This article was downloaded by: [Baskent Universitesi]On: 20 December 2014, At: 06:39Publisher: Taylor & FrancisInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

LEUKOS: The Journal of the Illuminating EngineeringSociety of North AmericaPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ulks20

The Next Big Thing. Maybe.David L. DiLaura FIES, LCPublished online: 16 Sep 2013.

To cite this article: David L. DiLaura FIES, LC (2005) The Next Big Thing. Maybe., LEUKOS: The Journal of the IlluminatingEngineering Society of North America, 2:1, 4-6, DOI: 10.1080/15502724.2005.10732034

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15502724.2005.10732034

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) containedin the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of theContent. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon andshould be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable forany losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use ofthe Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematicreproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

L E U K O S V O L 2 N O 1 J U L Y 2 0 0 5 P A G E S 4 - 6

4

Editorial

The Next Big Thing. Maybe.David L. DiLaura, FIES, LC

he utterly unexpected discovery of another set of photoreceptors in the human retina (Berson, Dunn, and Takao 2002) sparked not only new

and interesting neural vision research, but an awakening within the lighting community of a much-heightened consciousness of what is now broadly referred to as “light and health.” Shigang has provided a readable review of this and other developments in the understanding of retinal circuitry (Shigang and others 2003), and Boyce has given an informed view of the effect that knowledge (or its lack) of the non-visual effects of light may have on lighting research and applications (Boyce 2003). The next big thing. One aspect of these new findings is a clearer understanding of how light entrains our biological clock, affects our sleep, and can change our hormonal chemistry. Calling all this “circadian photobiology” gives name to something that may have immediate and important effects on lighting. Early proponents have already offered ways in which circadian photobiology can be used to modify current lighting practice and recommendations (Rea and others 2002; van Bommel and van den Beld 2004). But these have met with calls for caution, circumspection, and integration into existing processes for generating recommendations and design practice standards. The drollest of the British commentators stated that

My general point is that whilst biological science is very interesting, it is insufficiently developed for general application to lighting design.

It has ever been so: our understanding of the fundamental neural, physiological, and psychological mechanisms that underlie our use of and reaction to light get clearer but never clear, thwarted by the staggering complexity of vision and seeing. Nevertheless, we have used what we have known, however incomplete, and established recommendations and touted best practices. That is, we have delivered lighting. And that is why “light and vision” has never been and will not ever be the same as “lighting and vision.” And so it is that “light and health” is not “lighting and health.” Our most difficult, immediate task will be to determine when we are prepared to let photobiology affect our recommendations and design practices. That is, to agree not when these things are clear, but rather when they are clear enough. Our risk is double-edged: acting too soon or waiting too long. There are certainly dangers (though that is a strong word) with acting too soon. After a presentation on “light and health” at a recent conference, I shared a luncheon table with a participant who was all but rubbing his

T

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Bas

kent

Uni

vers

itesi

] at

06:

39 2

0 D

ecem

ber

2014

L E U K O S V O L 2 N O 1 J U L Y 2 0 0 5 P A G E S 4 - 6

5

hands at the seemingly-immediate prospects of having “another way to make sure the public uses lighting professionals.” I pictured him not satisfied until no one would dare reach for a ‘light bulb’ on the shelf at the supermarket without putting in a call to their consulting endocrinologist. Or that lamps would come to be called “photobiological electromagnetic health systems.” There has always been public confusion and then backlash, indifference, and cynicism when science is rushed into policy (“so what food is good for me this week?”) But I believe it is a greater mistake for our industry to wait too long. Taking the initiative will be important; otherwise we may find matters pulled from our hands. We must determine how to make it clear that, like water and air, light is something that we all need and, like water and air, has qualities that take some arranging if they are to be adequately and economically delivered. It may be that a chemist really knows water, but it is a water resources engineer that actually gets clean water to the tap. Can we make it clear to a wider constituency that there is a precise parallel to this with light and lighting? We must. To some extent, this process has begun. In November of 2002, the Lighting Research Office sponsored the 5th International Lighting Research Symposium: Light and Human Health. Proceedings can be obtained at http://www.epri.com/LRO/preprints.html. In September of 2004, the CIE organized a well-attended symposium on “Lighting and Health” and its proceedings can be obtained at http://www.techstreet.com/ciegate.tmpl. Interestingly, the scientists outnumbered the lighting professionals 2 to 1 at the CIE symposium. The ratio needs to be the other way around. In addition to these events, more information needs to appear in a form that is directly accessible by and useful to the lighting professional. Prof. J. Aizenberg, editor of Sveto Tekhnika, Russia’s lighting journal, has been particularly active in this regard. At his instigation, he, Prof. D. L. Loe, chairman of the editorial board of Britain’s Lighting Research and Technology, and I have been exchanging ideas about what the three lighting journals we oversee can do in this regard. Prof Loe prompted us to broaden our scope to include the psychological aspects of light—a wider definition of ‘health’ if you will, with the hope of establishing a context sufficiently broad so that any discussion and analysis of research results, generates something useful for lighting design. We hope to publish a series of invited papers on the emerging issue of lighting and health, to sponsor meetings that offer venues where lighting practitioners and scientists can meet and share information, and to publish the results of those meetings. As a start, this issue of LEUKOS contains an invited, overview paper on this subject by the president of the CIE, Prof. W van Bommel. Our industry must take the initiative in this matter since it seems that any assumptions about automatic, radical change in the public’s perception of the value of lighting are not justified. History does not predict a change will simply happen without effort on our part. The cynic will argue that based on what we currently understand from photobiology, we should sleep in very dark rooms and use only red night lights; and then will ask “What else of practical importance to lighting is there in all this? ” One answer might be to point to the outcome of a very recent research review commissioned by the American Psychiatric Association, showing that in trials, daily exposure to bright light is as effective as antidepressant drugs

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Bas

kent

Uni

vers

itesi

] at

06:

39 2

0 D

ecem

ber

2014

L E U K O S V O L 2 N O 1 J U L Y 2 0 0 5 P A G E S 4 - 6

6

in quelling seasonal affective disorder (SAD), or winter depression, and other forms of depression. The review concluded that:

This analysis of randomized, controlled trials suggests that bright light treatment and dawn simulation for seasonal affective disorder and bright light for nonseasonal depression are efficacious, with effect sizes equivalent to those in most antidepressant pharmacotherapy trials. (Golden and others 2005).

There. Light is as powerful as drugs in helping seasonal and other forms of depression. But how many in the lighting community are professionally prepared or ethically able to assume responsibility for what is not lighting design or illuminating engineering, but medical treatment? Few, if any. This is another manifestation of the difference between “light and health” and “lighting and health.” The question remains: What else of practical importance to lighting is there in all this? We don’t yet know, but unless we study the matter and answer the question, “lighting and health” may never become the next big thing. ____________________ Berson DM, Dunn FA, Takao M. 2002 Feb 8. Phototransduction by retinal ganglion cells that set the circadian clock. Science. 295: 1070-1073. Boyce PR. 2003. Lighting research for interiors: The beginning of the end or the end of the beginning. In: Proceedings of the 25th Session of the CIE; 25 June- 2 July; San Diego. Vienna: CIE. 1: 34-42. Golden RN, Gaynes BN, Ekstrom RD, Hamer RM, Jacobsen FM, Suppes T, Wisner KL, Nemeroff CB. 2005. The efficacy of light therapy in the treatment of mood disorders: A review and meta-analysis of the evidence. Am J Psychiatry 162: 656-662. Rea MS, Figueiro MG, Bullough JD. 2002. Circadian photobiology: an emerging framework for lighting practice and research. Lighting Res Tech. 34(3): 177-190. Shigang H, Dong W, Deng Q, Weng S, Sun W. 2003 Oct 17. Seeing more clearly: Recent advances in understanding retinal circuitry. Science. 302: 408-411. van Bommel WJM, van den Beld GJ. 2004. Lighting for work: a review of visual and biological effects. Lighting Res Tech. 36(4):255-269.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Bas

kent

Uni

vers

itesi

] at

06:

39 2

0 D

ecem

ber

2014