Tag: Feedly

It turns out that your annoying friend who insists on closing all of the window blinds and covering all of the glowing electronics in a bedroom in order to sleep in total darkness is onto something. New research bolsters the well-established theory linking nighttime light to adverse health impacts.

A preliminary analysis set to be presented at the American Heart Association’s Scientific Sessions 2025, starting Friday, suggests that the state of darkness while we sleep plays a crucial role in our overall health. The results link more artificial light at night, also known as artificial nighttime light pollution, with higher brain stress signals, inflamed blood vessels, and greater risk of heart disease—a broad term for different heart problems.

“We know that environmental factors, such as air and noise pollution, can lead to heart disease by affecting our nerves and blood vessels through stress. Light pollution is very common; however, we don’t know much about how it affects the heart,” Shady Abohashem, head of cardiac PET/CT imaging trials at Massachusetts General Hospital and senior author of the yet-unpublished study, said in a statement by the American Heart Association.

Artificial nighttime brightness at home

In the observational study, Abohashem and his colleagues reviewed the health data of 466 adults who had undergone the same combined Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography (PET/CT) scan at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston between 2005 and 2008 to identify stress signals in the brain and evidence of artery inflammation. They also investigated the adults’ exposure to artificial nighttime brightness at their homes via the 2016 New World Atlas of Artificial Night Sky Brightness.

The researchers found that people who experienced greater amounts of nighttime artificial light had higher brain stress activity, blood vessel inflammation, and a greater chance of developing heart disease. Unsurprisingly, the risk of heart issues was increased among participants who lived in areas with additional stress factors like significant traffic noise or lower neighborhood income. By the end of 2018, 17% of the adults had experienced significant heart problems.

“We found a nearly linear relationship between nighttime light and heart disease: the more night-light exposure, the higher the risk. Even modest increases in night-time light were linked with higher brain and artery stress,” Abohashem explained. The correlation remained even after researchers adjusted for known heart risk factors and other socio-environmental stresses.

“When the brain perceives stress, it activates signals that can trigger an immune response and inflame the blood vessels,” he added. “Over time, this process can contribute to hardening of the arteries and increase the risk of heart attack and stroke.”

Put the phone down

So what can we do about it? Cities could diminish unnecessary external lighting, and individuals could lessen indoor nighttime light before going to bed, according to Abohashem. That includes screens, which means no more scrolling on TikTok before snoozing.

“We know too much exposure to artificial light at night can harm your health, particularly increasing the risk of heart disease. However, we did not know how this harm happened,” said Julio Fernandez-Mendoza, who is director of behavioral sleep medicine at Pennsylvania State University College of Medicine and was not involved in the study. “This study has investigated one of several possible causes, which is how our brains respond to stress. This response seems to play a big role in linking artificial light at night to heart disease.”

However, the study has some limitations, according to the statement. For example, the participants were drawn from a single hospital system, so the group may lack diversity, and the results might not reflect the broader population. Furthermore, because of the nature of an observational study, it can’t prove that the associations are causal.

“We want to expand this work in larger, more diverse populations, test interventions that reduce nighttime light, and explore how reducing light exposure might improve heart health,” Abohashem concluded.

NASA’s X-59 has finally taken flight.

The X-59 is NASA’s experimental new jet built to break the sound barrier without generating the thunderous sonic booms typically associated with supersonic flight.

NASA did not announce the flight publicly, nor has the agency issued a statement following its flight (likely due to the ongoing U.S. government shutdown).

But videos and photos were posted to social media by aircraft spotters and photographers, showing the radically elongated X-59 taking off before flying north out of Palmdale. Photographer Jarod Hamilton caught the X-59 as it left the ground, making a steep climb into the air above the Mojave Desert.

Based on the X-59’s track, it appears the X-plane flew oval-shaped "racetrack" patterns over the U.S. Air Force’s Edwards Air Force Base for just over an hour before landing at the facility.

NASA’s Armstrong Flight Research Center is located at the base. After this first flight, the X-59 will now reside at Armstrong, where it will undergo a testing campaign that will involve flying the jet over microphones placed throughout the desert and trailing other aircraft equipped with special air sensors through its shockwaves .

The X-59 was designed by NASA and built by Lockheed Martin at the company’s storied Skunk Works facility in Palmdale. The aircraft was designed from the wheels up to be able to fly faster than the speed of sound without producing loud sonic booms, which can be disruptive to people on the ground below. Because of those booms, supersonic flight has been prohibited above land within a certain distance of the U.S. since 1973.

But NASA hopes to change that. If the X-59 can prove that "quiet" supersonic flight is possible, the restrictions on breaking the sound barrier above the populated U.S. could someday be lifted, allowing commercial supersonic flight. The high speeds of supersonic travel could also be a huge boon for disaster relief, medical transport and other industries.

Join our Space Forums to keep talking space on the latest missions, night sky and more! And if you have a news tip, correction or comment, let us know at: community@space.com.

Here’s a new life hack to help keep the grim reaper at bay. Research out today seems to have pinned down the best length for a life-extending walk.

Scientists at the University of Sydney and others examined the walking habits of more than 30,000 people. Sedentary people who got most of their daily steps through 10- to 15-minute-long walks, they found, were the least likely to develop cardiovascular disease or to die early. The findings suggest an easy way for less active people to improve their heart health, the researchers say.

“These results can inform physical activity recommendations for individuals—particularly those who are otherwise sedentary or low-active—to incorporate longer, purposeful walking sessions into their daily routines to optimize health outcomes,” they wrote in their paper, published Tuesday in the Annals of Internal Medicine.

10,000 steps not needed

Contrary to popular belief, walking 10,000 steps a day isn’t the be-all, end-all of optimal health.

For starters, this number was originally coined from a marketing campaign in the 1960s by a Japanese company looking to sell their pedometers. Secondly, actual studies have found that walking as little as 2,300 to 4,000 steps a day can still keep you healthy and lower your risk of dying early (at the same time, there doesn’t seem to be an upper limit to the health benefits of walking even more).

Though any amount of physical exercise and steps taken is better than none, the researchers of this current study were interested in figuring out whether the duration of a walk is important, too. They analyzed data from the UK Biobank, a long-running project following the long-term health of residents. As part of the project, some participants were asked to wear a pedometer to tally their daily steps for a week.

The researchers specifically looked at 33,560 people between the ages of 40 and 79 years (the average age was 62) who were sedentary but had no existing history of heart disease or cancer when they wore the pedometers.

Over an average follow-up period of nearly eight years, 735 people died, while over 3,000 people developed cardiovascular disease. After accounting for various factors, the researchers found that people who took longer walks had the lowest risk of heart disease and early death compared to everyone else, while the greatest risk was seen in people who mostly took short walks lasting five minutes or less.

What should this mean for you?

This study is observational, meaning it can’t definitively prove a causative link between longer walks and better health.

The researchers also note that they tried to account for many variables in their analysis, such as the number of steps taken (people who walk longer tend to take more steps). But it remains possible they missed some important differences between long- and short-walkers that would better explain why the former live longer, outside of their average walking length.

While more research to confirm these findings would be valuable, it’s already clear that taking regular walks (or any form of physical activity) is great for you. And for those looking to make the most of their walks, it certainly seems reasonable that stretching them out a few minutes longer can be even better.