[HN Gopher] Myopia treatment 'smart glasses' from Japan to be so...
___________________________________________________________________
Myopia treatment 'smart glasses' from Japan to be sold in Asia
Author : isof4ult
Score : 256 points
Date : 2021-01-25 19:12 UTC (3 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (asia.nikkei.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (asia.nikkei.com)
| wpietri wrote:
| I have a lot of questions, but I'd definitely pay if it worked.
| I've very slowly been getting more nearsighted, but I mainly
| avoid wearing glasses. My optometrist said that wearing glasses
| would speed the slide, although I'd eventually end up at the same
| level of myopia. I'd much rather wear glasses that fix the
| problem than make it worse.
| fatnoah wrote:
| I was in the "slowing going nearsighted and avoiding glasses"
| phase for quite some time and the result was regular "ice-pick"
| headaches and migraines. Getting glasses fully cured all of
| that. My prescription also hasn't changed in 10 years, so (for
| me, at least) glasses have only had a beneficial effect.
| dj_mc_merlin wrote:
| I've been nearsighted my entire life and do not wear glasses.
| I get the headaches after a couple of hours of wearing them.
| More than likely it's more to do with what you're accustomed
| with than how good your vision is.
| jacquesm wrote:
| That sounds more like a set of glasses that are not optimal
| for your eyes.
| foobarian wrote:
| Also sounds like the prescription is not too bad. Those
| of us with -5 and under do not really have a choice not
| to wear corrective lenses :)
| dj_mc_merlin wrote:
| It's fluctuated from -4.5 to -2.5 over the years.
| Currently on the better end I think, but I haven't been
| to an exam in a long while. I have friends with lower
| than -5 and from trying on their glasses, I would also
| wear them if my vision was that bad. Even at -4.5 the
| only major annoyances were street signs and confusing
| people from far away though.
| simias wrote:
| That's insane to me, I'm at around -3.5 and I feel highly
| handicapped when I don't wear glasses. I most definitely
| wouldn't drive without them for instance.
| pnutjam wrote:
| Glasses don't make it worse, per your optometrist. You just
| notice where you need to be. I'm about a -9, I wear contacts as
| much as possible; so I thought that's what you were saying.
| Don't be afraid to wear glasses.
| jacquesm wrote:
| It's true. I went from pretty good eyesight to +3.25 over a
| relatively short period of time, but it wasn't an option to
| wait any longer, I had these crazy headaches and did not
| realize they were caused by my eyesight being off. The initial
| glasses were +1.5 and made a world of a difference. 6 months
| later is was +2.0, another six months and it was at 3.0. That's
| when I got scared wondering how bad it was going to get but it
| actually leveled off and took another year or so to go to 3.25
| and I've had these for a year now and no difference. I even
| bought a couple to not have to switch to different models when
| these wear out (which they inevitably do, they're consumables
| to me, not something to treat with great care, a couple of
| hours in the shop and they'll definitely fall at least once on
| a concrete floor).
| Someone wrote:
| I don't know whether you know, but +3.25 isn't near-
| sightedness (myopia), but far-sightedness (hyperopia) or
| presbyopia (Wikipedia: "insufficiency of accommodation
| associated with the aging of the eye that results in
| progressively worsening ability to focus clearly on close
| objects") I don't know whether you know, but +3.25 isn't
| near-sightedness (myopia), but far-sightedness (hyperopia) or
| presbyopia (insufficiency of accommodation associated with
| the aging of the eye that results in progressively worsening
| ability to focus clearly on close objects)
| jacquesm wrote:
| I didn't say that it was myopia did I? I specifically gave
| the glasses strength with the sign to indicate the kind of
| correction my eyes needed, and yes, it is far-sightedness,
| what else could it be with that particular prescription?
| Hence my need to wear them when working in the shop, I'm
| chance less without them doing any closer or detailed work.
|
| The point was: once you start wearing glasses it
| accelerates the slide. + or - doesn't really matter all
| that much.
| jtwaleson wrote:
| Do you use these for reading books/screens or also for
| distance vision? If only for reading, then what you are
| describing sounds like presbyopia, which is different
| from far-sightedness. Your accommodation changing as you
| age is a normal process and doesn't have anything to do
| with sliding myopia/hyperopia.
| jacquesm wrote:
| That's tricky. The 'light' version certainly helped also
| with different applications other than just books and
| screens and I used them in the car regularly, but the
| higher ones are useless for that because I can't keep all
| of the interior bits of the car in focus at the same time
| as the outside world so I drive without glasses, it also
| significantly reduces my dead angles due to improved
| peripheral vision.
|
| So there may very well be more than one effect at work
| here. I can't really see the instrument cluster in the
| car but I know it by heart so it's not a problem and
| speed I can do by ear and get it well within the margin
| of error for speeding tickets.
| GrantZvolsky wrote:
| > My optometrist said that wearing glasses would speed the
| slide
|
| This is a myth widespread among opticians and optometrists. I
| have discussed it with those who treated me and not a single
| one could provide any evidence.
| pnutjam wrote:
| Speed the slide = you notice
| CubsFan1060 wrote:
| That's the interesting part to me. I have very very very
| slight glasses. If I never put them on, it's fine. If I've
| been wearing them, and THEN take them off, everything looks
| horrible.
|
| I mostly only wear reading glasses at work.
| bilalel wrote:
| More to read about this on Bloomberg [0] and BusinessWire [1]
|
| [0] https://www.bloomberg.com/press-
| releases/2020-12-17/kubota-v... [1]
| https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20201217005811/en/
| blue_box wrote:
| Shut up and take my money. This is the smart glasses that the
| world needs.
| Hraefn wrote:
| For those interested, there are a couple of treatments available
| in the U.S. to slow the progression of childhood myopia.
| MiSight[0] contacts and low-dose atropine[1].
|
| [0] https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-
| appr... [1] https://www.aao.org/eyenet/article/how-to-use-low-
| dose-atrop...
| nsxwolf wrote:
| It's not a great headline. My first reaction was "that's what
| glasses do".
| jonplackett wrote:
| Yeah I had the exact same response.
|
| There needs to be a 'permanently' in there somewhere.
| Darmody wrote:
| "Through further clinical trials, it is trying to determine
| how long the effect lasts after the user wears the device,
| and how many days in total the user must wear the device to
| achieve a permanent correction for nearsightedness."
|
| Permanently wouldn't be very accurate either.
| dang wrote:
| Ok, we've edited the title above to make it clear that it's a
| treatment device.
| ludwigvan wrote:
| Has anyone here given this a try:
| https://gettingstronger.org/2010/07/improve-eyesight-and-thr...
|
| https://gettingstronger.org/2014/08/myopia-a-modern-yet-reve...
|
| It claims that myopia can be cured, just like muscles can be made
| stronger in a gym.
| jimmyswimmy wrote:
| I was forced to try the referenced Bates method for several
| years as a child, spending about a half hour a day on it. The
| experience was not good and the effort would have been much
| better spent on academics or even sports. After several years
| my parents changed eye docs, and I got one who would give me
| real glasses. I remember how awful my mother felt as I tried on
| the new glasses and exclaimed how amazing it was to be able to
| see anything at all. Trees have individual leaves, cars have
| license plates and brands, stores have sales prices posted. It
| may be possible these exercises work for others, but not for
| me.
|
| The idea is a lovely one. There is some anecdotal evidence that
| more time spent outside as a youth reduces the rate of myopia.
| I don't recall whether the funding was published in science
| letters or elsewhere but it was an unexpected result of a
| survey. I see no downside in trying this for my own children,
| as opposed to my experiment of underpowered glasses and eye
| exercises. The kids like being out there.
| ysw0 wrote:
| Anecdote: I used to get new glasses/prescriptions every year.
| Every year my prescriptions would get stronger. Last couple of
| years I stopped renewing my glasses and whenever I absolutely
| need to get new glasses, I have the store use my old
| prescription. For whatever reason, my eye sight stopped getting
| worse. I think by wearing stronger prescriptions, your eyes
| adapt to it and you get more and more myopic.
| pessimizer wrote:
| You're probably just getting old. Normal people get
| farsighted as they age. Myopic people stop getting worse, or
| even improve a little, and start developing astigmatism.
| lucb1e wrote:
| Warning to anyone taking the above as medical advice: perhaps
| it might work for you, but do discuss with your doctor and
| check that you are not driving vehicles with worsening sight
| while believing it's fine. By all means try it, but get it
| checked so at least you have the data to know whether it
| works for you.
| war1025 wrote:
| > but do discuss with your doctor
|
| This requires having a doctor you trust.
|
| My experience with most doctors is that I can trust them
| about as far as a used car salesman.
| RHSeeger wrote:
| Start by finding an eye doctor that doesn't have a
| glasses shop attached, imo. Or one that isn't "attached"
| to such a shop in a way they would profit from it, I
| guess. Without insulting any doctor in specific, my
| thought is that making a profit from glasses being sold
| is likely to impact how likely the doctor is to prescribe
| new glasses.
| lucb1e wrote:
| > making a profit from glasses being sold is likely to
| impact how likely the doctor is to prescribe new glasses.
|
| And beyond that, following the logic from the recent
| surgery thread: they see their patients _see_ better.
| They see all the good cases, where someone walks out more
| confident and with better sight. Their product helps
| people. But then so do homeopathic placebos (to a certain
| (measurable) extent), and that 's the hard part to figure
| out.
|
| Of course, in this case everyone truly does see better
| when they walk out and what GP is wondering about are the
| long-term effects. This stuff is complicated, though I
| frankly have a hard time believing this claim of "just
| stop wearing glasses and you'll see better". Surely
| someone would have noticed that? But without doing a deep
| dive into the research here, it's all just speculation on
| both their part and mine.
| moneywoes wrote:
| Have a link to the surgery thread?
| lucb1e wrote:
| I meant that you can discuss it with your doctor to get
| their factual knowledge or pointers, and then draw your
| own conclusions. I didn't say, and didn't mean to say
| (sorry if it came across like that), that you should
| follow their advice to any degree. I trust the
| overwhelming majority of people (doctor or patient) to
| use their own reasonable judgement, and the rest won't be
| helped by this advice anyway.
|
| And for what it's worth, you may have had a string of bad
| doctors. I never had that feeling with any of mine
| (though I've only ever seen doctors in the Netherlands
| and Germany).
| dmitryminkovsky wrote:
| How do you get stores to use your old prescription? I've had
| no luck with that.
| sct202 wrote:
| Some of the online stores especially the ones based in
| China don't actually check your prescription.
| soylentcola wrote:
| For a while I could order from the UK, but I think (at
| least for the shop I used) they changed this to be more
| restrictive like the US.
|
| It really is annoying due to the difficulty finding a
| good optometrist who does more than the basics. The
| entire process is still a matter of closest estimate when
| you consider that our eyes don't work in exact "steps"
| along a range. On top of that, the center point of the
| lens varies a lot based on exactly how a set of frames
| sits on your particular face. I've had plenty of glasses
| that were headache city because the IPD was right, but
| the lens center didn't line up properly with my pupil
| (vertically, when worn).
|
| Then don't even get me started on the whole Luxottica
| thing where it can be another pain in the ass to find
| nice looking frames at many optometrist-attached stores.
| There are a few others with both optometrists and glasses
| sales (Warby Parker, if you have one of the brick and
| mortars nearby, for example).
|
| For someone like me, even the "cheap" stores usually
| involve an extra $150-200 per set of glasses due to my
| cruddy eyesight and the need for the highest index lens
| material. I usually end up bouncing back and forth
| between somewhere like Warby when I really am due for
| another exam and will stomach the $200 cost for $20 worth
| of plastic. If I break or lose my specs too soon after, I
| tend to just suck it up and roll the dice with one of the
| cheapie online vendors.
| dmitryminkovsky wrote:
| Do you have any recommendations?
| NotPavlovsDog wrote:
| get the best eye test you can, with a prescription. buy
| cheapo online chinese. zenni optical works fine for me,
| but with prices from 10 bucks, try several vendors and
| see which one you personally like.
| sct202 wrote:
| I use firmoo, and I haven't had any issues with the
| lenses. The only tricky thing is that you need to
| basically estimate the fit based on the dimensions of
| glasses frames that you already own.
| ysw0 wrote:
| I asked the optometrist. He was a little offended that I
| wasn't going to use the new measurements but I pleaded with
| him enough that he relented.
|
| One very interesting thing that convinced me to start doing
| this: if you get measurements taken at night (vs early in
| the day), your prescriptions will be stronger as your eyes
| are already tired. So your new glasses may be too strong
| for you but your eyes will adapt to it and become worse.
| dmitryminkovsky wrote:
| Was this in the US? I've tried and everyone told me
| filling an expired prescription is illegal. Even places
| that don't do exams. I have an old prescription and don't
| want to get an exam because of the pandemic.
| astura wrote:
| I'm assuming the optometrist wrote a new prescription for
| the old measurements.
| Sohcahtoa82 wrote:
| That doesn't make sense.
|
| I'd recommend getting glasses online from Zenni [0]. They
| just ask for the measurements of the prescription.
| There's nothing about expiration dates. And they're super
| inexpensive! Glasses are a racket.
|
| I can't speak for the quality/durability of their frames,
| as I only used them to get some prescription lenses for
| my Valve Index so I can play in VR without wearing my
| glasses.
|
| [0] https://www.zennioptical.com/
| lucb1e wrote:
| An optometrist in Germany told me the same regarding
| measuring eyes in the morning, for what it's worth. I
| came in after work and they basically turned me away
| because they didn't think I'd get a good measurement at
| that time.
| Vrondi wrote:
| In my experience, wearing glasses that are either too
| strong _or_ too weak for your myopia will lead to
| headaches. Lots of headaches.
| programmertote wrote:
| Your experience is similar to mine. I got glasses at the age
| of 13, but didn't like wearing the glasses, so never did.
| Both my late father and my sister (since she was about 12
| years old) have to wear thick glasses. My sister started out
| about the same eye power as I did, but she wears her glasses
| everyday. My sister's glasses got thicker year over year, and
| finally she got LASIK a couple of years ago. My sister
| doesn't work with computers whereas I spend ~10-12 hours a
| day with computers/TV screens (when I use computer, I don't
| wear glasses and my eye doctor told me that's okay). For me,
| my eye power stayed about the same and never got stronger
| glass prescription over the last 25 years or so.
|
| Having said that, I started wearing glasses about a year ago
| when watching the TV between 10pm-12am (thanks to my wife who
| likes watching movies and I joined in). Turns out, my
| eyesight (near-sight) got a bit worse in a year and now I
| have a slightly thicker glasses. Again, this is all anecdotal
| and maybe age comes into play here with my eye sight (but the
| common knowledge--not sure how true that is--is that the
| nearsightedness gets better as people age, so what I'm
| experiencing is the opposite).
| lern_too_spel wrote:
| Studies of deliberate undercorrection show a slight
| acceleration in myopia progression. Myopia progression slows
| and stops naturally after adolescence, whether you wear the
| correct prescription lenses or not.
| burmanm wrote:
| It's also your age. I kept having stronger and stronger
| glasses (until -9.5) but then it suddenly stopped and vision
| stayed at this one point.
|
| This was also what a eye doctor said to me ~20 years ago,
| although his prediction when it would happen didn't quite
| match.
| andrewzah wrote:
| The same thing happened to me where I got continually
| stronger prescriptions, but I stabilized anyways at around
| 18. My optometrist told me that's very common after
| adolescence.
|
| I really wouldn't recommend using an incorrect prescription.
| In the US anyways shops won't let you use a prescription
| older than 1 year.
| outworlder wrote:
| That is a trial with N=1
|
| Your eyesight might have stopped getting worse on its own. As
| is the case for most people (myopia doesn't run away to
| infinity after all!). Which is why corrective surgery is only
| indicated after your prescription has been stable for some
| time.
| dorfsmay wrote:
| Yes, I tried in my 20s with no obvious positive result.
| yters wrote:
| I have bad nearsightedness, and anecdotally if I go without my
| glasses for awhile, such as when swimming at the beach, my
| eyesight has improved somewhat by the end of the day. I think
| it is a combination between using my eye muscles more
| effectively and learning to better infer what the blobs are.
| antisthenes wrote:
| It's nonsense.
|
| I was recommended this as a child - any improvement was
| temporary, and at best this will slow down the progression of
| myopia very slightly, in childhood.
|
| Nothing beats sunlight and outdoor activity in childhood for
| reducing myopia, but if you already have it as an adult -
| you're stuck with it.
| adkadskhj wrote:
| Doesn't this article suggest there's some truth to
| strengthening the eye to improve Myopia, though?
|
| While the "new glasses" could of course be snake oil -
| assuming they're not for discussion would suggest that the
| muscles can be strengthened/corrected and all we're
| discussing is an implementation detail.
|
| That's assuming these glasses actually work in this fashion,
| though. .. and that they work, of course.
| stevebmark wrote:
| No, myopia is caused by eye length, not muscle structure.
| Eye length is determined by how your eye grows. The Bates
| method is quackery.
| antisthenes wrote:
| The article can suggest whatever it wants.
|
| If it actually worked long-term, it would be a published
| paper on PubMed and ophthalmologists would be readily
| prescribing it to their patients.
|
| I'm not ruling out a temporary improvement in myopia from
| exercises. Sort of like squinting or putting eye drops in
| your eyes can temporarily make you less nearsighted.
|
| But if there are positive, long-term effects from simple,
| harmless exercise (spoiler alert - you can't change the
| shape of your eye permanently with exercise like you can
| with a muscle), it would be part of eye doctor's treatment
| plans everywhere.
|
| But it isn't, so it doesn't pass the smell test.
| throw1234651234 wrote:
| I have been reading about myopia fixes through exercise for
| years. I see no significant evidence that its possible. I can't
| find an example of a SINGLE person in history that fixed the
| issue. E.g. Aldous Huxley never really did, despite writing the
| book that all current methods are based on.
|
| On the other hand, doing a single-arm chin up seems impossible
| and takes a decade. Enough funds have not been put into
| research.
| war1025 wrote:
| I went pretty deep down this rabbit hole for a while.
|
| I've always been suspicious of eye doctors since every visit
| they find an excuse to bump you up a notch or two.
|
| Anecdotally, me and my brother had the same prescription in
| high school. I started refusing to go to the eye doctor. He
| kept going. I happened to see his contacts prescription maybe
| six years later. His prescription was now over a diopter
| stronger than mine. I needed new contacts, so went to an exam
| about that time. My prescription was still the same, "Well we'd
| like to bump you up a notch, but you can stay at this level if
| you want."
|
| Further, I noticed growing up that the kids with the worst
| eyesight were the ones whose parents had the best insurance and
| could afford twice per year exams.
|
| Anyway, I think glasses do irreparable harm to vision
| (particularly during adolescence). I think that will be borne
| out by research if anyone ever looks into it.
|
| The myopia correction exercises do seem to help, but it's a
| fickle process. If it was easy it wouldn't be controversial. I
| would describe my experience as your baseline vision stays
| roughly the same, but you can learn to focus for short periods
| of time and improve your acuity by maybe 1 - 2 diopters.
| outworlder wrote:
| You know what else does irreparable harm? Failing classes
| because you can't see!
|
| Most people don't just decide that "hey, today is a good day
| for me to start wearing glasses, wouldn't it be cool!?"
|
| For young kids, it's usually when they start doing badly in
| classes or people notice they are squinting. For adults, it's
| having trouble with things like the DMV exam, caught by
| routine checkups, or when they notice their peers can see
| much better than they can.
|
| I could also give you endless anecdotes "proving" the
| opposite point, that wearing glasses can slow down or stop
| the progress, but why bother. That's all they are, they are
| not facts.
| [deleted]
| retrac wrote:
| It's making a mountain out of a molehill. Yes, there's some
| evidence that very rigorous, regular eye exercises can help
| delay or even slightly reverse myopia. Slightly. If you give
| yourself a headache for like an hour a day, every day. And the
| effect goes away when you stop exercising.
|
| This is something that has been studied pretty extensively. If
| it was actually a cure, it'd have been well-proven by now, and
| we'd all be doing it.
|
| You really should exercise your eyes once in a while if you're
| staring at a screen all day, though.
| jdtang13 wrote:
| > This is something that has been studied pretty extensively.
| If it was actually a cure, it'd have been well-proven by now,
| and we'd all be doing it.
|
| Untrue and faulty reasoning. It may have been studied
| extensively on biased populations, or the research may not
| have been funded adequately. Anyways, this is part of the
| "myopia is purely genetic" zeitgeist which is shoved down all
| of our throats in the west. Meanwhile, studies from Taiwan,
| Japan, and Korea show that myopia truly has an environmental
| component to it, e.g. childhood eyestrain and video games.
|
| One may argue that could be because East Asian genetics are
| different from those of Europeans. I can't say exactly why,
| but I will say that the mainstream "myopia can't be
| cured/prevented" rhetoric has been extremely harmful for
| approximately 2 billion people on this planet.
| lern_too_spel wrote:
| Urban schools in China and Taiwan used to mandate daily eye
| exercises in classrooms. There was no effect. It wasn't
| until Taiwan started requiring more outside time for
| children that they were able to reverse the myopia trend.
| hangonhn wrote:
| To add to your point,
| https://www.cnn.com/2015/04/05/asia/myopia-east-
| asia/index.h...
|
| In addition, wasn't there a study that found Australia
| children of Asian descent don't follow the same trend of
| myopia? IIRC, the researchers found that Australian
| children tend to spend a lot more time outside and get more
| natural sunlight. I wish I could find the original article.
| feanaro wrote:
| Agreed. I surveyed the existing medical literature on the
| topic in about 2018 (or was it 2017?) and conclusion was
| that it is still a very active area of research with a lot
| of controversy.
|
| Anecdotally, I have a low-grade myopia which gets
| observably worse after a lot of near work or sitting the
| whole day in front of a computer. I can pretty consistently
| reverse through the use of print pushing and use of anti-
| corrective lenses (basically forcing myself to look at a
| slightly out-of-focus image each day). It also consistently
| worsens when I stop doing it, especially when I stop
| spending time outside.
| mathisonturing wrote:
| Slightly off topic, but how do you go about surveying the
| literature on a particular topic, say myopia or acne.?
| einpoklum wrote:
| > It's making a mountain out of a molehill.
|
| I have a pair of glasses to sell you which can fix that...
| ekianjo wrote:
| > If it was actually a cure, it'd have been well-proven by
| now, and we'd all be doing it.
|
| You could say that for everything for which there was no
| treatment before and for which the problem is now considered
| solved with modern practice.
| saurik wrote:
| I think the argument is that this isn't some unknown new
| untested discovery but instead something well known and
| constantly studied with disappointing results.
| jdtang13 wrote:
| The "myopia is purely genetic" zeitgeist has been continually
| shoved down all of our throats in the west. Meanwhile, studies
| from Taiwan, Japan, and Korea show that myopia truly has an
| environmental component to it, e.g. childhood eyestrain and video
| games. It's also undeniable that myopia manifests more in middle
| class workers than working class, which indicates some sort of
| systematic environmental component.
|
| Since the article is specifically about Japan and Asian markets,
| I must add this: One may argue that the discrepancy in mainstream
| scientific conclusions could simply be due to differences in
| genetics between East Asians and Europeans. This mainstream
| "myopia can't be cured/prevented" rhetoric has been extremely
| harmful for approximately 2 billion people on this planet.
| frankohn wrote:
| The predisposition to myopia is genetic but one becomes myopic
| due to an environmental factor: the lack of exposure to
| sunlight. It is because of the lack to regular exposure to
| sunlight that people who study and spend a lot of time in homes
| can develop myopia if they are genetically predisposed.
|
| Focusing on nearby objects does not lead to myopia. Doing
| gymnastics with the eyes has no effect. Likewise, using under-
| sized glasses has no effect on myopia.
|
| Here a supporting article about Inuit populations developed
| myopia just in one generation because of changes in lifestyle
| reducing outdoor activities:
|
| https://www.nature.com/news/the-myopia-boom-1.17120
| Geee wrote:
| As a kid, I remember that my myopia disappeared after one
| summer when I was outdoors a lot. Then it came back soon
| after returning to school.
| itwy wrote:
| I don't think it works like that.
| meowface wrote:
| It does seem like a convenient "just-so" anecdote, and
| I've never experienced or heard of myopia just going away
| like that, but I also don't think it sounds completely
| implausible.
| soylentcola wrote:
| I'd imagine it's also less noticeable in scenarios when
| you don't need to read smaller letters from a distance as
| much (ie: when you are playing outside rather than
| sitting in class).
| throwawayboise wrote:
| Also in bright light your pupils are constricted so depth
| of field is greater. In dim light your pupils are
| dialated and depth of field is shallower. Same principle
| as a camera lens f-stop.
|
| So the perception that you see more clearly in bright
| outdoor conditions could be true.
| soylentcola wrote:
| I accept that this isn't anything more than anecdote, but my
| mother was very myopic. I grew up in the boonies, spent loads
| of time outdoors, had no video games until I was in high
| school, and was allowed very little TV time.
|
| I still needed glasses by 2nd grade and finally leveled out
| somewhere around the -8.50 range in my mid-late 30s. Hasn't
| really gotten too much worse as I got older, but as a lovely
| side note, I'm in my early 40s now and am getting the
| slightest bit of trouble on the other end of the spectrum
| where I can't always focus on small, close-up things if I
| have my glasses on. Guess it'll be time for bifocals soon.
| throwawayboise wrote:
| There may be some correlation but there must be other
| factors. Doesn't fit my history. I'm myopic, -6.0 diopter,
| needed glasses starting in 2nd grade. Spent a lot of time
| outdoors as a kid (no computers, 3 channels of TV which was
| targeted at grownups except for Saturday morning). Being
| inside was _boring_.
|
| Nearsightedness also runs in the family on my fathers side,
| but strangely none of my kids need glasses and they all grew
| up with much more TV and other screen time than I had.
| [deleted]
| digikata wrote:
| This reminds me of archetypal idyllic images of ancient Greek
| education where a philosopher is teaching a group of students
| in an outdoor amphitheater. Maybe we need to redesign our
| schools to be outdoor, or at least with indoor structures
| with generous amounts of natural lighting.
| xwdv wrote:
| God no, UV radiation is a thing.
| Franciscouzo wrote:
| And sunscreen is also a thing.
| xwdv wrote:
| I don't trust most people to apply sunscreen effectively.
| You really need a lot of it for adequate protection, and
| by the time you apply that much, you become an oily
| slippery mess leaving sunscreen on every surface you
| touch. It's easier to just stay the hell away from the
| sunlight and any surface that reflect light.
| magicpin wrote:
| Glass also blocks most UV radiation, so lots of windows
| would be ideal.
| novok wrote:
| That is only possible in a very small climate band.
|
| Maybe just have a ton of natural light in your buildings,
| energy conservation be dammed?
|
| It's harder now because of screens general inability to
| work well in daylight, although that might be a plus in
| most schools.
| rmah wrote:
| Outdoor schools were a thing in recent history. It gained a
| lot of traction about 100 years ago until the 1930's. It
| was called the "open air school" movement. I think it was
| started mostly to combat a rise tuberculosis.
|
| https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/history-outdoor-
| schoo... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_air_school
| [deleted]
| scythe wrote:
| Daytime sunlight is not the only exposure factor correlated
| with myopia. Nighttime artificial lighting is also a
| negative:
|
| https://www.nature.com/articles/20094
|
| There's a review here:
|
| https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S135094621.
| ..
| himinlomax wrote:
| The currently favored theory is that it's due to a lack of UV
| light reaching the eye. It's not (just) video games, it's
| (also) school and generally being indoors instead of out at
| midday.
| young_unixer wrote:
| Since I learned that excess UV radiation burns the retina,
| I've started always wearing sunglasses outside. Should I
| stop?
| stevebmark wrote:
| There's no such theory, and exposure to light brightness has
| nothing to do with myopia. Being outdoors causes less close
| up focus, which slows the progression of myopia.
| bilegeek wrote:
| The factors weren't "childhood eyestrain and video games". The
| one consistent factor was the amount of bright light exposure
| in a study[1]; in other words, being indoors, away from bright
| sunlight, which is correlative to eyestrain and video games,
| not causative, because people tend to do those things indoors.
| If you read outdoors in bright light, it's not really worse
| than just hanging around in bright light.
|
| Couldn't find a non-paywalled PDF, sorry, but here's the
| original study:
|
| [1]https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6
| ...
|
| Also, it might have changed since then (2012). If there's since
| been a study refuting this one, let me know, because it's nigh-
| impossible to find between the glut of citation-free news sites
| and blog posts, and paywalled journals.
| outworlder wrote:
| > myopia truly has an environmental component to it
|
| Very much possible. I only have anecdotal evidence, but if you
| plotted the amount of time I spent at home starting at a TV
| versus other kids, you will probably find interesting
| correlations.
|
| > , e.g. childhood eyestrain and video games.
|
| Why single out video games in particular? If there is a
| problem, the problem is the screen. Or rather, how close it is.
| It is unlikely to be related to the content.
|
| I wouldn't be surprised to learn about a feedback loop getting
| disrupted. For many organs in the body, an approximate shape
| will work just fine, who cares if an organ is slightly off by a
| few millimeters. Not so for the eyes.
| simlevesque wrote:
| I have bad myopia (around -5) both my parents have it too and
| to me it has always been evident that it isn't purely genetic.
| I think I could willfuly downgrade my vision if I concentrated.
| teyc wrote:
| Not sure if it'll help, there's an older gentleman on Youtube
| who claims reading with glasses actually makes myopia worse
| with time, due to the way it affects the shape of the
| eyeballs. Look up Tod Becker.
| andrewzah wrote:
| Really? We're taking medical advice from random people on
| youtube?
|
| How is this any different from a youtuber claiming the
| earth is flat or vaccines cause autism?
| buss wrote:
| I have hypermyopia (-12.5 left, -13 right) and my sister has
| 20/15 vision. Same childhood environment as her and I needed
| glasses before I could even read, let alone before I ever
| played a video game.
|
| It's well beyond a genetic predisposition, it was a genetic
| guarantee for me.
| mumblemumble wrote:
| In my family (n=basically_none), it seems that myopia
| correlates strongly with habits. The most bookish, indoors-y
| kids ended up in glasses - and the more so, the thicker the
| glasses - while folks who spent their childhoods running
| around outside tend to have 20/20 vision.
|
| Assuming such an effect really exists, I expect it would be
| very difficult to statistically distinguish from straight
| heredity. Kids' early childhood habits tend to reflect family
| culture.
| toast0 wrote:
| OTOH, perhaps those who are starting to have myopia aren't
| going to want to do outdoorsy things because they tend to
| require far-seeing. If I can't see what's going on far
| away, I'm not going to have a fun time with most sports,
| and I'd rather read a book.
| typon wrote:
| I read that being in the sun when you're a child and your
| eyes having to adjust with the change in brightness helps
| with reducing myopia
| amelius wrote:
| Perhaps a good reason to buy a HDR monitor then :)
| mumblemumble wrote:
| The other hypothesis I've heard is that it's switching
| back and forth between focusing on close-up things and
| distant things. Which you naturally do a lot when
| engaging in outdoor activities, but basically not at all
| when staring at books or screens.
| ekianjo wrote:
| > "myopia is purely genetic"
|
| I have never heard that Myopia is purely genetic. Where is that
| claim even coming from?
| coldtea wrote:
| From tons of articles, medical advices, etc. that insist that
| "you don't develop myopia from reading, monitor work, video
| games, etc".
|
| They not not say that it's "purely genetic", but that's the
| impression one gets, that all those lifestyle params don't
| play any role...
|
| Wikipedia says it's "a mix of genetic and environmnetal
| factors", and includes all of the above factors I've
| mentioned. But I've read many times in the past decades
| articles insisting that those other things don't matter (and
| presenting it as the medical consensus)...
| outworlder wrote:
| > From tons of articles, medical advices, etc. that insist
| that "you don't develop myopia from reading, monitor work,
| video games, etc".
|
| As an adult, it would certainly be an outstanding discovery
| if this did matter. Which is why I'm skeptical about these
| supposed glasses. Sounds like snake oil, quacks like snake
| oil.
|
| For children, teenagers and young adults: maybe. It's all
| about the eye shape, and children's bodies are still in
| development.
| mattjaynes wrote:
| Ask yourself, how much brighter is it outside than inside
| (assuming a sunny day vs a brightly lit office)?
|
| Before looking into this, I would have guessed 2X or 3X, but
| would you believe it's actually over 100X!
|
| I bet most people's guess would also be off by 1 or 2 orders of
| magnitude.
|
| Even outdoors in the shade, it is over 50X brighter than indoors.
|
| (For specific numbers and comparisons, see:
| https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6656201/ )
|
| Apparently, our eyes adjust so quickly to the difference that we
| have a very poor sense of the magnitude of light change between
| indoors and outdoors.
|
| I bring this up because one of the largest factors in myopia
| development appears to be outdoor light exposure in childhood.
|
| Genetics are likely a factor too, but light exposure seems to
| have a huge effect: "The prevalence of myopia in 6- and 7-year-
| old children of Chinese ethnicity was significantly lower in
| Sydney (3.3%) than in Singapore (29.1%), while patterns of daily
| outdoor light exposure showed that children living in Singapore
| were exposed to significantly less daily outdoor light than
| Australian children." (from the same study linked above)
|
| The obvious takeaway for parents, schools, and governments:
| ensure your children have plenty of outdoor playtime. It will
| greatly reduce instances of myopia (not to mention the benefits
| from higher Vitamin D levels, exercise, etc).
| stevebmark wrote:
| That's only correlation, light brightness has nothing to do
| with myopia. It's more likely from looking at things farther
| away from the face outside so that there is less light focused
| on the fovea.
| mattjaynes wrote:
| "light brightness has nothing to do with myopia" - that's a
| big claim and will need some evidence to back it up,
| especially given the many studies that suggest otherwise.
|
| This is still a topic with many unknowns, but we have to
| follow the evidence as much as we can. Evidence should always
| beat data-free guesses.
| oehtXRwMkIs wrote:
| Correlation does not imply causation but it does imply having
| something to do with the other. Your first sentence
| contradicts itself.
| [deleted]
| hug wrote:
| Light perception is logarithmic, not linear, which is why your
| guess is so far off.
|
| 7 'shades' brighter and you're already hitting '100x'.
| derekp7 wrote:
| And here I thought it was from focusing up close (such as
| reading) that caused myopia. To me this made sense, as in order
| to focus your eye muscles contract to change the shape of the
| lens. This contraction has to push off something, which is the
| eyeball shell, and the resulting stress causes the growth
| patterns to be more in one direction instead of the other
| (causing the eye globe to lengthen). Guess I was wrong in my
| understanding.
| mastazi wrote:
| People who have the hobby of photography, might have some
| intuitive understanding of this brightness difference. If you
| are shooting with fixed aperture and ISO, your exposure times
| could easily go from 1/60 indoors to 1/3000 outdoors which is
| not quite a 100X difference, but close.
| c9fc42ad wrote:
| This is true, it wasn't until I started photography that I
| realized how much darker it was inside compared to outside.
| atotic wrote:
| I've read this study a while ago, and I think it helped me
| correct my son's myopia.
|
| When my 5yo kid's eye check came back with "he'll need glasses
| next year", we started strict "hour+ outside play daily"
| policy. At his next checkup, he had normal vision. Dr was
| surprised.
| outworlder wrote:
| I believe that's still under active research. If this is a
| factor, my money is more on "your eyes will be focusing more
| at infinity" rather then low light levels.
| midjji wrote:
| Focusing on infinity more has been tested using glasses
| designed to force this, it was a popular theory for 60
| years or so, and many opticians prescribed glasses which
| forced people to do this as a result. I cant find it atm,
| but the result according to a large metastudy was that it
| caused headaches, and nothing else of note.
| outworlder wrote:
| > I bring this up because one of the largest factors in myopia
| development appears to be outdoor light exposure in childhood.
|
| I used to live almost on the equator. Before adolescence, I
| would spent most of my time outdoors. Very stable weather so
| windows were open most of the day (and night). There was often
| direct sunlight even indoors. We would go to the beach every
| weekend. I ended up with -5.00 and -5.25
|
| Maybe this would decrease the prevalence, if you are looking at
| the entire population. But it's not like you, as an individual,
| will be immune if you just stay outside.
| refactor_master wrote:
| I live in the dark North and have always been fond of
| screens. Being outdoorsy is a much later-acquired taste. My
| vision at soon 30 is still 20/20.
|
| Probability is a strange beast.
| JustSomeNobody wrote:
| Alas, I'm cursed with mostly astigmatism.
| shwestrick wrote:
| Some additional information here:
| https://www.kubotaholdings.co.jp/en/ir/docs/20201216_EN_eSpe...
|
| Assuming this device is actually legit (I'm skeptical...), it
| would need e.g. FDA approval to be used in the USA, correct?
| tyingq wrote:
| There's an interesting paragraph in there:
|
| _" myopic defocus is already in use in the US with a contact
| lens, "MiSight(r) 1 day" by CooperVision, which is U.S. Food
| and Drug Administration (FDA) approved to slow the progression
| of myopia. This product, which uses multifocal contact lens
| technology, passively stimulates the entire peripheral retina
| with light myopically defocused by the non-central power of the
| contact lens. Kubota Glasses technology leverages
| nanotechnology in its electronic glasses-based device and seeks
| to reduce the progression of myopia by actively stimulating the
| retina for shorter periods while maintaining high-quality
| central vision and not affecting daily activities."_
|
| Which seems to indicate the main beneficiaries will be
| children, to slow the progression of myopia. As it mentions,
| there are already multi-focal contact lenses used for that
| purpose.
|
| Since the contacts don't seem to be marketed at adults, I
| suspect this will be similar.
| outworlder wrote:
| > leverages nanotechnology
|
| What's the "nanotechnology" they are using, and how would
| that relate to the device's function?
|
| I'll see if I can find blockchain and machine learning
| somewhere in there.
| tyingq wrote:
| They have you covered in other press releases:
|
| "Kubota Vision Demonstrates 3D Imaging Capabilities Using
| AI on PBOS"
| gumby wrote:
| Poor choice of words; the headline should read "Myopia
| _treatment_ 'smart glasses'..."
|
| "Eyeglasses" are considered corrective lenses in US (at least)
| usage (because they correct the distortion of the body's lens).
| dang wrote:
| Ok, we'll use that above. Thanks!
| timonoko wrote:
| BTW: -2 shortsightness is the optimal. You can see your own hands
| and what you are doing and eating until the day you die. I happen
| to be those lucky few. On sunny days the iris is so small I can
| manage without glasses.
| phonebucket wrote:
| I'm short-sighted. I'm more worried about blurry traffic than
| blurry food.
| jonplackett wrote:
| Damn my long-sightedness!
| ihaveajob wrote:
| Reads like snake oil to me. I'd love to learn how this devices
| reshapes your eye lens when not worn. There are methods out there
| that people swear by, but I haven't seen a drop of evidence. I'd
| jump at the opportunity if it worked.
| outworlder wrote:
| If this worked I would take a loan if that's what it took.
|
| Most likely snake oil. Even more so since they are calling it
| "smart", I'm surprised there's no blockchain.
|
| Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. This thing
| can somehow physically reshape the eyes (or the cornea at
| least) permanently, with no surgery.
| jonnydubowsky wrote:
| Let's hope it doesn't pan out like it did for Nathan R.
| Johnson...
|
| http://whywouldanyonebuythat.blogspot.com/2010/02/opti-
| grab-....
|
| Clip from Steve Martin's "The Jerk"
| https://youtu.be/i5jTH89HjTA
| bilegeek wrote:
| There is Orthokeratology, which physically deforms the cornea
| via a contact lens, and lasts about a day or two. But it isn't
| ideal, and can have bad outcomes.
| npongratz wrote:
| A day or two if you're lucky. If you happen to have corneas
| like mine, you'll get about 9 hours before suffering a fast
| decline:
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21546732
|
| No lasting bad effects for me, at least. I'm still glad I
| tried it.
| skulk wrote:
| Isn't there a period of time during this decline where you
| can't wear your normal corrective lenses because they are
| too strong? That sounds horrible.
| npongratz wrote:
| That's correct, at least in my experience. I could have
| worked around the every-afternoon decline by carrying a
| number of glasses in -1.00 to -6.00 and switching among
| them as needed, or by wearing the ortho-k lenses, which I
| could tolerate with my eyes closed while I slept, but
| would have been intolerable while performing any normal
| activities. Either way, that completely negated my goal
| of being able to live corrective lens-free during my
| waking hours.
|
| The other thing that really bugged me was the fact that
| these lenses could not correct my vision across my entire
| dilated pupil, and that issue also got worse as the day
| went on. That resulted in terrible halos around light
| sources in high contrast situations, such as at night
| when driving home from work.
| afrojack123 wrote:
| It doesn't take a genius to realize man never had myopia or
| vision problems until the recent 2 decades. Generalize this too
| any disease. If everybody is getting it(cancer,autism, ALS etc),
| its an environmental disease.
| rob74 wrote:
| This headline is a classic example of "burying the lede". Er...
| glasses that correct myopia? Haven't those been around for, like,
| at least 600 years?
| dorfsmay wrote:
| Correcting? They mean temporarily cure... If this works, it's
| fascinating!
|
| One thing I have been wondering for a while, and I thought this
| what it was when I read the title, is, why can't we have zoom
| lenses with a camera turned inword to the retina applying
| autofocus algorithms? As I age, I need a different prescription
| for every 20 cm I push my laptop back, something like this would
| be very useful.
|
| Anybody knows what happened to this project
| https://www.core77.com/posts/12220/brilliant-water-based-eye... ?
| gcheong wrote:
| It's not clear what the current status is but this is the
| website for that project: http://cvdw.org . Last Facebook post
| was in 2018.
| midjji wrote:
| "It projects an image from the lens of the unit onto the wearer's
| retina to correct the refractive error that causes
| nearsightednes" so regular glasses then...
| u678u wrote:
| BTW there was an interesting article on Myopia yesterday on how
| Covid lockdowns will harm children's eyesite.
| https://www.dw.com/en/covid-19-and-eyesight-myopia-on-the-ri...
| whoisburbansky wrote:
| It looks like the article doesn't have any details on how this
| works, anybody care to speculate on a potential mechanism here?
| stevebmark wrote:
| It doesn't work, this is terrible reporting.
| WORLD_ENDS_SOON wrote:
| Completely speculation, but I wonder if it's using the same
| mechanism explored in the famous upside down goggles
| experiment: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upside_down_goggles
| Gizmodo article talking about the effect:
| https://io9.gizmodo.com/does-your-brain-really-have-the-powe...
|
| Basically, if you wear goggles that distort your vision for
| long enough, your visual processing adapts and "corrects" for
| the distortion such that you can function normally. Then if you
| remove the goggles your brain still tries to correct for the
| distortion that isn't there (for a while at least), so the
| world appears distorted without the glasses.
| misterbwong wrote:
| More details from the Bloomberg PR:
|
| Kubota Glasses technology works to reduce the increase in axial
| length associated with myopia by projecting myopically-
| defocused virtual images generated using micro-LEDS on the
| peripheral visual field to actively stimulate the retina.
| Passive stimulation using myopic defocus is already in use in
| the US with a contact lens, "MiSight^(r) 1 day" by
| CooperVision, which is U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)
| approved to slow the progression of myopia. This product, which
| uses multifocal contact lens technology, passively stimulates
| the entire peripheral retina with light myopically defocused by
| the non-central power of the contact lens. Kubota Glasses
| technology leverages nanotechnology in its electronic glasses-
| based device and seeks to reduce the progression of myopia by
| actively stimulating the retina for shorter periods while
| maintaining high-quality central vision and not affecting daily
| activities.
| Bud wrote:
| Key words: "reduce the progression". Which means that
| marketing this as a cure is a complete fraud.
| dangjc wrote:
| This is similar to the "active focus" method:
| https://endmyopia.org/
|
| I've been in this Facebook group for a while and lots of people
| have great personal anecdata about their improvements. It's
| really interesting to see a medical device come out and if they
| have clinical trials to back it up.
| [deleted]
| sedatk wrote:
| From the article: It projects an image from the lens of the
| unit onto the wearer's retina to correct the refractive error
| that causes nearsightedness. Wearing the device 60 to 90
| minutes a day corrects myopia according to the Japanese
| company.
| google234123 wrote:
| How does this actually help treat nearsightedness when not
| wearing it? Does it change the shape of the eye ball?
| feanaro wrote:
| It's probably based on the theory that over a longer time
| frame the eye adapts to slightly defocused images in order
| to bring them in focus. The key is that the image must be
| defocused only slightly, not grossly.
| RHSeeger wrote:
| It's amazing what the eye can adapt to. The story of the
| man who wore the glasses that turned everything upside
| down... and his brain just adapted to it and he saw
| things normally... is fascinating to me.
|
| And then there's my eyes. I have severe double vision (as
| a result of surgery last year) and my brain is just like
| "meh, suck it up"; and I'm left walking into things on
| regular basis because there's two of everything. How come
| _his_ brain figured out upside down, and mine can't
| figure out 2 of everything? (I'm not actually asking,
| just complaining a bit /sigh)
| throwaway314158 wrote:
| Since it doesn't come in contact with the eye, that doesn't
| seem to be likely. It could be training the muscles that
| adjust the curvature of your lens.
| bilegeek wrote:
| It doesn't seem like it. They've had what you're talking
| about already: Orthokeratology[1], in which contact lenses
| temporarily reshape the cornea.
|
| [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orthokeratology
| mmcconnell1618 wrote:
| No details in the article but I assume the "smart" part of
| the name implies it can adjust the image to adapt to
| different people. It's possible it has some kind of
| algorithm to slowly adjust the prescription over the 60 to
| 90 days so that your body begins to adjust by making eye
| muscles stronger. The visual equivalent of braces for your
| teeth. No real details, just speculation.
| drewzero1 wrote:
| (Speculation) Most non-surgical treatments I've looked into
| to help with nearsightedness are focused on strengthening
| the muscles that shape the eye's lens. I wonder if this is
| designed to train those muscles.
| [deleted]
| f430 wrote:
| now if only they had something for astigmatism. There's
| surprising lack of progress
| plussed_reader wrote:
| That's a tough nut to crack as everyones axis to the
| astigmatism is custom, nevermind the combination of powers to
| compensate for the actual focal issues.
|
| And all of those details shift over time, too.
| f430 wrote:
| I wonder if there is a way to "read" how elongated your
| eyeball is, detect imperfections on the surface level and
| create a smart glass that adjusts what you see based on these
| "customizations".
|
| Imagine training the brain to see properly, I doubt it will
| change in adults however.
|
| Even wearing light sunglasses helps tremendously but because
| of the socially frowned upon nature of wearing shades indoors
| and the long term effect of opening up the cornea constantly
| isn't good, it is a bandaid problem.
|
| I look good too in shades and I can't use astigmatism as an
| excuse similar to how using one's Asperger syndrome diagnosis
| as a license to be insensitive cannot expect positive
| societal feedback.
| plussed_reader wrote:
| Enchroma has a product to correct for varities of color
| blindness, but they overall effect is still sunglasses to
| those looking at you.
|
| Like anyone with a visible disability it takes education
| and time to normalize things, triple-so for those with
| disabilities that are not immediately presenting.
| arusahni wrote:
| Would you say there's a stigma?
| graeme wrote:
| Ugh. I had fairly stable myopia and was content. Recently
| developed astigmatism in my strong eye and so my overall vision
| is substantially worse.
|
| Anyone know what can cause sudden onset of astigmatism in
| adulthood? It appeared a couple years ago and seems stable. Not
| sure over what period it appeared, probably in 3-12 months.
| [deleted]
| stevebmark wrote:
| This will absolutely not, under any circumstances, "correct"
| myopia. You can only slow its progression, with techniques like:
|
| - Pupil dilating eye drops
|
| - Wearing corrective lenses as little as possible
|
| - Wearing glasses with fogged edges/rims
|
| - Reducing the time you hold objects close to your face
|
| The major factor behind all of this is to reduce the over
| focusing of light on your retina and fovea. The more light that
| focuses back there, the more your eye is told to grow longer.
|
| Every parent should know this and how it works. And so should
| your ophthalmologist, most of which are clueless.
|
| You can't, in any way, undo this growth once it's happened. This
| is terrible reporting.
| unexpected wrote:
| You so sure about that? My myopia has gone from -5.50 to -4.00
| over the years.
| vasquez wrote:
| If you're nearing/above 40 this could be age related
| farsightedness, i.e. presbyopia.
|
| https://www.nvisioncenters.com/farsightedness/and-age/
| cupofcoffee wrote:
| What did you do?
| kyriakos wrote:
| Pay walled.
| mepian wrote:
| Private mode circumvents the paywall.
| kyriakos wrote:
| Thanks
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-01-25 23:00 UTC)