5 ms·

Exactly. For some reason this upsets people.

• rajeshp1986 4y ago
  I can say this anecdotally based on my observations of my elders in my village in India while growing up. They used to avoid getting glasses and eventually their eyesight became worse. I don't think the hypothesis that wearing glasses is causing near sightedness epidemic.
• epgui 4y ago
  Well, the optometrists I know seem to think this explanation doesn't make sense.
  • User23 4y ago
    Why is that? Also what do you mean “seem to?” They do or they don’t, right? Have they not actually told you what they think?
    • epgui 4y ago
      I'm modulating my language simply because I don't have a firm grasp on expert consensus, I only have a handful of optometrist friends, and I usually like to defer to consensus. I'm not sure why you'd think they wouldn't be honest with me: you should assume good faith.
      • User23 4y ago
        I am assuming good faith. I wouldn’t ask you why they believe that if I didn’t. Incidentally you didn’t answer my question: “why is that?”
        • epgui 4y ago
          I thought I did answer it with my first paragraph, but if that still seems odd to you we can probably chalk it up to English as a second language or to a misunderstanding.
  • kafkaesque 4y ago
    Optometrists are not medical doctors. It's better to consult ophthalmologists (plural) on this. They are better educated and the ones that actually do all the hands-on work on your eyes
    • epgui 4y ago
      I know that. But technically, optometrists have a "professional doctorate" in optometry ("doctor of optometry" or OD), just like doctors have a "professional doctorate" in medicine ("doctor in medicine" or MD). Neither MDs nor ODs are traditional doctors, which is what you would traditionally call someone with a PhD, and not someone who takes care of your health. I just don't happen to know any ophtalmologists, or anyone with a PhD who specializes in this, and in any case a good optometrist has overlapping expertise and concerns with ophtalmology and current research. Take it for what it's worth, no more, no less.
    • the_d3f4ult 4y ago
      I'm an ophthalmologist. Optometrist are very well educated and very competent. They tend to be better at things optics related like refractions, contact lens fitting, etc. and are perfectly capable of managing bread-and-butter medical ophthalmic issues. Ophthalmologists tend to be better at complex medical management, especially when there are systemic manifestations and own anything requiring surgical intervention. Optometrists do a 4-year doctorate. Ophthalmologists do a 4-year MD that includes the full spectrum of medical training (gen surg, ob-gyn, neurology, etc.) and then a 1 + 3 residency that includes 1 year of general medicine or surgery and 3 years of medical and surgical ophthalmology. There are, of course, optometrists who are very good at medical management and ophthalmologists that are very good at refractive issues (e.g. refractive surgeons). We mostly work cooperatively although things occasionally get spicy. I I enjoy working with and learning from my optometrist colleagues. I go to an optometrist friend when I need a refraction and an ophthalmologist friend for my annual.
      • epgui 4y ago
        PS.: ophtalmology residency candidates compete for an absurdly small number of seats in Canada/US, so an ophtalmologist’s opinion on optometrists should be weighed relatively heavily (they’re very smart folks). Commenter is being very humble.
• lmm 4y ago
  On the contrary, there's nothing people love more than blaming any problems on what the kids these days are enjoying, regardless of evidence. The evidence is actually pretty clear, what's causing this vast increase in myopia is not spending enough time in bright environments (i.e. outside) during one's formative years. In that regard cellphones (since they can be used outdoors) are a huge improvement over e.g. television. If we actually cared about fixing the problem, we'd be making it easier for children to spend time outside and making outdoor environments more welcoming for them. But that would require parents to allow children some freedom, or maybe even actually make some lifestyle changes of their own, whereas the revealed preference of parents is to lock their children up indoors all day and night doing something that looks like "studying" (i.e. pointless drills).
  • nsonha 4y ago
    No that's not it at all. It's amazing how people in this thread act like this is a new frontier in health care or something, thinking that genetics and exposure to light are the causes. It has been determined very conclusively that myopia is caused by spending too much time looking at close objects. That was in my highschool textbook like 20 years ago. Yes kids should spend more time outside but it has nothing to do with bright environment.
  • causality0 4y ago
    But is it the intensity and spectrum of the light or the fact that being outdoors means your eyes are looking at far more distant objects?
    • lmm 4y ago
      It's purely the brightness. If you're in ambient bright light you don't develop myopia even if you're looking at nearby objects the whole time (e.g. reading books or a phone), if you're in a dim environment you still (are at statistically elevated risk to) develop it even if you're looking at distant objects. This is something they've had to keep doing bigger and bigger studies on because everyone who hears about it has the same kind of thoughts as you did.