Site icon The Island 360

LED opposition not supported by scientific facts

Prior to my reply to Rebecca Rosenblatt Gilliar, it is important to note the following:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As expected, it is always foreseeable that a few people will complain. That is the nature of people experiencing a change.

There is nothing wrong with anyone of them openly making their objections known.

The problem that the undersigned finds disturbing is that their complaints become personal and sometimes frustrating because the change was made and we all have to accommodate and compromise to those changes.

I am fortunate enough to have an office and residence in both Great Neck and Boca Raton, Fla.

We have LED lighting throughout our gated communities in Florida as we have now in the Village of Great Neck.

We are able to block out lights in our bedrooms in both New York and Florida using special shades that are readily available to everyone at a reasonable cost. Therefore, by accommodating and compromising, the people that are complaining can block out all of the lighting the same way we were able to accomplish that in both Florida and in New York.

Support local journalism by subscribing to your Blank Slate Media community newspaper for just $50 a year.

 It would have cost a lot less to purchase the proper shades to block out the light than bring a lawsuit against the village’s four trustees.

Furthermore, Mrs. Gilliar’s statements are technically incorrect and the use of the word “may,” as an example, does not mean technically or medically, that there is a connection between LEDs and any type of illness or injury.

One should never take a subjective statement or opinions that are not peer reviewed and take them as fact. That is the fault of many of the objecting individuals who are making statements that are also not scientifically correct.

Dr. C. J. Abraham

Technical Director

SCIENTIFIC ADVISORY SERVICES LTD

Exit mobile version