I think there's some miscommunication here. Certainly, it's possible for light to damage the retina. It's likely that blue light is more apt to cause damage because it's higher energy. This doesn't mean that LEDs producing a larger blue component are more damaging than LEDs (or other lights) with a smaller blue component. It's entirely possible that at the intensity artificial light is used for indoor and street lighting, how much of the light is blue is irrelevant.
I didn't read this entire article, but it seems to be discussing the general mechanism of light damage. There was no reference to LEDs. I'd want to see something that gave reason to believe that the blue in LEDs poses a threat.
Edit:Adding LED to the search results in many spurious sources in 1st two pages, with a single NIH study. Again, more reading required:
http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/122-a81/
This particular topic falls into the same category as 'phone radiation & brain cancer' news, where claims are made, proven, disproven and so on. If either proves true enough, we'll all be in the same boat together, I guess.
I didn't read this entire article, but it seems to be discussing the general mechanism of light damage. There was no reference to LEDs. I'd want to see something that gave reason to believe that the blue in LEDs poses a threat.