[stuckonempty]

This is great it works for you but hopefully you realize the weakness of anecdotal evidence when it comes to declaring something is universally effective.

Your n of 1 argument is the equivalent of “my grandpa smoked until he was 95 so smoking clearly can’t be bad for your health”.

[whateverboat]

I love redshift as well. I actually keep it 24x7, and my eyes don't get tired at all even after 12 hours of programming. Nowadays, turning off redshift feels like an attack on the eyes.

And no, reducing brightness on monitors doesn't have the same effect. I recently upgraded my monitors to 600nits brightness from 350nits and there has been no change in comfort level with redshift but without the redshift, the old monitors (and the new) stil feel very hostile to eyes.

[red75prime]

It’s more like, "Some people have something going on that ameliorates the cardiovascular and cancer problems caused by smoking."

[hn_throwaway_99]

You're right, it's not valid to make any broader conclusions from an anecdote. But it's about just as valid as the author making conclusions based solely on physical "this is what I should expect to happen" hypotheses.

More importantly, as an individual, the only thing that counts is when the n of 1 is you. As another commenter said, you don't need to live your life by studies. It's not like there is much expense or risk in trying a screen reddener, so try it out, and if it works for you, great - it's bizarre that the author thinks it is "aggravating" that a lot of people use things that they say work for them.