Blue light filters don't work – controlling total luminance is a better bet

Re:Blue light filters don't work – controlling total luminan... by disillusioned on Saturday February 21, 2026 @03:49AM (#47098790)

To the extent that there's some sort of clinical statistically significant lift over, say, however you might control for a placebo here, who knows? To the extent that it's working for you in a meaningful way, placebo or not... does it even matter? If they're working for you, they're tautologically not a scam, except insofar as you find yourself missing out on benefits promised that aren't being realized, or you feel that the price you've paid is disproportionate to the benefit because some much cheaper option exists in some sense.

Put another way, placebo or not, if there's an effect, and it's a positive one for you, it really doesn't matter. It's working.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Blue light filters don't work – controlling total luminan... by 7bit on Saturday February 21, 2026 @06:54AM (#47099929)

The same could be said about homeopathy, but homeopathy is a scam.

The problem is, how do you define "if there's an effect"? A placebo can not have an effect, yet, it has.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Blue light filters don't work – controlling total luminan... by samtheDamned on Saturday February 21, 2026 @01:27PM (#47103301)

The whole point of placebo is that it has an effect though, just not one based on a real change.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Blue light filters don't work – controlling total luminan... by storus on Saturday February 21, 2026 @02:14PM (#47103716)

That won't work for immediate relief; placebo is studied statistically as a cumulative change over a period of time. Not when I put Gunnars over my sore eyes from computing too much and get immediate relief. Frankly, I find this discussion a bit insane, a bunch of people trying to persuade me "it's all in my head" because they align with the opposite opinion, not with reality.

[ Parent | on HN ]