Remote Sensing Suggest Link Between Light at Night and Breast Cancer

About Directions

Calendar

Syndicate This Blog

RSS 0.91 feed

RSS 1.0 feed

RSS 2.0 feed

Top Referers

www.thegisforum.com (58)
atlas.ca.gov (45)
planetgs.com (29)
www.heartevents.nl (23)
friendfeed.com (21)

Special Announcement

Our Points

Thursday, February 21. 2008

Remote Sensing Suggest Link Between Light at Night and Breast Cancer

Update: Here are the details, via the Washington Post

"By no means are we saying that light at night is the only or the major risk factor for breast cancer," said Itai Kloog, of the University of Haifa in Israel, who led the new work. "But we found a clear and strong correlation that should be taken into consideration."

The report is in this week's online issue of the journal Chronobiology International.

--------minimalist original post --------

"Using NASA satellite imagery to plot high emissions of light at night, researchers found breast cancer rates were as much as 60-percent higher in high-light areas than in darker ones."

- NBC 12, Virginia

Posted by Adena Schutzberg in Remote Sensing at 07:51 | Comments (5) | Trackbacks (0)

Trackbacks

Trackback specific URI for this entry

No Trackbacks

Comments

Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

The article doesn't source who the "experts" and "researchers" are. Perhaps the relationship is due to there being 60 percent more population in areas with a lot of lights!

#1 Anonymous on 2008-02-21 19:10 (Reply)

This one is a bit on the far fetched side... and conjures up bad memories of that movie "Enemy of the State." I didn't realize that remote sensing could analyze light levels in my bedroom.

I bet that the same 'risk factor' analysis would show that people who live in 'higher light' areas earn more income per capita than those who don't, that they are less likely to eat vegetables from home gardens, and that they have more indoor-only cats. Hmm... I'd better go make sure my streetlight is working.

Wow... sorry to be so harsh... this is a bad combination of poorly interpreted statistics and 'cool' technology.

#2 Chris A on 2008-02-22 01:52 (Reply)

Indeed, I agree with Chris A: There are many, many confounding factors that could be at work here, far more plausible. For instance, high light concentrations may correlate with high breast cancer rates because they correlate with urban areas, and, so, with groundwater contamination, or with industrial pollutants, or with automobile exhaust. This is one of the kinds of things that Paulos rightly rants against.

#3 Jan Theodore Galkowski (Link) on 2008-02-22 07:36 (Reply)

Ding ding ding, we have a winner.

#3.1 Daniel (Link) on 2008-02-23 00:34 (Reply)

Hopefully the "rate" is a ratio of cases in relation to popultion and not a specific number of cases in that area. But, the higher breast cancer rates could do with density of people in a city as opposed to rural areas.

#4 Melissa on 2008-02-22 09:32 (Reply)

Agreed with previous posters, this research "conclusion" has autocorrelation written all over it!

#5 Anonymous on 2008-02-25 10:49 (Reply)

Add Comment

Name
Email
Homepage
In reply to
Comment	Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (word), underscore are made via _word_. Standard emoticons like :-) and ;-) are converted to images. E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly. Enter the string from the spam-prevention image above:
	Remember Information? Subscribe to this entry

Advertisers

Polls

What's your preferred format for electronic publications?

	July '09
Mon	Tue	Wed	Thu	Fri	Sat	Sun
		1	2	3	4	5
6	7	8	9	10	11	12
13	14	15	16	17	18	19
20	21	22	23	24	25	26
27	28	29	30	31