE to go to sleep off my schedule, works for me.

Re:Pretty Obvious + Plug for Awesomeness

[baker_tony]

Man, I love flux as well, have it installed on computers, iPad and iPhone. Makes a massive difference, just to eye strain!

Re:Pretty Obvious + Plug for Awesomeness

[smellotron]

I am not associated with the makers of f.lux in any way except being a hopeless devotee and mentioning them to anyone within earshot that mentions difficult keeping a normal sleep cycle.

Thanks, I am trying this out now.

Re:Pretty Obvious + Plug for Awesomeness

[CAIMLAS]

There are a number of 'night mode' apps available for Android. ... though, for the life of me, I can't seem to find any of them. I know for fact I had some installed on at least one of my phones since ICS came out.

Re:Pretty Obvious + Plug for Awesomeness

[Cato]

F.lux is great, works on Windows, Mac and (jailbroken) iOS. One of the downsides of iOS devices as e-readers is that you have to jailbreak to get f.lux installed and not change your sleep cycle.

There's also XFlux, but I use Redshift too on Linux - http://www.ubuntu-inside.me/2009/03/flux-better-lighting-for-your-computer.html

[[http://stereopsis.com/flux/ios.html Now on iOS]] for jailbroken devices - see [[iPhone]] for jailbreaking.

Discussion: http://forum.koohii.com/viewtopic.php?id=5347&p=1

Blue light in morning resets circadian cycle: http://www.sciencedaily.com/videos/2006/0201-waking_up_teens.htm

Tie-in to SAD and phase advance or delay associated with depression: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/05/060501113832.htm

Re:Pretty Obvious + Plug for Awesomeness

[guttentag]

Just be careful using f.lux if you're pulling an all nighter working with photo editing or video production, unless you're very "artsy." People will either say your colors are all off or you have a very unique style. Then again, it worked for the Wachowski brothers...

Re:Pretty Obvious + Plug for Awesomeness

[betterprimate]

Holy shit! Thank you so much!

I'm pulling an all-nighter and am glad I decided to browse /.

As soon as I installed f.lux, I had an immediate physical reaction! No more headaches, neck aches, and sore eyes!! Fucking wow! Thank you!

Re:Pretty Obvious + Plug for Awesomeness

[Anonymous Coward]

the only one i know of is renderfx for cyanogenmod. it has night mode and a pure red filter (and a few silly ones and "calibrated" modes).

Re:Pretty Obvious + Plug for Awesomeness

[hankwang]

Now if only they'd port it to Android.

Lux for Android is an auto-screen dimmer, but it also has a 'night' mode with red hues. The red mode is not in the free version, so it will set you back 1 or 2 dollars.

That said, in the evening, I usually read in bed from my Android screen with low brightness and the lights off, and usually I will fall asleep within half an hour; I don't use the 'red mode' for that.

Re:Pretty Obvious + Plug for Awesomeness

[Anonymous Coward]

Less buggy? On my quad monitor, dual nVidia card, TwinView + Xinerama system it just segfaults.

Re:Pretty Obvious + Plug for Awesomeness

[Quirkz]

Ah, yeah, was trying to remember what this was called. Had this on my previous desktop computer. I was doing a lot of evening work and then having a lot of trouble falling asleep. It really did seem to help a bit when I installed it, though I had to turn it off every time the evening's work involved graphics, where I needed to see color properly. I forgot to reinstall it when I upgraded the system last year.

Re:Pretty Obvious + Plug for Awesomeness

[lewiscr]

I prefer to run my screens with a lightgrey-on-black color scheme, instead of black-on-white. It was a lot more effective on CRTs, but it's pretty useful on LCD screens too.

Re:Pretty Obvious + Plug for Awesomeness

[Anonymous Coward]

CyanogenMod also has options to tint everything red.

f.lux or redshift

[heptapod]

I use f.lux and it's pretty nice. Dims the screen and gives it a red cast around sunset, brightens to the normal, harsh blue glare around sunrise.

I didn't RTFA (like everyone on Slashdot) but did the researchers check with test subjects if these programs had any effect on their melatonin or sleep habits?

What

[s4v1or]

And here I thought it was all the awesome stuff on the device that kept me up, and not the display.

And now to play Civilization for a few minutes..

Uh, yeah.

[russotto]

Exposure to light can reduce production of a hormone known to have its production reduced by exposure to light.

Re:Uh, yeah.

[VortexCortex]

The difference is that the researchers studied the effects of back lit display light, vs indoor incandescent light, candle light, fireplaces, outdoor camp fires, or cave entrance torches...

What I mean is that they lack control groups something fierce.

Re:Uh, yeah.

[dkf]

Exposure to light can reduce production of a hormone known to have its production reduced by exposure to light.

Not just that. Backlit displays tend to be more blue in color than most home lighting, which is the part of the spectrum that most affects melatonin production (a reasonably well-known effect). Which puts this all in "No shit, Sherlock" territory. Or an undergraduate project.

Re:Uh, yeah.

[ceoyoyo]

No, they used back lit displays with tinted glasses as a control group. Despite the claims of the summary, the study compares exposure to blue light (modern LED backlit displays, and backlit displays plus EXTRA blue LEDS) versus orange tinted light (achieved with glasses).

It's well known that blue light at bedtime is a recipe for sleep disruption. This study is just the same thing "with tablets."

Welcome to Tautology Club

[deatypoo]

The first rule or Tautology Club is the first rule of Tautology Club http://xkcd.com/703/

Re:Welcome to Tautology Club

[pubwvj]

I thought it was:

The first rule of the Tautology club is the Tautology club's first rule.

The short version

[Anonymous Coward]

Staring at a light keeps you awake :)

Wash & Powder Your Pee Pee

[Anonymous Coward]

Gnome? KDE? HA! I use OpenBox!

oh.. wait... wrong story.

Try Flux

[Anonymous Coward]

Link. In a nutshell it adjusts the screen's colour temperature to help with this sort of problem. Ironically, perhaps, I'm too tired to write much more.

Its not the light, its what's in the light.

[Narcocide]

How much of this affect can be conclusively attributed to the light itself and how much of it is actually the adrenaline rush from the video game? I suspect hours reading boring documentation under the exact same light would NOT have even remotely the same effeccts.

Re:Its not the light, its what's in the light.

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

How much of this affect can be conclusively attributed to the light itself and how much of it is actually the adrenaline rush from the video game? I suspect hours reading boring documentation under the exact same light would NOT have even remotely the same effeccts.

It does seem pretty likely that stimulating material on the display has its own effect; but there has been enough messing around with boring light sources(ie. LED arrays in white or blue with no display content at all) to suggest that light itself packs a decent punch.

I suppose, if one wanted to be especially sure, a bit of research on subjects given the stiffest doses of beta blockers that the IRB will allow might be in order. If you crater the beta receptors, this 'adrenaline rush' phenomenon will not be an issue. Probably easier just to get approval to shine LEDs in people's eyes, though.

on the hypothesis

[ThorGod]

Not sure about the sample size...but the Institute backing the research looks reputable enough. (Yes, that matters.)

Anecdotally, I've been turning my TVs and monitors' backlights down after 5 pm for months now. I'm definitely able to get to sleep more easily than leaving monitors at full brightness.

Glasses

[Anonymous Coward]

So they build special glasses that annoyed people for two hours because it was impossible to get them to use a store-bought tablet, TV or PC for two hours?

FTFM

[omfgnosis]

Yah the melatonin helps you sleep but the zombie nightmares get much more awesome.

Re:FTFM

[Anonymous Coward]

Yah the psylocybin won't help you sleep, but the zombie hallucinations are even more awesome.

Re:FTFM

[ozmanjusri]

Yah the bath salts won't help you sleep, but the zombie reality is truly hyped to the max.

Re:FTFM

[Anonymous Coward]

Yah baths will help you sleep, but not if you're a zombie.

Any word?

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

So, any word on how many man-years of sleep have been pointlessly destroyed by the fact that blue LEDs are now cheap and 'cool' enough to include in assorted consumer electronics devices where low-power greens used to be used?

Maybe I'm just turning into a cranky old guy in my old age; but the old, dim, reds, ambers, and greens in various blinkenlight panels were downright soothing. Now you plug something in(even something designed to be pointed at a movie-watcher's face, FFS) and odds are that a blinding blue point source will burn a hole in your retina. Even a boring domestic-grade pile o' networking gear can put out enough light to read by at night.

Re:Any word?

[camionbleu]

I sympathize. Black electrical tape has restored my circadian rhythm.

Re:Any word?

[dgatwood]

Likewise. I have a Samsung TV with a bright red light that's on whenever the device is off (WHY?) and a Samsung with lighted buttons where the power button's light doesn't ever turn off (WHY?). Both are covered with electric tape.

I swear, every time I think electronics manufacturers can't get dumber, they prove me wrong. The worst part of it is the realization that a simple firmware fix would make the difference between these being great devices and making me want to fly to South Korea and smack all their engineers upside the head repeatedly with a clue-by-four....

Re:Any word?

[VIPERsssss]

I have a Samsung TV with a bright red light that's on whenever the device is off (WHY?) and a Samsung with lighted buttons where the power button's light doesn't ever turn off (WHY?).

Cylons...

Re:Any word?

[Anonymous Coward]

And why does my phone charger need a bright-ass red LED? I know it is operating because my phone says it is charging, as well as because the damn thing is plugged in and has no off switch. Fortunately I generally have plenty of electrical tape on hand when problems like this arise.

Re:Any word?

[xaxa]

I'm glad the EU banned stuff like that (for saving electricity). My stuff has real off-switches.

Re:Any word?

[Sycraft-fu]

That is actually slowly coming around again. Expensive electronics makers have realized that blue is getting rather overdone and they can look different by not doing it. My Denon receiver uses a red/green light for standby/on and a white display. My NEC monitor does have a blue power light, marketing probably insisted, but you can also change it to be green instead, and change the brightness.

One thing that annoys the hell out of me about the blue LEDs these days is that the manufactures don't seem to appreciate the brightness is too much. Back in the day, the expensive blue LEDs weren't all that bright so they worked reasonably well for indicators. However the common ones these days are piercingly bright. That's great over all, it is why when you coat them with fluorescing material they generate light so efficiently, but it means they shouldn't be used as indicators.

If you get higher grade gear, you can often avoid the stupid levels of light. I find it is wroth it anyhow, since it last longer. Like in terms of networking look at an Allied Telesis AT-GS900/8. All the indicators are a pretty sedate green and there's a switch to turn off everything except the power indicator to reduce light (and blinking). Also has an all metal case, integrated PSU (no wall wart) and is quite energy efficient which means it runs cool. It'll cost you a fair bit over a cheapie Netgear, but it is better kit, and as a bonus isn't annoying on the indicators.

Re:Any word?

[Sycraft-fu]

It's a standby indicator, they are fairly common on A/V gear. The idea is that you can tell if the devices are ready to accept remote commands, or are hard off. My Denon receiver has two power switches, one which actually powers the unit on to full and the other which is a hard switch. If the hard switch is off, no indicators. If it is one, the soft switch has a red ring indicator showing the unit is in standby. It goes green when it is fully active.

Re:Any word?

[Mr Krinkle]

The EU and the "Green Cert" or whatever that stupid environmentally friendly crap are the reason FOR these lights. If you use the remote to turn it off, it stays in "standby" so it has to let you know it's in standby. That way you'll know to turn it all the way off to make the light go off. Some of the Samsung TV's have a "full power" switch by holding the stupid button on the tv. No way to turn the light off from the remote.
As for the lights on the chargers, that's just stupid. :) And I hate all people that do that. One of the more gratifying moments in my career was smacking an engineer at Ericsson when he decided to have the LED light be always on when charging. He wouldn't admit "most people" would want it off, and just have an icon by default, but we added the option in the menu's to NOT have the bright ass blue light kick on when it was fully charged. (which woke me up at night when the phone finished charging)

Re:Any word?

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe I'm just turning into a cranky old guy in my old age;

Perhaps you're not getting enough sleep due to the over-exposure of blue LED lighting.

Re:Any word?

[RobertLTux]

the led on the charger is to show you have it in a "valid" outlet so if it does not light up then you need to look at what you are plugged into.

Re:Any word?

[dgatwood]

Neither of the devices in question has a hard switch. If they did, I'd be able to turn off the light.... :-)

Re:Any word?

[Sycraft-fu]

What I'd do is put the whole setup on a switch. I have a remote controlled power strip (Home Depot sells them, among other places) for my home theater. Let's me easily shut off all devices with one switch. The little indicators then let me know if they are on and ready for remote commands.

Re:Explains a lot

[Tehrasha]

Aha! So the 'CRT tan' was not a myth!!

Re:Explains a lot

[Tehrasha]

I SO wanted that to work...

Re:Explains a lot

[fustakrakich]

And a lightin' up a fatty doesn't hurt

Not that useful advice given here

[esldude]

"For now, the researchers recommend dimming backlit devices such as tablets when using them at night, and they suggest limiting their use at night in the first place." Heck, I have important or fun stuff to do in the daytime when there is plenty of light. Best time for such back lit devices is at night. Sigh.

Re:Not that useful advice given here

[ThorGod]

Best time for such back lit devices is at night. Sigh.

Actually, no. The backlight really just competes with the ambient light. If you're in a bright, sunny room then it's going to require more light shining through the pixels for your eyes to see the picture clearly. If you're in a dark room, there's no glaring of light from other sources to mess up the image...so you need less backlighting to see the image.

Flat-lined

[thepacketmaster]

My circadian rhythms flat-lined a long time ago. Years of video games, late night programming, and 2am change windows. Sleep is for the under-caffeinated.

Re:Flat-lined

[Anonymous Coward]

Why are there always idiots like you, acting as if that was somehow "cool"?

It's like those people in the old AOL commercials, "bragging" about how they are too fuckin' dumb to program a VCR, as if that was just a normal thing, and how they now managed to go "online". Maybe people with that level of stupidity should not be allowed to use a computer in the first place??

I wonder if you ever realize how much dumber you are, solely because of that lack of sleep. I know from experience, that it’s at least 20 IQ points.
Yeah... way to go, mate! Really "cool".

Try using no artificial lighting at all for two weeks. You will be stunned by the clarity of your cloudless mind. You will never want to go back.

....again

[Urza9814]

...Is it just me, or is this story posted every year or two? I thought this was a very well phenomenon by this point...

Re:Explains a lot

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

It's hard to do without ruining image quality or causing a CRT implosion; but shaving a bit of the glass off the front of the tube might help... They didn't use leaded glass in CRTs just for fun...

Radiation burns are a form of 'tan' right?

Has nothing to do with...

[rsilvergun]

the constant pressure to pass tests in classrooms of ever increasing size, cutting back and eliminating PE, adding large fees to sports activities, or getting the kids up at 6am because the buses come at 6:45am to get 'em there by 8. Nope. It's the frickin' iPad that's at fault for kids not sleeping...

f.lux can help

[synaptic]

The f.lux program for Windows sits in the system tray and continuously adjusts the blue component of the display based on the time of day.

http://stereopsis.com/flux/

You can also dose with melatonin caplets a little while before you know you want to sleep.

Re:f.lux can help

[KozmoStevnNaut]

I can't prove anything outright, but I feel that using f.lux has helped me sleep more easily. On Linux I use redshift.

If you set it to the slow transition speed (1 hour), the change is imperceptible. Until you try turning it off, that is. The difference is amazing.

Re:Explains a lot

[ignavus]

That's melatonin not melanin. Melatonin regulated sleep.

I clearly need more sleep. I first thought you wrote "Melatonin regulated sheep."

I suppose sheep regulation could help you sleep - it would make them easier to count.

Re:Explains a lot

[Anonymous Coward]

No that's lanolin.

"What's your name? Lanolin? Like sheep's wool? Maybe don't wear a bra next time."

Re:Explains a lot

[Mista2]

f course, I've been reading with my iPad and iPhone in bed.
1 I find that the biggest problem of falling asleep with the iPad is that it hurts much more than my iPhone when you fall asleep and it hits you in the nose.
iBooks and Kindle also have a night mode 8) this stops the wife complaining of the LCD glow.
And I've started reading 2312. If this doesnt put you to sleep, nothing will.

Where is

[fafaforza]

Where is my 19" eInk display already?

Re:Where is

[ankhank]

Plenty of info here: http://psychcentral.com/blog/archives/2007/03/12/light-and-dark/

Re:Where is

[shutdown -p now]

It's still redrawing.

Re:Where is

[ankhank]

for covering existing lights, you can use the yellow polycarbonate drinking water bottles from Walgreen’s, etc (don’t let them overheat, though). For covering lights AND computer screens (and flashlights) you can get Rosco theatrical gel filters at any good photo or theater lighting supplier, for about $7 for a 20×24 piece. Deal! This is “Daffodil” http://www.rosco.com/images/filters/roscolux/310.gif That blocks most light below about 470nm (though you’d want to add their ultraviolet blocking filter as well, for any fluorescent light) http://www.rosco.com/

Re:Explains a lot

[Anonymous Coward]

Now we know why geeks are so pale.

And you didn't revoke his geek card?

Re:Explains a lot

[Samantha Wright]

And a lightin' up a fatty doesn't hurt

--
Man! It stinks in here

Do you make a habit of speaking to your signature?

Re:Explains a lot

[frosty_tsm]

That's melatonin not melanin. Melatonin regulated sleep.

I clearly need more sleep. I first thought you wrote "Melatonin regulated sheep."

I suppose sheep regulation could help you sleep - it would make them easier to count.

Baaaa. Baaaa.

Re:Explains a lot

[guttentag]

That's melatonin not melanin. Melatonin regulated sleep.

It used to. Now there's an app for that. Actually, according to the article, just about every app that doesn't turn off the backlight on your tablet is taking over melatonin's role and regulating your sleep (or lack thereof).

Sounds good

[Barlo_Mung_42]

Now I can stay up longer and write more code.

bad test then

[dutchwhizzman]

There are quite some good studies into how light triggers sleeping patterns and causes or prevents winter depression and all that. With a tablet, you usually will be exposing little more than the retina around your "yellow spot" while with using lenses and all, I think you might be exposing a lot more of the peripheral areas of your retina as well. There could be a significant difference in how that influences your melatonin levels. Yes, it's true that the amount of "blueish" light over a certain threshold that hits your retina influences your melatonin production and sleeping patterns. However, the actual amount that hits your retina when using a tablet and where it hits will be a significant factor in that. If the results of this study this were true, people looking at LCD televisions and LCD computer screen would also not be sleeping at night, nor would they be suffering from winter depression. I think there is plenty of statistic evidence that whoever conducted this study, must have done something wrong to come up with these results.

Re:bad test then

[MagusSlurpy]

Well, one of the things to consider when comparing tablets, monitors, and TVs is the percentage of light hitting the retina. While monitors and TVs have more area and thus put out more light than tablets, they are much farther away. For example right now my 19" work monitor is an arm's-length away (~3 feet), while a tablet will be a foot, maybe less, from my eyes. So even though a 10" tablet has a fifth of the area, under the inverse square law I'm actually getting twice the light hitting my eyes. And TVs typically being across the room would then have even less intensity hitting the eye. . . unless your name is Frank.

Even better! N = 1

[dutchwhizzman]

You may conclude that the pill you took yourself while doing the study is a powerful hallucinogen. Conclusive results based on just a single sample!

Re:Explains a lot

[Jane Q. Public]

"That's melatonin not melanin. Melatonin regulated sleep."

All sleep-regulated sheep aside, melatonin supplements are cheap and plentiful. The tablets most often come in 3mg size but a doctor said that's "almost certainly too much". Take 1 mg (or 1/2 a 3 mg), about half an hour to an hour before bedtime.

Caution: taking melatonin (especially 3 mg) can cause you to feel groggy in the morning if you haven't gotten a full 8 hours.

Re:Explains a lot

[Anonymous Coward]

It explains the common computer nerd's amazing porn watching stamina...err, sorry I mean it explains "insomnia".

What about CRTs? I stll have two of those...

[Anonymous Coward]

And I must say it feels very much like it creates the exact same problem.

Re:What about CRTs? I stll have two of those...

[ceoyoyo]

Yup. It's the colour of the light, and to some extent the intensity, not the source. An e-ink display read under a cheap (non-incandescent matching) florescent will have the same effect.

Well...

[matunos]

...when they invent non-backlit tablets that can play porn, let me know!

Oh FFS

[Anonymous Coward]

The problem with this sort of BS is people will believe it enough to subconsciously produce a sleep problem and then blame it on their device. I can't sleep without my WoW fix, thankfully I realise it's not backlit. Not everyone will.

Maybe it does

[Penurious Penguin]

Perhaps the line of logic was; that the effects of melatonin-deficiency induced circadian-dysrhythmia would have one sleeping more during the day than at night, thus reducing exposure to the sun and causing paling. That was my first thought when I read the original comment. Maybe melanin was never considered. And most geeks I know, do indeed spend their time primarily indoors and in front of melatonin-depleting monitors.

I actually can't imagine modding that comment "offtopic". But I am not normal, at all.

backlighting?

[sgunhouse]

Personally, one of the first things I did on my XP system was change that infernal blue color scheme. Olive is so much easier on the eyes. (Yes, changed the wallpaper too.) Likewise I found my android tablet never went dark enough so I turned off Auto brightness - even in daylight I prefer it darker than they set it. (Even at minimum brightness I wish I could turn it down further at night.)

Try this out

[Sir Foxx]

http://stereopsis.com/flux/

Bad Science...

[Lumpy]

They did not compare Backlit displays to front lit displays or edge lit displays, so therefore their findings that Back Lit displays are at fault is 100% useless.

I'm betting it's the same old long known knowledge that exposure to bright light will disrupt sleep patterns, they have known this since the 40's.

Re:Bad Science...

[arth1]

I'm betting it's the same old long known knowledge that exposure to bright light will disrupt sleep patterns, they have known this since the 40's.

The 40 ADs, you mean? Probably longer than that.
People have lived north of the polar circle for thousands of years, and dealt with this phenomenon as part of their daily (no pun intended) lives.

Re:Bad Science...

[Anonymous Coward]

They did not compare Backlit displays to front lit displays or edge lit displays, so therefore their findings that Back Lit displays are at fault is 100% useless.

They also didn't compare with light reflected from notations written on the sides of giraffes, pandas and sea turtles, but that doesn't invalidate their findings either.

"Our study shows that a two-hour exposure to light from self-luminous electronic displays can suppress melatonin by about 22 percent. Stimulating the human circadian system to this level may affect sleep in those using the devices prior to bedtime," said Figueiro.

Stop feeling so threatened. They're not casting blame on your lifestyle or chosen devices.

Re:Bad Science...

[Anonymous Coward]

News flash, the EXACT SAME result will happen when you use REFLECTED LIGHT of the same luminosity even off of a white wall. It's the light intensity, not the source of light you buffoon. Sitting in a room reading a book with the same light intensity will produce the exact same results... But you seem to not have the cognitional capacity to understand his point. It's a bunch of very uneducated idiots trying to make news by doing something half witted and pulling the wool over the eyes of uneducated people like you. Or in other words, It's Fox News level of science.

Re:Bad Science...

[ceoyoyo]

It's the colour of the light. The study compares LCD to LCD+blue LED and LCD+orange glasses. Orange glasses is the control.

Sitting reading a book under a daylight balanced lamp will have the same effect as a tablet.

From personal experience

[ThePhilips]

Well, that a scientific explanation of what I have observed some time ago: sleeping in after reading/etc on PC is harder compared to sleeping in after reading a book or e-book off e-Ink device.

Was also one of the reasons why I have abandoned long in past the night time TV: it just felt unnatural - and tiring - how it kept me up for no apparent reason.

Probably it is the same reason why I strongly prefer color schemes with dark background for the OS/applications on the PC.

Sample size of 13?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not a master statistician, but I do know a sample size of less than 30 means the results are not useful; anyone remember the Central Limit Theorem from their statistic courses? I reckon this is just a headline-grabber for nerds like us to rave about.

Re:Sample size of 13?

[ceoyoyo]

"but I do know a sample size of less than 30 means the results are not useful"

You're right, you're not a statistician.

The central limit theorem refers to the tendency of the means of many samples to be normally distributed even if the original distribution is not. It's not really relevant here.

Melatonin Supplements

[martinde]

Always a good idea after late night video games. Much better than not playing them anyways :-)

Re:Explains a lot

[kiehlster]

At first I was all laughing at your lack of sleep, but then I was all sad because Count Dracula just recently passed away. How are we suppose to count sheep without The Count? He was always there for us when we needed sleep.

Re:Explains a lot

[kiehlster]

Clearly I need some sleep as well seeing as I've confused Count von Count for Count Dracula.

Manufacturer's Problem??

[Anonymous Coward]

TFA also says that manufacturers should create new devices that auto-regulate to stimulate or decrease melatonin production. I found that a little drastic and too much nanny-state mentality. Users and use vary - just because it is night doesn't mean I'm ready for bed.

honest mistake

[PopeRatzo]

Exposure to Backlit Displays Reduces Melatonin Production

At first glance, I thought it said "melanin production" and thought, "Well, that explains the Republican Party."

Using a computer before bed can keep you awake...

[dywolf]

Really? You think? Most people have known about this phenomon, if not the mechanic, for years. That why they tell people "dont use a computer right before you plan to sleep". or recommend reading a book for 10-20 minutes afterward if you do, to re-relax you.

!News.

Yikes!

[Anonymous Coward]

IN BREAKING NEWS, Light Disrupts Sleep! What an Amazing Find!

In other breaking news, Mankind Continues to Conduct Invalid Studies to Fulfill Agendas.

Oh Slashdot. Poor Slashdot. What happened to you?

In an unrelated study scientists have found....

[Kaptain Kruton]

that people that wear lots of light sensors and goggles have trouble sleeping as well as they do without them.

Fortunately

[Rinikusu]

Nature has seen fit to riddle me with the 'beetus, so I can counteract the awful effects of backlit displays with a delicious sugary beverage, like Mountain Dew, and be out within an hour.

Tablet for 2 hrs = massive headache

[Anonymous Coward]

If I looked at a tablet screen for 2 hours, I would have such a massive headache I wouldn't be able to sleep for days.

Spectra: f.lux - doesn't change much re sleep

[ankhank]

Craig at LEDMuseum used his spectrometer on his fluorescent-backlit screen; here’s the results;

f.lux removes enough to change the color balance, but doesn’t zero out the band that affects melatonin (in fact doesn’t reduce it anywhere near as much as the “low blue light” compact fluorescents he tested for me years ago– that spectrum is also on his site, listed in the other info I’ve posted).

I’ll keep using f.lux — because it makes the screen less bright. I do like having that happen at night! but I’m keeping the yellow Rosco film for night use as well.

———- forwarded ——

[QUOTE=The_LED_Museum]Good afternoon Hank,

I was able to shield the spectrometer from ambient radiation, and have
obtained the following spectra:

[img]http://ledmuseum.candlepower.us/30/asusfw.gif[/img]
Without F.Lux.
Color temperature 6500K.

[img]http://ledmuseum.candlepower.us/30/asusflux.gif[/img]
With F.Lux (color temperature set to coolest temperature {least blue
display}).
Color temperature 3400K.

As you can see, F.Lux doesn’t get rid of all the blue wavelengths — it
only removes some of them. But this is on an Asus VW246H 24 LCD flat-panel
monitor, which I believe uses a fluorescent backlightother monitors may
“lose” more of their blue light component when this program is used on them.

Re:Spectra: f.lux - doesn't change much re sleep

[ankhank]

here are filter gels you can put over any illumination source -- they show a spectral curve for transmission for each of the filter gels
The idea is to block the range around 450-500nm, the blue-green, that affects the receptors controlling melatonin.

http://www.rosco.com/filters/roscolux.cfm

for example: http://www.rosco.com/images/filters/roscolux/15.jpg

These work ok without preventing using the touchscreens of an iPhone or a Palm PDA too.

Re:Explains a lot

[Anonymous Coward]

This study is bunk. Melatonin production issues have been around LONG before back-lit screens ever came around (see Gallstones). Even if that weren't the case, the lifestyle of someone who spends a significant amount of time in front of a screen vs someone who doesn't likely has a much larger impact than a backlight.

Re:Explains a lot

[Anonymous Coward]

That's more like a cure for insomnia. Watch porn, rub one out, pass out instantly when you hit the sack and sleep like a rock.

They need to do another study

[undefinedreference]

To see how these goggle affect the wearer's sex lives. I bet the results will be fascinating.

Re:Explains a lot

[nobodie]

I read with an ebook reader every night, it is light as a phone and with e-ink is not backlit. Win-win-win

Depends on reading material.*

[Anomalous Co-worker]

I use my iPad to read in bed, I always turn the brightness way down when reading, but I notice that how soon I go to sleep varies depending on the reading material. The right book can put me to sleep before I reach the end of the page. I recommend it as a means to go to sleep. Most books from O'Reilly will do it for me. *Assuming you ARE reading, not watching videos, or playing games, or anything else.