From an advertisement for Harpers Magazine, May 2022 Issue.

As the earth is getting warmer, it’s also getting brighter. About 83
percent of humans—and more than 99 percent of North Americans and
Europeans—live under light-polluted skies. The planet’s darkness has
become a rapidly dwindling resource with profound ecological and
biological effects. The lack of darkness has been linked to
cardiovascular disease, obesity, depression, diabetes, and even cancer.
Suzannah Showler reports on the burgeoning darkness conservation
movement and enumerates the losses we face as darkness becomes
endangered. “Our view of the stars and planets has been crucial to the
physical sciences, to navigation, to religion, to myth. Every culture
makes meaning from our vantage on the stars,” Showler writes. “In that
sense, artificial light is blotting out access to the primary source
text of our cultural heritage.” (End of advertisement).

I don't have enough background reading to comment on this nor sufficient
motivation to research further but it certainly sparks a passing
interest and will be a topic that some here will probably follow and
have insights to offer.

Among the things Titus G wrote:
> From an advertisement for Harpers Magazine, May 2022 Issue.
>
....
>The lack of darkness has been linked to
> cardiovascular disease, obesity, depression, diabetes, and even cancer.

"has been linked to" is a bit more definite than "is associated with", assuming it is meant literally and not just chosen from a thesaurus of scare words. I suspect the link is not as direct as walking through a well-lit parking lot causing these maladies, but runs through the lifestyle that has one running around so late at night. This disposes me to put these advertisers in the category of people who want one specific thing (possibly not even related to what they are advocating for) and who are willing to say anything to get it. This puts me in the mood to examine their motives more than their facts, which are thin on the ground anyway. This all leads to a joke about them using facts the way a drunk uses a lamppost, more for support than illumination, as is the use they are proposing for lampposts.

On a tangentially related note: I read somewhere recently a hypothesis that bright light is needed to trigger... a whatever, something in developing eyeballs, and keeping our kids cooped up indoors under artificial light much less intense than sunlight is responsible for their need for glasses. I follow it only on the level of a Just So Story, but if it is advocating any lifestyle change, at least it is doing so more subtly, and for a specific purpose, rather than everything from cancer to cultural heritage.

--
-Jack

On Fri, 29 Apr 2022 06:11:14 -0700 (PDT), Jack Bohn
<jack.bohn64@gmail.com> wrote:

>Among the things Titus G wrote:
>> From an advertisement for Harpers Magazine, May 2022 Issue.
>>
>...
>>The lack of darkness has been linked to
>> cardiovascular disease, obesity, depression, diabetes, and even cancer.
>
>"has been linked to" is a bit more definite than "is associated with", assuming it is meant literally and not just chosen from a thesaurus of scare words. I suspect the link is not as direct as walking through a well-lit parking lot causing these maladies, but runs through the lifestyle that has one running around so late at night. This disposes me to put these advertisers in the category of people who want one specific thing (possibly not even related to what they are advocating for) and who are willing to say anything to get it. This puts me in the mood to examine their motives more than their facts, which are thin on the ground anyway. This all leads to a joke about them using facts the way a drunk uses a lamppost, more for support than illumination, as is the use they are proposing for lampposts.
>
>On a tangentially related note: I read somewhere recently a hypothesis that bright light is needed to trigger... a whatever, something in developing eyeballs, and keeping our kids cooped up indoors under artificial light much less intense than sunlight is responsible for their need for glasses. I follow it only on the level of a Just So Story, but if it is advocating any lifestyle change, at least it is doing so more subtly, and for a specific purpose, rather than everything from cancer to cultural heritage.

The version I recall is that, if the kids aren't outside and /focusing
on the horizon/ (or, at least, something far far away) enough, the
eyeball does not develop properly and, yes, the need for far-vision
corrective lenses arises.

At least it proposes a physiological /reason/ for the claimed effect:
that we evolved (evolution was taken for granted here, although "were
created" would work just as well) to see into the far far distance and
proper ocular development requires it during childhood.

But it's still irritating think that our Mothers might have been
/right/ when they told us we would ruin our eyes watching so much TV.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."

On Friday, 29 April 2022 at 14:11:16 UTC+1, jack....@gmail.com wrote:
> Among the things Titus G wrote:
> > From an advertisement for Harpers Magazine, May 2022 Issue.
> >
> ...
> >The lack of darkness has been linked to
> > cardiovascular disease, obesity, depression, diabetes, and even cancer.
>
> "has been linked to" is a bit more definite than "is associated with", assuming it is meant literally and not just chosen from a thesaurus of scare words. I suspect the link is not as direct as walking through a well-lit parking lot causing these maladies, but runs through the lifestyle that has one running around so late at night. This disposes me to put these advertisers in the category of people who want one specific thing (possibly not even related to what they are advocating for) and who are willing to say anything to get it. This puts me in the mood to examine their motives more than their facts, which are thin on the ground anyway. This all leads to a joke about them using facts the way a drunk uses a lamppost, more for support than illumination, as is the use they are proposing for lampposts.

The claim appears under "Health" at <https://www.darksky.org>
It's mainly about staying up too late and/or melatonin.

Wikipedia says that the non-profit International Dark-Sky
Association was incorporated in 1988.

International Dark Sky Week ends on Saturday, I suppose
without a firework show.

> On a tangentially related note: I read somewhere recently a hypothesis that bright light is needed to trigger... a whatever, something in developing eyeballs, and keeping our kids cooped up indoors under artificial light much less intense than sunlight is responsible for their need for glasses. I follow it only on the level of a Just So Story, but if it is advocating any lifestyle change, at least it is doing so more subtly, and for a specific purpose, rather than everything from cancer to cultural heritage.

We have better artificial light in the 20th and 21st
centuries than we used to, I'd say.

Meanwhile, a "theory" that I've heard going around
is that "normal" sleep for human beings is to go to
bed when it's dark, get up a while later, I forget why,
then go to bed again until morning. Supposedly this
only quite recently ceased to happen but we've
forgotten or covered it up or something. Actual
evidence is, um, light.

In article <on2o6h91uiia9fsuan0iddcjnpt7e26bar@4ax.com>,
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:

> On Fri, 29 Apr 2022 06:11:14 -0700 (PDT), Jack Bohn
> <jack.bohn64@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Among the things Titus G wrote:
> >> From an advertisement for Harpers Magazine, May 2022 Issue.
> >>
> >...
> >>The lack of darkness has been linked to
> >> cardiovascular disease, obesity, depression, diabetes, and even cancer.
> >

<Snip>
> >
> >On a tangentially related note: I read somewhere recently a hypothesis that
> >bright light is needed to trigger... a whatever, something in developing
> >eyeballs, and keeping our kids cooped up indoors under artificial light much
> >less intense than sunlight is responsible for their need for glasses. I
> >follow it only on the level of a Just So Story, but if it is advocating any
> >lifestyle change, at least it is doing so more subtly, and for a specific
> >purpose, rather than everything from cancer to cultural heritage.
>
<snip>
>
> At least it proposes a physiological /reason/ for the claimed effect:
> that we evolved (evolution was taken for granted here, although "were
> created" would work just as well) to see into the far far distance and
> proper ocular development requires it during childhood.
>
> But it's still irritating think that our Mothers might have been
> /right/ when they told us we would ruin our eyes watching so much TV.

From a conversation between baby-boomer SF fans in the mid-70s:

"Did you notice that we are all wearing glasses?"

Reading books indoors hours on end would cause the problem as well.

--
"We have advanced to new and surprising levels of bafflement."
Imperial Auditor Miles Vorkosigan describes progress in _Komarr_.
-------------------------------------------------------
Robert Woodward robertaw@drizzle.com

On 29/04/2022 11.03, Robert Carnegie wrote:

> We have better artificial light in the 20th and 21st
> centuries than we used to, I'd say.
>
> Meanwhile, a "theory" that I've heard going around
> is that "normal" sleep for human beings is to go to
> bed when it's dark, get up a while later, I forget why,
> then go to bed again until morning. Supposedly this
> only quite recently ceased to happen but we've
> forgotten or covered it up or something. Actual
> evidence is, um, light.

It seems, from what I can find, that this was primarily in
the British Isles and western Europe. Evidence is mostly
in the form of written references (in diaries and such) to
"first sleep" and "second sleep".

--
Michael F. Stemper
Deuteronomy 24:17

On Friday, April 29, 2022 at 5:55:39 AM UTC+1, Titus G wrote:
> From an advertisement for Harpers Magazine, May 2022 Issue.
>
> As the earth is getting warmer, it’s also getting brighter. About 83
> percent of humans—and more than 99 percent of North Americans and
> Europeans—live under light-polluted skies. The planet’s darkness has
> become a rapidly dwindling resource with profound ecological and
> biological effects. The lack of darkness has been linked to
> cardiovascular disease, obesity, depression, diabetes, and even cancer.
> Suzannah Showler reports on the burgeoning darkness conservation
> movement and enumerates the losses we face as darkness becomes
> endangered. “Our view of the stars and planets has been crucial to the
> physical sciences, to navigation, to religion, to myth. Every culture
> makes meaning from our vantage on the stars,” Showler writes. “In that
> sense, artificial light is blotting out access to the primary source
> text of our cultural heritage.” (End of advertisement).
>
> I don't have enough background reading to comment on this nor sufficient
> motivation to research further but it certainly sparks a passing
> interest and will be a topic that some here will probably follow and
> have insights to offer.

Not everybody's life would be improved by cutting back on artificial light. My eyesight has always been bad enough that I do not benefit much from a clear night sky - I can see that the moon is out, and I might also detect venus, but that's about it. Most of my various eyesight problems are alleviated by good light and worsened by darkness. The reduction of street lighting would significantly restrict me, especially commuting to work in the winter.

On 2022-04-29, Titus G <noone@nowhere.com> wrote:

> From an advertisement for Harpers Magazine, May 2022 Issue.
>
> As the earth is getting warmer, it’s also getting brighter. About 83
> percent of humans—and more than 99 percent of North Americans and
> Europeans—live under light-polluted skies. The planet’s darkness has
> become a rapidly dwindling resource with profound ecological and
> biological effects. The lack of darkness has been linked to

Lies, all lies! It is never dark at night. I have seen countless
movies and TV shows where people roam around at night and there is
always plenty of light to see by. In _Barbarians_ they rode at
speed through the forests of Germania at night! Clearly this
universal depiction must be an accurate reflection of reality.
Don't be taken in by fake news that say otherwise!

--
Christian "naddy" Weisgerber naddy@mips.inka.de

On 2022-04-29, Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:

> The version I recall is that, if the kids aren't outside and /focusing
> on the horizon/ (or, at least, something far far away) enough, the
> eyeball does not develop properly and, yes, the need for far-vision
> corrective lenses arises.

See the severe epidemic of near-sightedness in East Asian countries
where cramming for school has top priority.

(I understand it affects South Korea as well, so not all blame can
be laid at the feet of the Chinese script.)

> But it's still irritating think that our Mothers might have been
> /right/ when they told us we would ruin our eyes watching so much TV.

More importantly, they should have warned you against spending too
much time reading books, including school books...

--
Christian "naddy" Weisgerber naddy@mips.inka.de

On 2022-04-29, Robert Carnegie <rja.carnegie@excite.com> wrote:

> The claim appears under "Health" at <https://www.darksky.org>
> It's mainly about staying up too late and/or melatonin.

Somewhat related, one of the more interesting articles I've seen
in PLOS _Biology_ lately:

Consensus View
"Recommendations for daytime, evening, and nighttime indoor light
exposure to best support physiology, sleep, and wakefulness in healthy
adults"
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3001571

--
Christian "naddy" Weisgerber naddy@mips.inka.de

On Friday, April 29, 2022 at 2:30:10 PM UTC-4, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
> On 2022-04-29, Titus G <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
> > From an advertisement for Harpers Magazine, May 2022 Issue.
> >
> > As the earth is getting warmer, it’s also getting brighter. About 83
> > percent of humans—and more than 99 percent of North Americans and
> > Europeans—live under light-polluted skies. The planet’s darkness has
> > become a rapidly dwindling resource with profound ecological and
> > biological effects. The lack of darkness has been linked to
> Lies, all lies! It is never dark at night. I have seen countless
> movies and TV shows where people roam around at night and there is
> always plenty of light to see by. In _Barbarians_ they rode at
> speed through the forests of Germania at night! Clearly this
> universal depiction must be an accurate reflection of reality.
> Don't be taken in by fake news that say otherwise!
> --
> Christian "naddy" Weisgerber na...@mips.inka.de

I live out in the country. No streetlights.

Some nights, if I walk outside, It's literally dark
enough that I can walk into a parked car before
I see it.

Other nights, the moon is bright enough to see some
colors by.

pt

On Friday, April 29, 2022 at 2:30:10 PM UTC-4, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
> On 2022-04-29, Robert Carnegie <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote:
>
> > The claim appears under "Health" at <https://www.darksky.org>
> > It's mainly about staying up too late and/or melatonin.
> Somewhat related, one of the more interesting articles I've seen
> in PLOS _Biology_ lately:
>
> Consensus View
> "Recommendations for daytime, evening, and nighttime indoor light
> exposure to best support physiology, sleep, and wakefulness in healthy
> adults"
> https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3001571
>

I did a quick Google Scholar search and found this, among others:

Nighttime Lights, Urban Features, Household Poverty, Depression, and Obesity. / Liao, Yi-An; Garcia-Mondragon, Liliana ; Konac, Deniz; Liu, Xiaoxuan; Ing, Alex; Goldblatt, Ran; Barker, Edward.
In: CURRENT PSYCHOLOGY, 20.01.2022.
https://kclpure.kcl.ac.uk/portal/files/166849633/CP_Liao_et_al.2022.pdf

On Fri, 29 Apr 2022 17:58:16 -0000 (UTC), Christian Weisgerber
<naddy@mips.inka.de> wrote:

>On 2022-04-29, Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
>
>> The version I recall is that, if the kids aren't outside and /focusing
>> on the horizon/ (or, at least, something far far away) enough, the
>> eyeball does not develop properly and, yes, the need for far-vision
>> corrective lenses arises.
>
>See the severe epidemic of near-sightedness in East Asian countries
>where cramming for school has top priority.
>
>(I understand it affects South Korea as well, so not all blame can
>be laid at the feet of the Chinese script.)
>
>> But it's still irritating think that our Mothers might have been
>> /right/ when they told us we would ruin our eyes watching so much TV.
>
>More importantly, they should have warned you against spending too
>much time reading books, including school books...

Mine didn't want me to be a bookworm but I was anyway. Vision is
still 20-15, only where it used to be that from the horizon down to a
couple of inches from my nose, it's now from about 2 feet in front of
me to 4 feet in front of me--anything closer or further requires
correction.

On Friday, April 29, 2022 at 5:29:36 PM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Apr 2022 17:58:16 -0000 (UTC), Christian Weisgerber
> <na...@mips.inka.de> wrote:
>
> >On 2022-04-29, Paul S Person <pspe...@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
> >
> >> The version I recall is that, if the kids aren't outside and /focusing
> >> on the horizon/ (or, at least, something far far away) enough, the
> >> eyeball does not develop properly and, yes, the need for far-vision
> >> corrective lenses arises.
> >
> >See the severe epidemic of near-sightedness in East Asian countries
> >where cramming for school has top priority.
> >
> >(I understand it affects South Korea as well, so not all blame can
> >be laid at the feet of the Chinese script.)
> >
> >> But it's still irritating think that our Mothers might have been
> >> /right/ when they told us we would ruin our eyes watching so much TV.
> >
> >More importantly, they should have warned you against spending too
> >much time reading books, including school books...
> Mine didn't want me to be a bookworm but I was anyway. Vision is
> still 20-15, only where it used to be that from the horizon down to a
> couple of inches from my nose, it's now from about 2 feet in front of
> me to 4 feet in front of me--anything closer or further requires
> correction.

Perhaps outdoor activities improve eyesight. Perhaps those with poor eyesight find outdoor activities more difficult and prefer reading. Perhaps in the distant past, those with poor eyesight did not survive to have kids, but now they do.

John

On Sat, 30 Apr 2022 07:06:14 -0700 (PDT), John Halpenny
<j.halpenny@rogers.com> wrote:

>On Friday, April 29, 2022 at 5:29:36 PM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:
>> On Fri, 29 Apr 2022 17:58:16 -0000 (UTC), Christian Weisgerber
>> <na...@mips.inka.de> wrote:
>>
>> >On 2022-04-29, Paul S Person <pspe...@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
>> >
>> >> The version I recall is that, if the kids aren't outside and /focusing
>> >> on the horizon/ (or, at least, something far far away) enough, the
>> >> eyeball does not develop properly and, yes, the need for far-vision
>> >> corrective lenses arises.
>> >
>> >See the severe epidemic of near-sightedness in East Asian countries
>> >where cramming for school has top priority.
>> >
>> >(I understand it affects South Korea as well, so not all blame can
>> >be laid at the feet of the Chinese script.)
>> >
>> >> But it's still irritating think that our Mothers might have been
>> >> /right/ when they told us we would ruin our eyes watching so much TV.
>> >
>> >More importantly, they should have warned you against spending too
>> >much time reading books, including school books...
>> Mine didn't want me to be a bookworm but I was anyway. Vision is
>> still 20-15, only where it used to be that from the horizon down to a
>> couple of inches from my nose, it's now from about 2 feet in front of
>> me to 4 feet in front of me--anything closer or further requires
>> correction.
>
>Perhaps outdoor activities improve eyesight. Perhaps those with poor eyesight find outdoor activities more difficult and prefer reading. Perhaps in the distant past, those with poor eyesight did not survive to have kids, but now they do.

Yes, I have often thought that the invention of eyeglasses was the
first step to the cybernetic organism.

And, as it spread, a major opponent to Natural Selection.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."

On Fri, 29 Apr 2022 09:03:09 -0700 (PDT), Robert Carnegie
<rja.carnegie@excite.com> wrote:

>On Friday, 29 April 2022 at 14:11:16 UTC+1, jack....@gmail.com wrote:
>> Among the things Titus G wrote:
>> > From an advertisement for Harpers Magazine, May 2022 Issue.
>> >
>> ...
>> >The lack of darkness has been linked to
>> > cardiovascular disease, obesity, depression, diabetes, and even cancer.
>>
>> "has been linked to" is a bit more definite than "is associated with", assuming it is meant literally and not just chosen from a thesaurus of scare words. I suspect the link is not as direct as walking through a well-lit parking lot causing these maladies, but runs through the lifestyle that has one running around so late at night. This disposes me to put these advertisers in the category of people who want one specific thing (possibly not even related to what they are advocating for) and who are willing to say anything to get it. This puts me in the mood to examine their motives more than their facts, which are thin on the ground anyway. This all leads to a joke about them using facts the way a drunk uses a lamppost, more for support than illumination, as is the use they are proposing for lampposts.
>
>The claim appears under "Health" at <https://www.darksky.org>
>It's mainly about staying up too late and/or melatonin.
>
>Wikipedia says that the non-profit International Dark-Sky
>Association was incorporated in 1988.
>
>International Dark Sky Week ends on Saturday, I suppose
>without a firework show.
>
>> On a tangentially related note: I read somewhere recently a hypothesis that bright light is needed to trigger... a whatever, something in developing eyeballs, and keeping our kids cooped up indoors under artificial light much less intense than sunlight is responsible for their need for glasses. I follow it only on the level of a Just So Story, but if it is advocating any lifestyle change, at least it is doing so more subtly, and for a specific purpose, rather than everything from cancer to cultural heritage.
>
>We have better artificial light in the 20th and 21st
>centuries than we used to, I'd say.
>
>Meanwhile, a "theory" that I've heard going around
>is that "normal" sleep for human beings is to go to
>bed when it's dark, get up a while later, I forget why,
>then go to bed again until morning. Supposedly this
>only quite recently ceased to happen but we've
>forgotten or covered it up or something. Actual
>evidence is, um, light.

IIRC, what they did in the meantime was eat their fourth meal [1],
dress, and go to the theater. Or the concert hall. Or the ball.

These are 1%-ers we are talking about, of course. What the lower
orders did I have no idea. Well, I suppose those in service or in some
businesses would have been active as well.

[1] In the USA: Breakfast, Lunch, Dinner, Supper. When I joined the
Army in the late 60s, their three meals were: Breakfast, Dinner, and
Supper. This conformed to some parts of the country. Other parts (like
the one I came from) ate: Breakfast, Lunch, and Dinner. In Merry Old
England, I suspect, one of those would be named "Tea". Some of the
time, anyway.

When I was growing up, we had "Dessert" before we went to bed, which
might have been a vistigial form of the Fourth Meal.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."

On Fri, 29 Apr 2022 12:01:58 -0700 (PDT), "pete...@gmail.com"
<petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Friday, April 29, 2022 at 2:30:10 PM UTC-4, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
>> On 2022-04-29, Titus G <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>
>> > From an advertisement for Harpers Magazine, May 2022 Issue.
>> >
>> > As the earth is getting warmer, it’s also getting brighter. About 83
>> > percent of humans—and more than 99 percent of North Americans and
>> > Europeans—live under light-polluted skies. The planet’s darkness has
>> > become a rapidly dwindling resource with profound ecological and
>> > biological effects. The lack of darkness has been linked to
>> Lies, all lies! It is never dark at night. I have seen countless
>> movies and TV shows where people roam around at night and there is
>> always plenty of light to see by. In _Barbarians_ they rode at
>> speed through the forests of Germania at night! Clearly this
>> universal depiction must be an accurate reflection of reality.
>> Don't be taken in by fake news that say otherwise!
>> --
>> Christian "naddy" Weisgerber na...@mips.inka.de
>
>I live out in the country. No streetlights.
>
>Some nights, if I walk outside, It's literally dark
>enough that I can walk into a parked car before
>I see it.
>
>Other nights, the moon is bright enough to see some
>colors by.

When I was at Fort Riley, we were out in the same training area (a bit
of forest) several times. It was a very different experience when the
Moon was full compared to when it was new.

Of course, if you /want/ to be in darkness, all it takes is some
shutters, something to put over your eyes, or /closing your eyes/ to
produce it.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."

On Saturday, April 30, 2022 at 12:19:09 PM UTC-4, Paul S Person wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Apr 2022 09:03:09 -0700 (PDT), Robert Carnegie
> <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote:
>
> >On Friday, 29 April 2022 at 14:11:16 UTC+1, jack....@gmail.com wrote:
> >> Among the things Titus G wrote:
> >> > From an advertisement for Harpers Magazine, May 2022 Issue.
> >> >
> >> ...
> >> >The lack of darkness has been linked to
> >> > cardiovascular disease, obesity, depression, diabetes, and even cancer.
> >>
> >> "has been linked to" is a bit more definite than "is associated with", assuming it is meant literally and not just chosen from a thesaurus of scare words. I suspect the link is not as direct as walking through a well-lit parking lot causing these maladies, but runs through the lifestyle that has one running around so late at night. This disposes me to put these advertisers in the category of people who want one specific thing (possibly not even related to what they are advocating for) and who are willing to say anything to get it. This puts me in the mood to examine their motives more than their facts, which are thin on the ground anyway. This all leads to a joke about them using facts the way a drunk uses a lamppost, more for support than illumination, as is the use they are proposing for lampposts.
> >
> >The claim appears under "Health" at <https://www.darksky.org>
> >It's mainly about staying up too late and/or melatonin.
> >
> >Wikipedia says that the non-profit International Dark-Sky
> >Association was incorporated in 1988.
> >
> >International Dark Sky Week ends on Saturday, I suppose
> >without a firework show.
> >
> >> On a tangentially related note: I read somewhere recently a hypothesis that bright light is needed to trigger... a whatever, something in developing eyeballs, and keeping our kids cooped up indoors under artificial light much less intense than sunlight is responsible for their need for glasses. I follow it only on the level of a Just So Story, but if it is advocating any lifestyle change, at least it is doing so more subtly, and for a specific purpose, rather than everything from cancer to cultural heritage.
> >
> >We have better artificial light in the 20th and 21st
> >centuries than we used to, I'd say.
> >
> >Meanwhile, a "theory" that I've heard going around
> >is that "normal" sleep for human beings is to go to
> >bed when it's dark, get up a while later, I forget why,
> >then go to bed again until morning. Supposedly this
> >only quite recently ceased to happen but we've
> >forgotten or covered it up or something. Actual
> >evidence is, um, light.
> IIRC, what they did in the meantime was eat their fourth meal [1],
> dress, and go to the theater. Or the concert hall. Or the ball.

No, Robert is referring to the idea of 'second sleep', which claims
that pre-industrial people would wake up for an hour or two at night,
engage in activities, and then go back to sleep.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biphasic_and_polyphasic_sleep#As_historical_norm

Pt

On Sat, 30 Apr 2022 09:40:39 -0700 (PDT), "pete...@gmail.com"
<petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Saturday, April 30, 2022 at 12:19:09 PM UTC-4, Paul S Person wrote:
>> On Fri, 29 Apr 2022 09:03:09 -0700 (PDT), Robert Carnegie
>> <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote:
>>
>> >On Friday, 29 April 2022 at 14:11:16 UTC+1, jack....@gmail.com wrote:
>> >> Among the things Titus G wrote:
>> >> > From an advertisement for Harpers Magazine, May 2022 Issue.
>> >> >
>> >> ...
>> >> >The lack of darkness has been linked to
>> >> > cardiovascular disease, obesity, depression, diabetes, and even cancer.
>> >>
>> >> "has been linked to" is a bit more definite than "is associated with", assuming it is meant literally and not just chosen from a thesaurus of scare words. I suspect the link is not as direct as walking through a well-lit parking lot causing these maladies, but runs through the lifestyle that has one running around so late at night. This disposes me to put these advertisers in the category of people who want one specific thing (possibly not even related to what they are advocating for) and who are willing to say anything to get it. This puts me in the mood to examine their motives more than their facts, which are thin on the ground anyway. This all leads to a joke about them using facts the way a drunk uses a lamppost, more for support than illumination, as is the use they are proposing for lampposts.
>> >
>> >The claim appears under "Health" at <https://www.darksky.org>
>> >It's mainly about staying up too late and/or melatonin.
>> >
>> >Wikipedia says that the non-profit International Dark-Sky
>> >Association was incorporated in 1988.
>> >
>> >International Dark Sky Week ends on Saturday, I suppose
>> >without a firework show.
>> >
>> >> On a tangentially related note: I read somewhere recently a hypothesis that bright light is needed to trigger... a whatever, something in developing eyeballs, and keeping our kids cooped up indoors under artificial light much less intense than sunlight is responsible for their need for glasses. I follow it only on the level of a Just So Story, but if it is advocating any lifestyle change, at least it is doing so more subtly, and for a specific purpose, rather than everything from cancer to cultural heritage.
>> >
>> >We have better artificial light in the 20th and 21st
>> >centuries than we used to, I'd say.
>> >
>> >Meanwhile, a "theory" that I've heard going around
>> >is that "normal" sleep for human beings is to go to
>> >bed when it's dark, get up a while later, I forget why,
>> >then go to bed again until morning. Supposedly this
>> >only quite recently ceased to happen but we've
>> >forgotten or covered it up or something. Actual
>> >evidence is, um, light.
>> IIRC, what they did in the meantime was eat their fourth meal [1],
>> dress, and go to the theater. Or the concert hall. Or the ball.
>
>No, Robert is referring to the idea of 'second sleep', which claims
>that pre-industrial people would wake up for an hour or two at night,
>engage in activities, and then go back to sleep.
>
>https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biphasic_and_polyphasic_sleep#As_historical_norm

After a hard day of hunting, gathering, and avoiding cats, rest up a
bit, make babies, then go back to sleep to prepare for another hard
day of hunting, gathering, and avoiding cats.

On Saturday, April 30, 2022 at 10:05:47 AM UTC-6, Paul S Person wrote:

> Yes, I have often thought that the invention of eyeglasses was the
> first step to the cybernetic organism.
>
> And, as it spread, a major opponent to Natural Selection.

Just to _parts_ of Natural Selection. Selection pressure for
larger brains isn't removed, but isn't counteracted by natural
selection for other traits as much. So it's helping natural
selection do its job in helping humans evolve in the right
direction!

John Savard

On Friday, April 29, 2022 at 7:30:10 PM UTC+1, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
> On 2022-04-29, Paul S Person <pspe...@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
>
> > The version I recall is that, if the kids aren't outside and /focusing
> > on the horizon/ (or, at least, something far far away) enough, the
> > eyeball does not develop properly and, yes, the need for far-vision
> > corrective lenses arises.
> See the severe epidemic of near-sightedness in East Asian countries
> where cramming for school has top priority.
>
> (I understand it affects South Korea as well, so not all blame can
> be laid at the feet of the Chinese script.)
> > But it's still irritating think that our Mothers might have been
> > /right/ when they told us we would ruin our eyes watching so much TV.
> More importantly, they should have warned you against spending too
> much time reading books, including school books...
> --
> Christian "naddy" Weisgerber na...@mips.inka.de
The increase in myopia in the last few decades makes it perfectly clear that there has to be an environmental cause - the old idea of purely inherited myopia does not fit the facts. But AFAIK there is no equally obvious smoking gun that points out any particular environmental cause. My personal favourite is the red component of artificial light - the theory is that eyes use natural chromatic aberration to work out how to grow, and having lots of contrast at red wavelengths tells them that they need to grow more myopic to get the other parts of the spectrum into focus. Myopia is a big enough deal in East Asia (short sighted soldiers are less deadly) that there is a lot of effort going into working out how to teach kids without making them short sighted.

On 30/04/22 05:48, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
> On 2022-04-29, Titus G <noone@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
>> From an advertisement for Harpers Magazine, May 2022 Issue.
>>
>> As the earth is getting warmer, it’s also getting brighter. About 83
>> percent of humans—and more than 99 percent of North Americans and
>> Europeans—live under light-polluted skies. The planet’s darkness has
>> become a rapidly dwindling resource with profound ecological and
>> biological effects. The lack of darkness has been linked to
>
> Lies, all lies! It is never dark at night. I have seen countless
> movies and TV shows where people roam around at night and there is
> always plenty of light to see by. In _Barbarians_ they rode at
> speed through the forests of Germania at night! Clearly this
> universal depiction must be an accurate reflection of reality.
> Don't be taken in by fake news that say otherwise!
>
..
I believe this fake news is the current reality. The issue is that it is
NOW never dark at night whereas once it was black at night and white by
day. I have seen countless movies and TV shows where the only contrast
is between black and white and such things as violence in the night
could only be portrayed by grunts, cries for help and the sound of
things falling over IN THE DARKNESS!
P.S. Were those the famous underground forests in the well-known glow
worm caves of Germ Mania?

On 30/04/22 06:18, Andrew McDowell wrote:
> On Friday, April 29, 2022 at 5:55:39 AM UTC+1, Titus G wrote:
>> From an advertisement for Harpers Magazine, May 2022 Issue.
>>
>> As the earth is getting warmer, it’s also getting brighter. About
>> 83 percent of humans—and more than 99 percent of North Americans
>> and Europeans—live under light-polluted skies. The planet’s
>> darkness has become a rapidly dwindling resource with profound
>> ecological and biological effects. The lack of darkness has been
>> linked to cardiovascular disease, obesity, depression, diabetes,
>> and even cancer. Suzannah Showler reports on the burgeoning
>> darkness conservation movement and enumerates the losses we face as
>> darkness becomes endangered. “Our view of the stars and planets has
>> been crucial to the physical sciences, to navigation, to religion,
>> to myth. Every culture makes meaning from our vantage on the
>> stars,” Showler writes. “In that sense, artificial light is
>> blotting out access to the primary source text of our cultural
>> heritage.” (End of advertisement).
>>
>> I don't have enough background reading to comment on this nor
>> sufficient motivation to research further but it certainly sparks a
>> passing interest and will be a topic that some here will probably
>> follow and have insights to offer.
>
> Not everybody's life would be improved by cutting back on artificial
> light. My eyesight has always been bad enough that I do not benefit
> much from a clear night sky - I can see that the moon is out, and I
> might also detect venus, but that's about it.

There was an interesting article in the Guardian about an astronomical
visual illusion regarding Venus colliding with Jupiter and four planets
visible in a row with perhaps the naked eye or definitely with
binoculars. Northern Hemisphere.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2022/apr/30/jupiter-and-venus-will-seem-to-nearly-collide-in-rare-celestial-spectacle

Most of my various
> eyesight problems are alleviated by good light and worsened by
> darkness. The reduction of street lighting would significantly
> restrict me, especially commuting to work in the winter.

On 1/05/22 04:40, pete...@gmail.com wrote:
snip
>
> No, Robert is referring to the idea of 'second sleep', which claims
> that pre-industrial people would wake up for an hour or two at night,
> engage in activities, and then go back to sleep.
>
> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biphasic_and_polyphasic_sleep#As_historical_norm
>
> Pt

Fascinating.

On Saturday, April 30, 2022 at 7:32:24 PM UTC-4, Titus G wrote:
> On 30/04/22 06:18, Andrew McDowell wrote:
> > On Friday, April 29, 2022 at 5:55:39 AM UTC+1, Titus G wrote:
> >> From an advertisement for Harpers Magazine, May 2022 Issue.
> >>
> >> As the earth is getting warmer, it’s also getting brighter. About
> >> 83 percent of humans—and more than 99 percent of North Americans
> >> and Europeans—live under light-polluted skies. The planet’s
> >> darkness has become a rapidly dwindling resource with profound
> >> ecological and biological effects. The lack of darkness has been
> >> linked to cardiovascular disease, obesity, depression, diabetes,
> >> and even cancer. Suzannah Showler reports on the burgeoning
> >> darkness conservation movement and enumerates the losses we face as
> >> darkness becomes endangered. “Our view of the stars and planets has
> >> been crucial to the physical sciences, to navigation, to religion,
> >> to myth. Every culture makes meaning from our vantage on the
> >> stars,” Showler writes. “In that sense, artificial light is
> >> blotting out access to the primary source text of our cultural
> >> heritage.” (End of advertisement).
> >>
> >> I don't have enough background reading to comment on this nor
> >> sufficient motivation to research further but it certainly sparks a
> >> passing interest and will be a topic that some here will probably
> >> follow and have insights to offer.
> >
> > Not everybody's life would be improved by cutting back on artificial
> > light. My eyesight has always been bad enough that I do not benefit
> > much from a clear night sky - I can see that the moon is out, and I
> > might also detect venus, but that's about it.
> There was an interesting article in the Guardian about an astronomical
> visual illusion regarding Venus colliding with Jupiter and four planets
> visible in a row with perhaps the naked eye or definitely with
> binoculars. Northern Hemisphere.
>
> https://www.theguardian.com/science/2022/apr/30/jupiter-and-venus-will-seem-to-nearly-collide-in-rare-celestial-spectacle

It's just a conjunction. This is just a step up from the laziest of lazy journalism,
articles about full moons, "super moons", and "blood moons".

Pt