American Medical Association Adopts Resolution Supporting Energy-Efficient Outdoor Lighting That Reduces Glare And Light Pollution
At the 2009 Annual Meeting of the American Medical Association, held back in June, the AMA adopted the following resolution, which can be found here (PDF, page 40).
516. ADVOCATING AND SUPPORT FOR LIGHT POLLUTION CONTROL EFFORTS AND GLARE REDUCTION FOR BOTH PUBLIC SAFETY AND ENERGY SAVINGS
Introduced by Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont Delegations
HOUSE ACTION: ADOPTED
RESOLVED, That our American Medical Association advocate that all future outdoor lighting be of energy efficient designs to reduce waste of energy and production of greenhouse gasses that result from this wasted energy use; and be it further
RESOLVED, That our AMA support light pollution reduction efforts and glare reduction efforts at both the national and state levels; and be it further
RESOLVED, That our AMA support efforts to ensure all future streetlights be of a fully shielded design or similar non-glare design to improve the safety of our roadways for all, but especially vision impaired and older drivers.
This is powerful stuff, but is it really health related? I’m wondering if this is a great endorsement of good lighting design or a can of worms?
[...] The American Medical Association included a resolution advocating efforts to control light pollution and reduce glare on the agenda for its 2009 annual meeting in June. The list of resolutions runs the gamut from medical policy issues to matters further afield, such as the tax deductability of student loan payments and human rights in Sri Lanka. The resolution regarding outdoor lighting is number 516 out of 736 resolutions considered.The AMA Resolutions (PDF)Hat tip: LightNOW blog [...]
How absurd for the AMA to adopt an outdoor lighting resolution! So, maybe the lighting industry can adopt a resolution that all AMA Board certified doctors should have be of the the proper height/weight/body fat proportion in order to keep their licences.
Amazing that this was even discussed by the AMA…I can only think that it was proposed by a member of the Dark Sky Association that must also be a doctor.
I agree that it is odd that they would comment so far afield of their expertise. It would have been more interesting and appropriate if they had approached it from a light and health perspective. If the AMA wants to support changing outdoor lighting to have less impact on the circadian system of humans that would be important.