The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
But if you're going to explore 670 and 790 nanometer light for sake of enhancing neuronal function, set it at a distance that's comfortable to look at, and that doesn't force you to squint or doesn't make you feel uncomfortable physically, as if you need to turn away during the period of that two to three-minute illumination each day.
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 wavelength of light is important. It is red light and near-infrared light that is going to be effective in this scenario. The authors of this study emphasized that it was red light of 670 nanometers in wavelength and near-infrared light of 790 nanometers in wavelength that were effective and that those wavelengths could be complimentary.