3 ms·

Until recently, eyeglass manufacturers were marketing blue light filtered lenses (which don't even filter much blue light anyway) as a way to prevent macular de

Until recently, eyeglass manufacturers were marketing blue light filtered lenses (which don't even filter much blue light anyway) as a way to prevent macular degeneration, until regulators shut it down. VPN providers shouldn't be allowed to claim that VPNs protect you from malware or that they do a better job at protecting data in transit than vanilla SSL.

kaplun 3y ago
Hey, I have such glasses, and here in France at least they are still marketed. Do you have any reference pointing out the fact that they do not work? (Are they even worse than regular glasses?)
- gurchik 3y ago
  > they are still marketed They're still marketed as a way to prevent macular degeneration?
KnobbleMcKnees 3y ago
Any source on the blue light filtering not working? I didn't get the filter on my latest glasses and feel like my eyes fatigue more quickly, but I'm aware that could just be aging or a change in monitors, lighting, etc. which have occurred since my last subscription update.
- gurchik 3y ago
  The lenses I'm talking about are the ones that are completely or nearly completely clear. Here's a photo of the "Everyday" blue light lenses on Zenni Optical as an example. They are marketed as blocking 16x more blue light than normal lenses. https://static.zennioptical.com/marketing/campaign/blokz/2023/LP/carousel/standard-lg.png https://static.zennioptical.com/marketing/campaign/blokz/202... How could it be blocking any significant amount of light in the visible spectrum and still be clear? I'm sure the "16x" claim is true, but normal lenses block a small amount of light. 16 times nearly zero is still nearly zero. It's just a marketing gimmick. Zenni Optical also sells lenses which are orange. I'm sure that actually does block a significant amount of blue light, but I also know from my experience visiting optician offices that many consumers are buying the first kind. I'm aware of studies which link blue light to eye fatigue and disruption of the circadian rhythm but I'm skeptical that blocking 5% of blue light or whatever could have a perceptible medical effect. With that being said, I don't feel strongly about claims like the 16x thing if its actually true (just a bit misleading). My comment above was mostly about the claims that they prevent macular degeneration which there is no evidence for. And regulators are right to jump in before it gets too bad, otherwise why stop at macular degeneration? Just say your lenses prevent hair loss and skin cancer while you're at it.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
girvo 3y ago
They still push them at the sales end of optometrists here in Australia. My optometrist partner always gives them death stares whenever they try to push that blue light filtering scam when I'm getting new lenses (like I did a week ago)
mschuster91 3y ago
> VPN providers shouldn't be allowed to claim that VPNs protect you from malware or that they do a better job at protecting data in transit than vanilla SSL. That's... not exactly true, given what definition of "protecting" you follow. VPNs definitely can protect against some forms of attacks that plain old HTTPS can't: - malicious QoS/routing policies at the ISP (or a public WiFi operator) that, say, down-prioritise or throttle stuff like YouTube, or route it through backed-up links (German Telekom was infamous for bad peering towards high traffic sites including Youtube [1] or where they all but extorted money from "double paid traffic" from server owners [2]) - ISPs hijacking DNS for a myriad of reasons (NXDOMAIN ad-hijacks, government-ordered censorship, thinking they can offer "improved" DNS service by simply answering all requests going out on UDP53 with their own servers [3], ...) - ISPs and WiFi operators listening on DNS requests or doing traffic analysis to sell to advertisers [4] - other devices on the network attacking your machine (e.g. in a coworking space) - proper VPN software like Cisco will "cut off" all communication with the outside with the exception of the remote VPN endpoint IP and DHCP. The part about malware is more sketchy, but in case the VPN operator uses something like PiHole and other shared lists of malware domains and IPs to blacklist common-known vectors and C&C sites, it is a valid statement. [1] https://winfuture.de/news,63355.html https://winfuture.de/news,63355.html [2] https://www.golem.de/news/hetzner-und-netzneutralitaet-extrakosten-fuer-bessere-anbindung-an-telekom-kunden-1511-117711.html https://www.golem.de/news/hetzner-und-netzneutralitaet-extra... [3] https://labs.ripe.net/author/babak_farrokhi/is-your-isp-hijacking-your-dns-traffic/ https://labs.ripe.net/author/babak_farrokhi/is-your-isp-hija... [4] https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/03/AR2008040304052.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/0...

kaplun 3y ago

Hey, I have such glasses, and here in France at least they are still marketed. Do you have any reference pointing out the fact that they do not work? (Are they even worse than regular glasses?)

gurchik 3y ago
> they are still marketed They're still marketed as a way to prevent macular degeneration?

KnobbleMcKnees 3y ago

Any source on the blue light filtering not working? I didn't get the filter on my latest glasses and feel like my eyes fatigue more quickly, but I'm aware that could just be aging or a change in monitors, lighting, etc. which have occurred since my last subscription update.

gurchik 3y ago
The lenses I'm talking about are the ones that are completely or nearly completely clear. Here's a photo of the "Everyday" blue light lenses on Zenni Optical as an example. They are marketed as blocking 16x more blue light than normal lenses. https://static.zennioptical.com/marketing/campaign/blokz/2023/LP/carousel/standard-lg.png https://static.zennioptical.com/marketing/campaign/blokz/202... How could it be blocking any significant amount of light in the visible spectrum and still be clear? I'm sure the "16x" claim is true, but normal lenses block a small amount of light. 16 times nearly zero is still nearly zero. It's just a marketing gimmick. Zenni Optical also sells lenses which are orange. I'm sure that actually does block a significant amount of blue light, but I also know from my experience visiting optician offices that many consumers are buying the first kind. I'm aware of studies which link blue light to eye fatigue and disruption of the circadian rhythm but I'm skeptical that blocking 5% of blue light or whatever could have a perceptible medical effect. With that being said, I don't feel strongly about claims like the 16x thing if its actually true (just a bit misleading). My comment above was mostly about the claims that they prevent macular degeneration which there is no evidence for. And regulators are right to jump in before it gets too bad, otherwise why stop at macular degeneration? Just say your lenses prevent hair loss and skin cancer while you're at it.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]

girvo 3y ago

They still push them at the sales end of optometrists here in Australia. My optometrist partner always gives them death stares whenever they try to push that blue light filtering scam when I'm getting new lenses (like I did a week ago)

mschuster91 3y ago

> VPN providers shouldn't be allowed to claim that VPNs protect you from malware or that they do a better job at protecting data in transit than vanilla SSL. That's... not exactly true, given what definition of "protecting" you follow. VPNs definitely can protect against some forms of attacks that plain old HTTPS can't: - malicious QoS/routing policies at the ISP (or a public WiFi operator) that, say, down-prioritise or throttle stuff like YouTube, or route it through backed-up links (German Telekom was infamous for bad peering towards high traffic sites including Youtube [1] or where they all but extorted money from "double paid traffic" from server owners [2]) - ISPs hijacking DNS for a myriad of reasons (NXDOMAIN ad-hijacks, government-ordered censorship, thinking they can offer "improved" DNS service by simply answering all requests going out on UDP53 with their own servers [3], ...) - ISPs and WiFi operators listening on DNS requests or doing traffic analysis to sell to advertisers [4] - other devices on the network attacking your machine (e.g. in a coworking space) - proper VPN software like Cisco will "cut off" all communication with the outside with the exception of the remote VPN endpoint IP and DHCP. The part about malware is more sketchy, but in case the VPN operator uses something like PiHole and other shared lists of malware domains and IPs to blacklist common-known vectors and C&C sites, it is a valid statement. [1] https://winfuture.de/news,63355.html https://winfuture.de/news,63355.html [2] https://www.golem.de/news/hetzner-und-netzneutralitaet-extrakosten-fuer-bessere-anbindung-an-telekom-kunden-1511-117711.html https://www.golem.de/news/hetzner-und-netzneutralitaet-extra... [3] https://labs.ripe.net/author/babak_farrokhi/is-your-isp-hijacking-your-dns-traffic/ https://labs.ripe.net/author/babak_farrokhi/is-your-isp-hija... [4] https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/03/AR2008040304052.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/0...