People Living in Places with Limited Illuminance Declare Better Health and Higher Quality of Life in Environmental and Physical Domains

đź“– Top 30% JournalJan 21, 2026Clocks & sleep

Living in Low-Light Areas Is Linked to Better Health and Higher Quality of Life in Environment and Physical Well-Being

AI simplified

Abstract

Residents of a reported a 58.7% rate of no sleep problems compared to 49.25% in a control town.

  • Dark Sky Park residents were more likely to be satisfied with their sleep, with a statistically significant difference (< 0.001).
  • Residents in areas with typical street lighting reported higher occurrences of eye diseases, cardiovascular diseases, and mood changes.
  • Environmental and physical quality of life scores were significantly higher for Dark Sky Park residents compared to those in the control town (< 0.05).
  • The sleep duration was similar between the two towns, but Dark Sky Park residents used fewer sleeping pills and window blinds.

AI simplified

Key numbers

58.7%
Sleep Satisfaction Increase
Percentage of residents reporting no sleep problems.
21.7% vs. 33.6%
Cardiovascular Disease Decrease
Incidence of cardiovascular diseases in vs. control town residents.
Higher in
Quality of Life Improvement
Quality of life scores from in vs. control town.

Full Text

What this is

  • This research examines the health and quality of life of residents in a with reduced artificial light at night.
  • It compares these individuals to those living in a town with typical street lighting.
  • The study utilizes self-administered questionnaires and the to assess various health outcomes and quality of life.

Essence

  • Residents of a report better health and higher quality of life compared to those in a town with typical street lighting. They experience fewer sleep problems and report lower incidences of mood disorders and certain diseases.

Key takeaways

  • residents report greater sleep satisfaction. 58.7% experience no sleep problems, compared to 49.25% in the control town.
  • Residents in the report lower rates of cardiovascular diseases (21.7% vs. 33.6%) and mood disorders. This suggests a potential health benefit associated with reduced light exposure.
  • Quality of life scores in the environmental and physical domains are significantly higher in the residents compared to the control town, indicating a positive impact of reduced light pollution.

Caveats

  • The study's cross-sectional design limits the ability to draw causal conclusions about the relationship between light exposure and health outcomes.
  • Self-reported measures may introduce bias, as respondents might overestimate or underestimate their health conditions and quality of life.
  • The lack of detailed medical histories and potential exposure to indoor artificial light could confound the results.

Definitions

  • Dark Sky Park: An area with reduced artificial light pollution, promoting natural darkness and protecting nocturnal environments.
  • WHOQOL-BREF: A standardized questionnaire assessing quality of life across physical, psychological, social, and environmental domains.

AI simplified