Cited by 76Circadian rhythm and melatoninImpact of Light on Environment and HealthSleep and Work-Related Fatigue

IS LIGHT-AT-NIGHT A HEALTH RISK FACTOR OR A HEALTH RISK PREDICTOR?

Kantermann, Thomas, Roenneberg, Till·2009·Chronobiology International

Abstract

In 2007, the IARC (WHO) has classified "shift-work that involves circadian disruption" as potentially carcinogenic. Ample evidence leaves no doubt that shift-work is detrimental for health, but the mechanisms behind this effect are not well understood. The hormone melatonin is often considered to be a causal link between night shift and tumor development. The underlying "light-at-night" (LAN) hypothesis is based on the following chain of arguments: melatonin is a hormone produced under the control of the circadian clock at night, and its synthesis can be suppressed by light; as an indolamine, it potentially acts as a scavenger of oxygen radicals, which in turn can damage DNA, which in turn can cause cancer. Although there is no experimental evidence that LAN is at the basis of increased cancer rates in shiftworkers, the scenario "light at night can cause cancer" influences research, medicine, the lighting industry and (via the media) also the general public, well beyond shiftwork. It is even suggested that baby-lights, TVs, computers, streetlights, moonlight, emergency lights, or any so-called "light pollution" by urban developments cause cancer via the mechanisms proposed by the LAN hypothesis. Our commentary addresses the growing concern surrounding light pollution. We revisit the arguments of the LAN theory and put them into perspective regarding circadian physiology, physical likelihood (e.g., what intensities reach the retina), and potential risks, specifically in non-shiftworkers.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3109/07420520903223984

Cites

44 of 44 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Epidemiologic studies that suggest light involvement in health risk mainly provide indirect evidence.

    “Therefore, epidemiologic studies that suggest light involvement in health risk 93, 94 mainly provide indirect evidence.”

    From The inner clock-Blue light sets the human rhythm (2019) · cites this paper as [94]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kantermann, T., & Roenneberg, T.
Affiliations
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (DE)
Corresponding author
Roenneberg, Till
Venue
Chronobiology International
Published
2009-08
Volume
26
Issue
6
Pages
1069-1074
ISSN
  • 0742-0528 (ISSN-L)
  • 1525-6073
OpenAlex
W2019145962
Cited by
76
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Chronobiology International (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (publishedVersion)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Endocrine and Autonomic Systems › Circadian rhythm and melatonin
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Impact of Light on Environment and Health
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and Work-Related Fatigue
Keywords
light at night, light pollution, shift work, circadian rhythm disruption, melatonin, cancer risk, circadian clock, DNA damage, oxidative stress, health risk factors, health risk prediction
MeSH terms
Circadian Rhythm, Environmental Exposure, Humans, Light, Neoplasms, Risk Factors, Chronobiology Disorders

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review