3 ms·

> The prevalence of cataracts by age 64 is in the neighborhood of 15-20%. But what is the lower bound where it starts to get that common, is the question? Does

> The prevalence of cataracts by age 64 is in the neighborhood of 15-20%. But what is the lower bound where it starts to get that common, is the question? Does it affect people in their careers that often? probably not. >Dismissive attitudes like this among the visually acute are one reason website accessibility is generally so poor. Sorry you disliked my analogy but it has nothing to do with website accessibility, merely the way you structured your argument/post in reply to my reasonable response of 'get glasses' to jumping to macular degeneration.

rectang 5y ago
> But what is the lower bound where it starts to get that common, is the question? This data is available at the NIH link I posted earlier, which breaks things down into 5 year spans. The lower bound is 10%, since that's the prevalence by age 59. > Does it affect people in their careers that often? probably not. The data makes this assertion obviously wrong. A huge number of people get cataracts during their working years. Fortunately, surgery to treat cataracts has a 95% success rate. Unfortunately, it's not 100% (and anecdotally I know multiple individuals in the lucky 5% whose vision has not improved after cataract surgery.)