Activism Meets Mainstream: Mark Baker’s Fight Against Blue LED Lights
Mark Baker’s fight against LED Lights has been festering for years. Mark is an activist and one of the loudest voices against LED technology. He first appeared on my radar a few years ago when he copied me on emails to IES and other organizations, voicing concerns about the effects of LEDs. While I haven’t closely followed his work, his recent settlement caught my attention and highlights how activism can sometimes drive mainstream causes.
At the center of this case is the Woodland Gateway shopping center, which installed security cameras featuring bright blue flashing LED lights—likely intended to mimic the presence of law enforcement. For Baker, who has neurological disabilities, these lights are far more than a minor inconvenience. In an email to me, he explained, “These blue LED lights are catastrophic. They capture my attention and evoke emotions of anger, fear, agitation, and even thoughts of suicide. I can’t look in the direction of these intense LED lights.”
Baker’s concerns led him to file a lawsuit, which resulted in a $4,000 settlement with Ulta Salon, Cosmetics & Fragrance, Inc. (Ulta). While Ulta denied any liability, the settlement underscores the growing conversation about the unintended consequences of certain LED applications.
Flashing Lights: A Broader Issue
For me, security lights like those at Woodland Gateway are less bothersome than the glaring blue and red lights of emergency vehicles at night. Last year, I interviewed John Bullough of Mt. Sinai’s Light & Health Research Center and Jack Sullivan, Director of Training at the Emergency Responder Safety Institute, about this very issue. Both experts noted that emergency vehicle lights are often too bright at night, creating visibility challenges for drivers. You can watch that conversation here: Emergency Vehicle Lighting Discussion.
In his email, Baker mentioned that he recently met with a California legislator to discuss the impact of supplemental LED flashing lights on emergency vehicles. He shared, “I told her that these LED flashing lights cause seizures for AI software and seizures for humans.” The legislator was reportedly open to the idea of updating laws to prohibit supplemental LED and laser flashing lights on vehicles, and discussions are ongoing.
The Human and AI Connection
During my conversation with Baker, I shared my own experience of shielding my eyes while driving past emergency vehicles at night due to the intensity and glare of their flashing lights. While I can understand how these lights might affect humans, I was surprised to learn about their impact on AI systems, particularly in self-driving vehicles.
Baker explained that self-driving cars rely on sensors to detect visible light, infrared, radar, or LiDAR, which then pass information to computer chips for processing—much like the human brain interprets visual data. He noted, “A fuzzy image is going to be harder to interpret than a crystal clear image. When LED flashing lights are operating, the computer’s confidence in the image is reduced. It’s harder to make sense of the image with all this extra pulsing glare. This is no different than humans.”
Supporting Pragmatic Advocacy
While I don’t share much of Mark’s broader anti-LED stance, I fully support his efforts to reduce the intensity of flashing lights on emergency vehicles at night. This is an issue where his advocacy aligns with a mainstream concern that could lead to practical improvements for both drivers and self-driving vehicles.
It’s a reminder that even voices we don’t fully agree with can bring attention to important issues. In this case, Baker’s activism may pave the way for a safer and more thoughtful use of LED technology in critical applications.
Go Deeper:
