4 ms·

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

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 6y ago
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)
- taneq 6y ago
  Yeah, adaptation is incredible when it works but is also hit-and-miss. I don't like the trend of hyperventilating about "your body is amazing and can adapt to anything" because it comes with an unspoken rider of "so if you have problems it's probably just a character flaw".
taneq 6y ago
So wear slightly weaker glasses? Yep.
- google234123 6y ago
  I don't think this has been conclusively demonstrated yet.
  - benibela 6y ago
    There was one famous study that discovered wearing weaker glasses made myopia worse, and then everyone was too afraid to make further studies
    - feanaro 6y ago
      I think you may be referring to Chung, Mohidin, O'Leary (2002) <https://doi.org/10.1016/S0042-6989(02)00258-4 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0042-6989(02)00258-4>. I know of at least one other study confirming this result (https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1444-0938.2006.00055.x https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1444-0938.2006.00055.x). This was controversial since it seems to be contrary to results of similar studies on animals. However, in both of those studies, participants wore their under-corrective glasses continually, regardless of whether they were doing near-work or just walking / looking at a distance. This is a crucial error, as pointed out by at least Hung and Ciuffreda: <https://www.oepf.org/sites/default/files/journals/jbo-volume-15-issue-3/15-3%20Hung-Ciuffreda.pdf https://www.oepf.org/sites/default/files/journals/jbo-volume...>. It makes intuitive sense to me that under-corrective or anti-corrective glasses should only be worn for a limited amount of time each time and only when doing near-work, in order to induce temporary pressure that the (feedback systems of the) eye can then attempt to correct. Also see this 2009 review by Barrett regarding the more general practice of behavioral vision therapy: <https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-1313.2008.00607.x https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-1313.2008.00607.x>. Behavioural vision therapy is a wider term, referring not only to the effort to slow myopia, but also to correct other vision problems through changes in behaviour.

RHSeeger 6y ago

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)

taneq 6y ago
Yeah, adaptation is incredible when it works but is also hit-and-miss. I don't like the trend of hyperventilating about "your body is amazing and can adapt to anything" because it comes with an unspoken rider of "so if you have problems it's probably just a character flaw".

taneq 6y ago

So wear slightly weaker glasses? Yep.

google234123 6y ago
I don't think this has been conclusively demonstrated yet.
- benibela 6y ago
  There was one famous study that discovered wearing weaker glasses made myopia worse, and then everyone was too afraid to make further studies
  - feanaro 6y ago
    I think you may be referring to Chung, Mohidin, O'Leary (2002) <https://doi.org/10.1016/S0042-6989(02)00258-4 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0042-6989(02)00258-4>. I know of at least one other study confirming this result (https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1444-0938.2006.00055.x https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1444-0938.2006.00055.x). This was controversial since it seems to be contrary to results of similar studies on animals. However, in both of those studies, participants wore their under-corrective glasses continually, regardless of whether they were doing near-work or just walking / looking at a distance. This is a crucial error, as pointed out by at least Hung and Ciuffreda: <https://www.oepf.org/sites/default/files/journals/jbo-volume-15-issue-3/15-3%20Hung-Ciuffreda.pdf https://www.oepf.org/sites/default/files/journals/jbo-volume...>. It makes intuitive sense to me that under-corrective or anti-corrective glasses should only be worn for a limited amount of time each time and only when doing near-work, in order to induce temporary pressure that the (feedback systems of the) eye can then attempt to correct. Also see this 2009 review by Barrett regarding the more general practice of behavioral vision therapy: <https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-1313.2008.00607.x https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-1313.2008.00607.x>. Behavioural vision therapy is a wider term, referring not only to the effort to slow myopia, but also to correct other vision problems through changes in behaviour.