eye exposure to blue light ( ~ 500 nm )

Main Page | Report this Page

Science Forum Index » Medicine - Vision Forum » eye exposure to blue light ( ~ 500 nm )

Page 1 of 1

Author

Message

Guest

Posted: Sun Jun 10, 2007 10:50 pm

I'm hoping for some knowledgable feedback on this.

Suppose someone's eyes get beamed with blue light ( wavelengths around
500 nm ) for 10 full seconds. The person didn't close his eyes but
managed to slightly divert the direction of his stare. The light
source was around 20 inches away and was extremely strong to his
eyes.

The following morning, he wakes up with a headache and pain on his
right eye, both of which goes away in 1.5 weeks. It's been exactly a
month since the incident and he feels his vision is fine.

How likely is it that he suffered retinal/corneal damage from this?
Any permanent damages? Is there an increased likelihood for macular
degeneration, cataracts, etc. in the future from this event? Are
exposures from blue light cumulative in eye damage?

Guest

Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2007 6:11 am

On Jun 10, 11:50 pm, seagate1...@hotmail.com wrote:

Quote:

very unlikely. intense blue light is used during routine eye
examinations to visualize fluorescein staining.

Guest

Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2007 12:31 pm

On Jun 11, 7:11 am, p.clar...@gmail.com wrote:

Quote:

On Jun 10, 11:50 pm, seagate1...@hotmail.com wrote:

How likely is it that he suffered retinal/corneal damage from this?
Any permanent damages? Is there an increased likelihood for macular
degeneration, cataracts, etc. in the future from this event? Are
exposures from blue light cumulative in eye damage?

very unlikely. intense blue light is used during routine eye
examinations to visualize fluorescein staining.

But this isn't the same blue light for eye exams. Operators are warned
to shield their eyes for this one. Even a 1-2 second exposure to your
eyes ( even if you're not directly looking into it ) does cause
discomfort and even pain.

And this person also had headaches and eye pain for more than a week.

So even in this case, it's likely that the guy is alright and doesn't
require any treatment? Will this be cumulative towards other adverse
vision effects in the future? We're particularly worried about macular
degeneration, cataracts, glaucomas, ......anything that can induce
blindness now and into the future.

Thank you in advance.

Dave Bell

Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2007 1:11 pm

Guest

On Mon, 11 Jun 2007 seagate1556@hotmail.com wrote:

Quote:

On Jun 11, 7:11 am, p.clar...@gmail.com wrote:
On Jun 10, 11:50 pm, seagate1...@hotmail.com wrote:

How likely is it that he suffered retinal/corneal damage from this?
Any permanent damages? Is there an increased likelihood for macular
degeneration, cataracts, etc. in the future from this event? Are
exposures from blue light cumulative in eye damage?

very unlikely. intense blue light is used during routine eye
examinations to visualize fluorescein staining.

But this isn't the same blue light for eye exams. Operators are warned
to shield their eyes for this one. Even a 1-2 second exposure to your
eyes ( even if you're not directly looking into it ) does cause
discomfort and even pain.

And this person also had headaches and eye pain for more than a week.

So even in this case, it's likely that the guy is alright and doesn't
require any treatment? Will this be cumulative towards other adverse
vision effects in the future? We're particularly worried about macular
degeneration, cataracts, glaucomas, ......anything that can induce
blindness now and into the future.

Are you by any chance an attorney?

Guest

Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2007 2:37 pm

On Jun 11, 2:11 pm, Dave Bell <d...@TheSPAMFREEBells.net> wrote:

Quote:

Are you by any chance an attorney?--

No. My intentions behind the inquiry are strictly medical.

And by blue light, I don't mean an LED blue light. The blue light
we're talking about polymerizes photo-initiator camphorquinone in the
460-500 nm range. It's of industrial grade and operators are strictly
warned of eye hazards. Even if there aren't any current symptoms from
this incident, it's not easy for the laypeople to easily downplay,
especially if they aren't experts.

Feedback/input from eyecare professionals or knowledgable readers
would be highly appreciated.

John H.

Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2007 4:07 pm

Guest

I have heard, but not confirmed, that blue light is bad for the eyes. Anyone
know if this is true????

<seagate1556@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1181590626.800562.225380@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com...

Quote:

On Jun 11, 2:11 pm, Dave Bell <d...@TheSPAMFREEBells.net> wrote:

Are you by any chance an attorney?--

No. My intentions behind the inquiry are strictly medical.

And by blue light, I don't mean an LED blue light. The blue light
we're talking about polymerizes photo-initiator camphorquinone in the
460-500 nm range. It's of industrial grade and operators are strictly
warned of eye hazards. Even if there aren't any current symptoms from
this incident, it's not easy for the laypeople to easily downplay,
especially if they aren't experts.

Feedback/input from eyecare professionals or knowledgable readers
would be highly appreciated.

John H.

Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2007 4:17 pm

Guest

J Long Term Eff Med Implants. 2006;16(4):315-25. Links
Ultraviolet and short wavelength visible light exposure: why ultraviolet
protection alone is not adequate.
Reichow AW, Citek K, Edlich RF.
Pacific University College of Optometry, Forest Grove, OR 97116, USA.

The danger of exposure to ultraviolet (UV) radiation in both the natural
environment and artificial occupational settings has long been recognized by
national and international standards committees and worker safety agencies.
There is an increasing body of literature that suggests that protection from
UV exposure is not enough. Unprotected exposure to the short wavelengths of
the visible spectrum, termed the "blue light hazard", is gaining acceptance
as a true risk to long-term visual health. Global standards and experts in
the field are now warning that those individuals who spend considerable time
outdoors should seek sun filter eyewear with high impact resistant lenses
that provide 100% UV filtration, high levels of blue light filtration, and
full visual field lens/frame coverage as provided by high wrap eyewear. The
Skin Cancer Foundation has endorsed certain sunglasses as
"product[s]...effective [as] UV filter[s] for the eyes and surrounding
skin". However, such endorsement does not necessarily mean that the eyewear
meets all the protective needs for outdoor use. There are several brands
that offer products with such protective characteristics. Performance sun
eyewear by Nike Vision, available in both corrective and plano
(nonprescription) forms, is one such brand incorporating these protective
features.

PMID: 17073573 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

"John H." <bingblat@goaway.com.au> wrote in message
news:136reitpbuk7kd1@corp.supernews.com...

Quote:

I have heard, but not confirmed, that blue light is bad for the eyes.
Anyone
know if this is true????

seagate1556@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1181590626.800562.225380@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
On Jun 11, 2:11 pm, Dave Bell <d...@TheSPAMFREEBells.net> wrote:

Are you by any chance an attorney?--

No. My intentions behind the inquiry are strictly medical.

And by blue light, I don't mean an LED blue light. The blue light
we're talking about polymerizes photo-initiator camphorquinone in the
460-500 nm range. It's of industrial grade and operators are strictly
warned of eye hazards. Even if there aren't any current symptoms from
this incident, it's not easy for the laypeople to easily downplay,
especially if they aren't experts.

Feedback/input from eyecare professionals or knowledgable readers
would be highly appreciated.

michael toulch

Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2007 4:22 pm

Guest

On Jun 10, 11:50 pm, seagate1...@hotmail.com wrote:

Quote:

uv-A and even visible blue light are defintely linked to macular
degeneration.
you should absolutely be using eye protection if you are going to be
exposed.

spammer

Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2007 6:40 pm

Guest

On Jun 10, 11:50 pm, seagate1...@hotmail.com wrote:

Quote:

Only a direct exam by a doctor will answer any of these questions. Is
there a reason your friend would risk his eyesight on internet
diagnoses?

Guest

Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2007 9:38 pm

On Jun 11, 7:40 pm, spammer <sereb...@yahoo.com> wrote:

Quote:

Only a direct exam by a doctor will answer any of these questions. Is
there a reason your friend would risk his eyesight on internet
diagnoses?-

The incident occurred in early May.

So are you implying that his vision can worsen over time?

Guest

Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2007 9:43 pm

On Jun 11, 5:22 pm, michael toulch <michaeltou...@hotmail.com> wrote:

Quote:

uv-A and even visible blue light are defintely linked to macular
degeneration.
you should absolutely be using eye protection if you are going to be
exposed.-

Would the exposure be as harmful as getting beamed by a laser
pointer?

And for this instance of blue light, is it going to be highly
significant for macular degeneration in the future ( or near
future ? ) ?

Dr Judy

Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2007 9:59 am

Guest

On Jun 11, 3:37 pm, seagate1...@hotmail.com wrote:

Quote:

If this exposure happened in the workplace, the workplace safety
officier should be informed and will arrange for medical examination
of your friend as well as provide accurate information (as opposed to
this news group speculation) as to the short and long term effects.

Dr Judy

Don W

Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2007 10:23 am

Guest

Quote:

Only a direct exam by a doctor will answer any of these questions. Is
there a reason your friend would risk his eyesight on internet
diagnoses?-

The incident occurred in early May.

So are you implying that his vision can worsen over time?

I think he is implying your friend should see a doctor.

Don W.

spammer

Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2007 6:06 pm

Guest

On Jun 12, 11:23 am, Don W <dwil...@prodigy.net> wrote:

Quote:

DING! DING! DING! And why aren't other posters, especially so
called eye docs suggesting this?

Don W

Posted: Thu Jun 14, 2007 2:28 pm

Guest

There is one paper (Framme: "Noninvasive imaging and monitoring of
the retinal epithelium patterns using fundus autofluorescense",
Current Medical Imaging Reviews, 2005, (available on a Google
search)) that mentions their use of blue light. Essentially this
monitors the retinal response to blue light of 500 nm. The paper
states the level of the light they use and says it follows the safety
guidelines of the Laser Institute. Unfortunately, it is a pay for set
of guidelines. They are at:

http://www.laserinstitute.org/

Good luck.

Don W.

Page 1 of 1 All times are GMT - 5 Hours The time now is Sun Oct 12, 2008 1:41 am Science Forum Index