A scientific consensus, based on statements from scientists studying human circadian systems, finds that circadian disruption causes ill health
The Issue
For more than one hundred years, the lighting industry has primarily been driven by aesthetics, energy efficiency and product cost with little consideration paid to the effects of light on health. Recent widespread replacement of traditional artificial light sources with LED lights has heightened concerns about the negative impact of these blue-rich sources on the human circadian system, and the health disorders linked to circadian disruption. Despite these concerns, less than 0.5% of the lighting sold today is capable of modifying its spectral content and intensity between day and night. We report that 248 scientists, with a total of 2,697 peer-reviewed publications on light and circadian clocks since 2008, and reached consensus on 25 statements about the impact of light on circadian rhythms and health, based on accumulated scientific evidence. Chief among the consensus was including support for the widespread introduction of circadian lighting to the market, and warning labels on blue-enriched LED lights indicating they “may be harmful if used at night.”
1.0 Introduction
The timing, duration, intensity and spectral composition of ocular light exposure have a profound effect on circadian clocks and rhythmic physiological processes. The human circadian system has been entrained over 10,000 generations to the contrast between the bright daylight (10,000–100,000 lux) and nocturnal darkness (0.0001–0.1 lux) of the Earth’s 24-h cycle (Moore-Ede et al., 1982). However, for less than four generations over the past century, the natural 24-h cycle of daylight and darkness at night has been replaced in the developed world by electric light. Approximately 90% of our time is now spent indoors (Kleipeis et al., 2001) under electric light, that is, typically 100 times dimmer during the day than natural daylight and 100 times brighter after dusk than even the brightest moonlight.
The resulting circadian disruption–that is to say, the out-of-sync timing of our physiological and biochemical processes that occurs in the absence of robust circadian entrainment by light–has been studied extensively over the past 50 years (Moore-Ede et al., 1982; Fishbein et al., 2021). By 2007, there was sufficient evidence for the World Health Organization (WHO) International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) (Straif et al., 2007) to classify night shift work with circadian disruption as a probable (group 2 A) human carcinogen based on human epidemiological studies and research with animal models. Since then, a large number of studies have linked circadian disruption caused by inadequate exposure to light during daytime hours and exposure to electric light at night to a wide range of health disorders, including obesity, diabetes, heart disease, reproductive and psychiatric disorders, and certain endocrine-sensitive cancers, such as breast cancer (Bedrosian et al., 2016; Blask et al., 2011; Fishbein et al., 2021; Kim et al., 2023; Rüger and Scheer 2009; Stevens et al., 2013; Straif et al., 2007). The circadian clocks that regulate the timing of physiological processes, and the molecular mechanisms that control them as defined by 2017 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine winners Jeffrey Hall, Michael Rosbash and Michael Young (Van Laake et al., 2018), are uniquely sensitive to the blue content of visible light.
The obvious solution is to provide blue-rich light during the daytime to help entrain circadian rhythms and blue-depleted light during the evening hours to protect against circadian disruption. However, the $130 billion/year lighting industry, driven by energy-efficiency incentives, offers mostly unmodulated blue-chip LED light. Less than 0.5% (0.26/130 billion US dollars) of the lights sold today have any circadian supportive properties (Data Bridge Market Research 2023). Recognizing the importance of balancing energy efficiency and human health concerns, we sought to determine if a scientific consensus can be reached between currently active scientists, which would 1) clarify the core well-established findings of circadian lighting science, 2) provide direction to the lighting industry on the properties of the lights they should be manufacturing and marketing to promote health and wellbeing, 3) provide guidance to lighting consumers on the evidence-based characteristics of the lights they should be buying, and 4) provide the scientific community with guidance on unresolved questions and issues that should be prioritized in future scientific investigations.
1.1 Survey Design
Forty statements were developed for testing by the authors of this article. Thirty were potential factual conclusions summarizing the scientific literature with the following response options: 1) Don’t Know, 2) No Evidence, 3) Limited Evidence, 4) Good Evidence or 5) Well-Established. Five were potential practical advice conclusions about lighting with the same set of response options. The five remaining statements were potential expert policy statements based on the scientific literature with the following response options: 1) Don’t Know, 2) Strongly Disagree, 3) Disagree, 4) Agree or 5) Strongly Agree.
1.2 Definition of Consensus
In a large and diverse group of scientists addressing complex scientific questions, achieving unanimous agreement is not feasible or expected. In Delphi health policy consensus studies, where there are several rounds of feedback between participants enabling participants to change their minds and refine their answers based on new data and the judgments of their peers, 70%–75% agreement is often accepted as consensus (Barrios et al., 2021; de Raaff et al., 2017). In this single iteration survey, with no opportunity to revise answers based on feedback from other participants, we defined a consensus as when two-thirds of the respondents (66.7%) supported the statement. For evidence-based statements and practical advice statements, responses of “Good Evidence” and “Well-Established” were combined; for policy opinions, statements of “Agree” and “Strongly Agree” were combined.
2. Results
The ranking of support for every scientific statement is displayed below in the bar graph in Figure 1 (top chart), and the ranking of the expert opinions on practical applications in Figure 1 (bottom chart), with the red line indicating the 2/3 consensus threshold.
The first set of consensus statements related to the role of regular exposure to bright light during the day (daylight or bright indoor electric light) in enhancing the robust entrainment of circadian rhythms and maintaining health. There was strong consensus that robust circadian rhythms are important for health (95.1%) and that disrupting circadian rhythms can cause ill health (98.4%).
There was also consensus that increasing daytime light intensity indoors within the normal indoor intensity range of 50–500 lux enhances circadian entrainment and strengthens circadian rhythms (70.5%), improves daytime alertness and reduces sleepiness (74.7%).
The second set of consensus statements related to the impact of electric light at night. There was strong consensus that increasing indoor light intensity at night increases the disruption of circadian rhythms (90.6%) and increases the suppression of nocturnal melatonin production (94.6%). There was also consensus that repetitive and prolonged exposure to nighttime light bright enough to cause circadian disruption increases the risk of breast cancer in women (67.6%), obesity and diabetes (74.7%), and sleep disorders (87.4%).
The third set of consensus statements related to the impact of the blue wavelengths present within white illumination on the human circadian system. There was strong consensus that “the sensitivity peak of the ipRGC melanopic receptors in the human retina is approximately 480 nm in the blue part of the visible spectrum” (97.2%) and that “the most potent wavelengths for circadian entrainment are 460–495 nm blue light near to the sensitivity peak of the ipRGC melanopic receptors” (92.7%).
The fourth set of consensus statements related to the practical application of circadian science to lighting. There was consensus that “light used in the evening (during the 3 hours before bedtime) should have as little blue content as practically possible” (82.5%) and that “the risk of circadian disruption during the 3 hours before bedtime can be reduced either by 1) dimming indoor lighting which may compromise the ability to perform visual work tasks, or 2) reducing the blue content of indoor lighting maintained at the intensity required for visual tasks” (72.0%).
The participants were also asked their expert opinion about the implications of circadian science for the design and implementation of lighting. There was consensus that “the blue content of light entering the eyes is much more important in determining circadian health outcomes than the correlated color temperature (CCT) of the light source” (86.7%) and “increasing the energy efficiency of lights is desirable, but not if it increases the risks of causing circadian disruption and serious illness (93.2%).
Summarizing their expert opinion, there was consensus that “there is now sufficient evidence to support the widespread introduction of circadian lighting that adjusts light intensity and blue content across day and night to maintain robust circadian entrainment and health (85.9%), and “LED lights with high 460–495 nm blue content should carry the warning label “maybe harmful if used at night” (79.1%). Respondents also reached consensus that “there is significant variation in individual sensitivity to light, therefore circadian lighting should be optimized where possible using personalized solutions” (90.6%).
Figure 1
Ranking of level of support for each statement. Top: Scientific statements. Bottom: Opinions on practical applications. Statement support was based on the combination of the response options “well established” and “good evidence” (scientific statements), and on the combination of the response options “strongly agree” and agree” (opinions). Vertical red line = 66.6% consensus level. LAN = Light at Night.
References
Bailes, H. J., and Lucas, R. J. (2013). Human melanopsin forms a pigment maximally sensitive to blue light (λ max ≈ 479 nm) supporting activation of Gq/11 and Gi/o signalling cascades. Proc. Biol. Sci. 280, 20122987. doi:10.1098/rspb.2012.2987
PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar
Balserak, B., Hermann, R., Hernandez, T. L., Buhimschi, C., and Park, C. (2022). Evening blue-light exposure, maternal glucose, and infant birthweight. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 1515 (1), 276–284. doi:10.1111/nyas.14852PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar
Cain, S. W., McGlashan, E. M., Vidafar, P., Mustafovska, J., Curran, S., Wang, X., et al. (2020). Evening home lighting adversely impacts the circadian system and sleep. Sci. Rep. 10, 19110. doi:10.1038/s41598-020-75622-4
PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar
California Assembly Bill (2022). Fluorescent lamps: sale and distribution: prohibition. Available at: https://legiscan.com/CA/text/AB2208/2021 (Accessed May 30, 2023).
David, A., Sahlhoff, D., and Wisser, M. (2019). Human perception of light chromaticity: short-wavelength effects in spectra with low circadian stimulation, and broader implications for general LED sources. Opt. Express 27 (22), 31553. doi:10.1364/ OE.27.031553
PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar
Directorate-General for Energy (2018). New lightbulb rules will enable household energy savings and help reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Brussels, Belgium: European Commission.
Engwall, M., Fridh, I., Jutengren, G., Bergbom, I., Sterner, A., and Lindahl, B. (2017). The effect of cycled lighting in the intensive care unit on sleep, activity and physiological parameters: A pilot study. Intensive Crit. Care Nurs. 41, 26–32. doi:10.1016/j.iccn.2017.01.009
PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar
Esposito, T., and Houser, K. (2022). Correlated color temperature is not a suitable proxy for the biological potency of light. Sci. Rep. 12, 20223. doi:10.1038/s41598-022- 21755-7
PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar
Figueiro, M. G., Plitnick, B. A., Lok, A., Jones, G. E., Higgins, P., Hornick, T. R., et al. (2014). Tailored lighting intervention improves measures of sleep, depression, and agitation in persons with Alzheimer’s disease and related dementia living in long-term care facilities. Clin. Interv. Aging 9, 1527–1537. doi:10.2147/CIA.S68557
PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar
Gibney, E. (2014). Nobel for blue LED that revolutionized lighting. Nature 514, 152–153. doi:10.1038/514152a
PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar
Grant, L. K., St Hilaire, M. A., Heller, J. P., Heller, R. A., Lockley, S. W., and Rahman, S.A. (2022). Impact of upgraded lighting on falls in care home residents. J. Am. Med. Dir. Assoc. 23 (10), 1698–1704.e2. doi:10.1016/j.jamda.2022.06.013
PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar
Griepentrog, J. E., Labiner, H. E., Gunn, S. R., and Rosengart, M. R. (2018). Bright environmental light improves the sleepiness of nightshift ICU nurses. Crit. Care 22 (1), 295. doi:10.1186/s13054-018-2233-4
PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar
He, C., Anand, S. T., Ebell, M. H., Vena, J. E., and Robb, S. W. (2015). Circadian disrupting exposures and breast cancer risk: A meta-analysis. Int. Arch. Occup. Environ. Health 88 (5), 533–547. doi:10.1007/s00420-014-0986-x
PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar
IARC Working Group on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans (2010). “Painting, firefighting, and shiftwork,” in IARC monographs on the evaluation of carcinogenic risks in humans (Lyon, France: WHO, IARC), 563–764.
PubMed Abstract | Google Scholar
Lai, Y. L., Sarkar, C., Ni, M. Y., Gallacher, J., and Webster, C. (2020). Exposure to light at night (LAN) and risk of obesity: A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. Environ. Res. 187, 109637. doi:10.1016/j.envres.2020.109637
PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar
Moore-Ede, M., Heitmann, A., and Guttkuhn, R. (2020). Circadian potency spectrum with extended exposure to polychromatic white LED light under workplace conditions. J. Biol. Rhythms 35 (4), 405–415. doi:10.1177/0748730420923164
PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar
Moore-Ede, M. (2021). LEDs must spectrally balance illumination, circadian health, productivity, and energy efficiency. Pennsylvania: LED Magazine. Available at: https:// www.ledsmagazine.com/lighting-health-wellbeing/article/14199941/ideal-led-lighting- must-balance-multiple-objectives-magazine. (Accessed June 3, 2023)
Rahman, S. A., Marcu, S., Shapiro, C. M., Brown, T. J., and Casper, R. F. (2011). Spectral modulation attenuates molecular, endocrine, and neurobehavioral disruption induced by nocturnal light exposure. Am. J. Physiol. Endocrinol. Metab. 300 (3), 518–527. doi:10.1152/ajpendo.00597.2010
PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar
Rüger, M., St Hilaire, M. A., Brainard, G. C., Khalsa, S. B. S., Kronauer, R. E., Czeisler, 6. A., et al. (2013). Human phase response curve to a single 6.5 h pulse of short- wavelength light: blue light phase response curve. J. Physiol. 591, 353–363. doi:10.1113/ jphysiol.2012.239046
PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar
Schöllhorn, I., Stefani, O., Robert, J., Lucas, R. J., Spitschan, M., Slawik, H. C., et al. (2023). Melanopic irradiance defines the impact of evening display light on sleep latency, melatonin and alertness. Commun. Biol. 6 (1), 228. doi:10.1038/s42003-023- 04598-4
PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar
Simons, K. S., Laheij, R. J. F., van den Boogaard, M., Moviat, M. A., Paling, A. J., Polderman, F. N., et al. (2016). Dynamic light application therapy to reduce the incidence and duration of delirium in intensive-care patients: A randomised controlled trial. Lancet Respir. Med. 4 (3), 194–202. doi:10.1016/S2213-2600(16)00025-4
PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar
Sletten, T. L., Raman, B., Magee, M., Ferguson, S. A., Kennaway, D. J., Grunstein, R. R., et al. (2021). A blue-enriched, increased intensity light intervention to improve alertness and performance in rotating night shift workers in an operational setting. Nat. Sci. Sleep. 13, 647–657. doi:10.2147/NSS.S287097
PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar
Stenvres, D. J., Scheer, F. A. J. L., Schrauwen, P., la Fleur, S. E., and Kalsbeek, A. (2019). Circadian clocks and insulin resistance. Nat. Rev. Endocrinol. 15 (2), 75–89. doi:10. 1038/s41574-018-0122-1
PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar
PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar
Urbano, T., Vincenti, M., Wise, L. A., and Filippini, T. (2021). Light at night and risk of breast cancer: A systematic review and dose–response meta-analysis. Int. J. Health Geogr. 20, 44. doi:10.1186/s12942-021-00297-7
PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Energy (2022). Energy conservation program: definitions for general service lamps (final rule 87FR27461). Fed. Regist. 87 (89).
U.S. Department of Energy (2023). Energy conservation program: energy conservation standards for general service lamps: notice of proposed rulemaking and announcement of public meeting. Available at: https://www. federalregister.gov/documents/2023/01/11/2022-28072/energy-conservation- program-energy-conservation-standards-for-general-service-lamps (Accessed June 2, 2023).
U.S. National Toxicology Program (2021). NTP cancer hazard assessment report on night shift work and light at night. Research Triangle Park, NC, USA: U.S Department of Health and Human Services, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. Available at: https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/results/pubs/cancer_ assessment/lanfinal20210400_508.pdf.
Van Laake, L. W., Luscher, T. F., and Young, M. E. (2018). The circadian clock in cardiovascular regulation and disease: lessons from the Nobel prize in Physiology or Medicine 2017. Eur. Heart J. 39, 2326–2329. doi:10.1093/ eurheartj/ehx775
Vethe, D., Drews, H. J., Scott, J., Engstrøm, M., Heglum, H. S. M., Grønli, J., et al. (2022). Evening light environments can be designed to consolidate and increase the duration of REM-sleep. Sci. Rep. 12, 8719. doi:10.1038/s41598-022-12408-w
PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar
Vethe, D., Scott, J., Engstrøm, M., Salvesen, Ø., Sand, T., Olsen, A., et al. (2021). The evening light environment in hospitals can be designed to produce less disruptive effects on the circadian system and improve sleep. Sleep 44 (3), zsaa194–12. doi:10.1093/sleep/zsaa194
PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar
Zielinska-Dabkowska, K. M. (2018). Make lighting healthier. Nature 7688, 274–276. doi:10.1038/d41586-018-00568-7
