Scientific Research: (2) Potential Hazards: There may be a number of hazards to other road users related to the use of emergency beacons, and these effects should be mitigated as far as possible during vehicle design. These potential hazards include: (a) Photosensitive epilepsy - This is an epileptic reaction to flashing lights in susceptible persons, which can range in severity from an unusual feeling or involuntary twitch to a generalized seizure. This epileptogenic response can be triggered by lights flashing in the frequency range of 10-20 Hz, regardless of color. While individual light sources used on emergency vehicles generally have much lower flash rates than this, the Loughborough study suggests that such possibilities be minimized. It also notes that emergency workers may report distraction and eyestrain unrelated to epilepsy from working under the lights. (a) Glare - A bright light source in a person's field of view can reduce their ability to see other objects. The effect may be exacerbated by rain, windshields, or eyeglasses. The study distinguished between "disability glare", where a driver may be temporarily blinded and unable to see hazards in the road, versus "discomfort glare", which is a more general effect from lights which may cause motorists to avert their eyes. The worst effects for disability glare occurred with amber beacons, strobe beacons, and especially bright lights. (b) Phototaxis - This is the so-called 'moth-to-flame' effect, where the hypothesis runs that some drivers may be so distracted by the beacons that they are 'drawn' to them. The Loughborough study, referencing the February 1998 issue of the U. S. trade journal Tow Times, asserts that there was a lawsuit in the U. S. where a tow operator was found liable for an accident for this reason, though the study authors were unable to locate any supporting scientific research