most popular:
66 Gas Saving Tips



most popular:
7 Best Electric Scooters


th comments
said: "Aw c'mon Maria, have a sense of humor. The author is awoman, and speaking as a DD myself, I find the concept hilarious! ..." [read]

Alejandro Mosquera said: "Great article, really informative, and also helpful links, thanks..." [read]

brian said: "Interesting idea; if only there wasn't sweatshop labor involved, I would take it more seriously...." [read]

Reverse Phone said: "I completely agree with all that here is told...." [read]

JML said: ""Just about the only thing going up in price faster than gasoline is helium." Maybe, but airships don't use the helium as fuel for thrust, ..." [read]

Lights Out Ladies: Brightly-Lit Neighbourhoods Associated With Breast Cancer

by Karin Kloosterman, Jerusalem, Israel on 03. 3.08
Food & Health

breast%20cancer%20treehugger.jpg

Women who live in well-lit neighborhoods are at a greater risk for developing breast cancer than those who live in darker areas, find Israeli scientists.

The clincher is that energy efficient lightbulbs may be a culprit too, they write in the journal Chronobiology International. Time to go back to the Dark Ages?

The new study was led by chronobiologist Prof. Avraham Haim from the University of Haifa. He studied satellite images from NASA to see how much light was emitted from neighborhoods throughout Israel. He compared these light levels with breast cancer statistics from Israel's National Cancer Registry.

Rates of breast cancer in areas with "average" night lighting was 37 percent higher than in communities with the lowest amount of light, while the rate was a further 27 percent higher in areas with the highest amount of outdoor lighting, reports ISRAEL21c.

The findings of the study support the theory that exposure to too much light at night interferes with the production of a key hormone, melatonin, raising the risk of breast cancer.

Haim also warned that the study's findings raise questions about the increasing use of low energy fluorescent bulbs. These have been found to suppress melatonin production more than traditional light bulbs, he said.

Melatonin is a powerful antioxidant that suppresses and minimizes the formation of tumors. The hormone is produced by the pineal gland in the brain, primarily at night. Levels drop dramatically in the presence of light, particularly light produced by computer screens and energy-efficient fluorescent bulbs.

"Thomas Edison's invention of the electric light bulb was great and changed the world, but what does it do to health?" Haim said in The Jerusalem Post. "Light is not only a source of pollution, but also a carcinogen, and this should be taken into consideration."

TreeHugger related :: Health Care Without Harm: a Hippocratic Waste Oath ::Pure Prevention: Breast Cancer and the Environment ::Quote of the Day: Jeanne Rizzo on Cancer and the Environment ::How To Green Your Personal Care::Recycle For Breast Cancer

::Israel21c

Comments (6)

I am all for getting rid of light pollution, but this study is mighty suspect. It seems to me increased street lighting is something of a proxy for increased urbanization, which means increased pollution from traffic, increased fast food consumption, decreased exercise, fewer trees, increased air pollution, etc.

This is interesting and merits further study, but for the millionth time: correlation is not causation.

jump to top DB says:

If I were to take a guess, I would say melatonin production is triggered by the absence of blue (sun) light. I read earlier that blue light can help keep people awake more so than other types of light, and we know florescent lights typically have a higher color temperature than incandescent lights.

I also read that loud sounds at night can raise blood pressure, whether or not those sounds wake the person up. So to all the people who sleep in the same room as their computers, and most especially the ones who have them decorated with blue lights, it's probably a good idea to turn them off at night.

jump to top Zol Hooper says:

Yah, I read about this in the Globe and Mail a year ago.

jump to top Brooke says:

brilliant photo.

jump to top Anonymous says:

haha, yeah, that photo is perfect, didnt notice it resembled breasts at first.

and
'Time to go back to the Dark Ages?' = yes. as in less light/energy used as a whole.

jump to top Blue says:

Its high time the uk government was forced to make responsible disposal of rubbish including batteries and the 'new' low energy lightbulbs mandatory - I now have a houseful of these and appreciate that the difference in energy consumption is massive but am also very concerned at the mercury that will in time be leaking into landfills and then into the rivers etc.

Regarding the light pollution issues I think there are several factors here - for personal protection surely thicker curtains or blackout blind are a must but the real problem of light pollution is much further reaching than this - drive down many motorways in the 'smll hours' or little travelled urban areas and the lighting seems excessive not only wasting energy and contribution to global warming but also disrupting the normal cycle of many birds and animals - I cant believe that more intelligent lighting isnt possible?

jump to top kerry says:

Post a comment

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

th ads
th top picks
th ads