Is Gaslight Injurious?

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

There is a prejudice against gaslight as being the most injurious form of artificial illumination. As against the proper and well regulated use of gas, this prejudice is entirely groundless, but there can be little doubt that from its abuse and bad management it is really doing more mischief than any other kind of light; its vcry excellencies are turned to bad account; its extreme cheapness, compared with other sources of illumination, naturally leads to its use in excessive quantities ; floods of light are poured forth, so that persons may read and sew for hours together in the remotest corners of the room. The air is heated by the excessive combustion, and poisoned by large quantities of carbonic acid, which there are no means of removing. The eye is unprotected from the glare by screen or shade; extraneous light is freely admitted, which obscures the impression, and strains the nerve of vision, and in proportion as the sensibility of the eye is impaired, stronger light is used, which gives temporary relief, but with danger of ultimate and permanent injury to the sight. On the other hand, good, well purified gas, judiciously controlled in accordance with the hints we have given, is perfectly harmless.

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American