Reply to Comment on: The Blue Light Hazard Versus Blue Light Hype

1 The study's design was obscured in part by figure 3 in the published article.1,2 Labeling was reversed for glare and target light source spectra in that figure, masking the fact that the authors used a glare source with a blue-weighted spectrum.1,2 The industrial funder of this research stated in the Federal Register that “a correction has been made through a letter to the journal's editor.” The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid services concluded that blue-filtering IOLs “do not demonstrate substantial clinical benefit in comparison with currently available IOLs.” The blue light hazard should not be used to “hype” unproven “hazards” of environmental blue light.6 Decades of scientific evidence prove that blue light is valuable for scotopic and circadian photoreception and fail to prove that ordinary environmental light exposure causes retinal phototoxicity.5,6 It's time for manufacturers and purveyors of blue-filtering lenses to stop using the blue-light “hazard” as “hype” to market products that decrease photoreception permanently without preventing AMD.5,6 See the original article6 for any disclosures of the authors.Acknowledgments We thank many authors for work we could not cite due to journal policy for letters.