My comment does not mention anecdotal evidence but a person using their eyes to perform an experiment. That is clearly not anecdotal.
It is ridiculous for people with eyes to not use their own eyes except to read studies as to whether their own eyes prefer light or dark. That should be obvious.
> My comment does not mention anecdotal evidence but a person using their eyes to perform an experiment. That is clearly not anecdotal.
It is clearly anecdotal [1] at the very least to everyone else that reads your comment. It is also clearly insufficient to draw any scientifically valid conclusions.
That a hand over fire will burn you is not a subject of dispute. Everyone who attempts it knows it. That dark mode is better for the eyes very much is a subject of dispute, and many have tried it and disagree it is better.
> It is clearly anecdotal [1] at the very least to everyone else that reads your comment. It is also clearly insufficient to draw any scientifically valid conclusions.
You are simply repeating something enough that you believe it to be true. You are misinformed about the meaning of the word anecdotal [1] and appear to be playing word games between "anecdotal", "anecdotal evidence", and a misunderstanding of what I wrote.
> It is also clearly insufficient to draw any scientifically valid conclusions.
What is the "it" in your comment? An experiment that someone performs is not anecdotal. [2]
Your own link starts with "Anecdotal evidence is evidence based only on personal observation." Even if you actually performed some experiment on yourself, unless you had some outside method of calculating eye strain it would still be anecdotal evidence.
The problem with this approach is that it is biased towards short term effects at the cost of long term effects and when you realize this it's too late already. "Feels better" is obviously a very good heuristic and usually what's good short term is probably more likely to be good than bad long term and millions of people rely on this heuristic but it's good to be aware of the shortcomings of this approach.
Came here to say the same. A good example is low-quality sunglasses that don't block UV light. Pupils dilate when wearing sunglasses, because there's less light coming in. Dilated pupils let more UV light in compared to naked eye vision. Subjective experience might be relief, yet it's at the cost of long-term retinal health.
It is ridiculous for people with eyes to not use their own eyes except to read studies as to whether their own eyes prefer light or dark. That should be obvious.