Andrew Huberman· PhD
it looks like it's pretty clear now actually that it has maybe more to do with outdoor lighting time than just near work
The evidence is convergent. Multiple independent sources reach the same conclusion, the underlying mechanism is well-characterized, and even the field's most cautious voices treat it as worth doing.
it looks like it's pretty clear now actually that it has maybe more to do with outdoor lighting time than just near work
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
the kids who spend time Outdoors are are progress dressing in their nearsightedness less like their their nearsighted prescription is not getting as strong as the kids who are spending more time indoors
the eyeball lengthens you become nearsighted which is why spending two hours outside um even if on a tablet has been shown to offset myopia
but the light is really the most important driver of protection from nearsightedness
they've taken children and given them equal intervals of outdoor activity but the ones who had noontime outdoor activity did better than the ones who were outdoors at 8am where there was less illumination