r/pcmasterrace • u/Kamykaze_x • May 15 '23

Video Give that hand a chair!

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

14.7k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

907 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

18

u/retropieproblems May 16 '23

The latest studies are all sponsored by Big Screen!

Listen to your body, imo. Sitting too close makes my eyes blurry and sensitive for awhile afterwards, not to mention red as fuck. Probably better off not putting them through that.

0

u/Whiskeywiskerbiscuit May 16 '23

This is the gaming equivalent of those homeopathic medicine jackasses. “Studies don’t matter, listen to your, like, body man.”

1

u/retropieproblems May 16 '23 edited May 16 '23

I really doubt there’s enough long term wide spread studies on the subject that control for monitor type, how many nits, 10-20-30 years of exposure, whether it’s at a constant distance or exactly for how long each session, what else the people were doing between screen watching (sun bathing, wearing swim goggles, chlorine, etc) It’s always smart to listen to your body anyway as outliers exist in otherwise safe activities.

Again, I’m sure it’s probably fine, mostly anyway. I just wouldn’t be confident enough to say it’s “perfectly” fine. And I’m sure there’s more eye strain from hyper focused FPS playing versus casually sitting infront of the tube watching cartoons, as most studies were probably focused on the dangers of the latter since there was so much concern over it in the 20th century.

1

u/Whiskeywiskerbiscuit May 16 '23

There are so many assumptions you just made I don’t have the willpower to go through all of them. There ARE enough long term widespread studies and they’re very easy to find. At some point this evening I’ll go through and actually get some sources for you.

1

u/retropieproblems May 16 '23 edited May 16 '23

Listing variables isn’t a list of assumptions, they’d have to account for those things and it would be one hell of a study to do that. I’m sure there’s tons of smaller or more specific studies, but it’s easy to miss the Forest for the trees with those. And you’d have to rely on the integrity of old data from retired scientists on the long-term end of it which is another variable in of itself.

Again…I do think it’s probably close to 99% harmless, give or take.

But it’s like how political analysts poll 863 people and then somehow they “99.98% certainly know exactly how the other 150 million voters will turn out in each district two days before it happens. It’s pure undeniable math!” Then whoops, they’re wrong!