Slight myopia improvement consistent with modern theories

In February I heard of possible links between myopia and exposure to
sunlight (e.g. search or http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20427331.
100-generation-specs-stopping-the-shortsight-epidemic.html?page=2 or
http://www.physorg.com/news150487968.html). I have always spent a lot of
time reading indoors, and have got more shortsighted every year. I
decided to spend a great deal more time outdoors and see what happened.
I have just had my yearly eye test. My optician tells me that I am
slightly less short sighted (from about 20 dioptres + astigmatism to
about 19 dioptres + astigmatism) and my corrected visual acuity is just
under one line better.

There are apparently three possible explanations:
1) Ageing eyes - I am now 47, so it is about time I stopped getting more
and more short sighted.
2) More sunlight as above.
3) Some theories suggest that correction of peripheral vision may have
an impact. I have had to start using blended lenticular lenses, which
don't correct at the edges of the lenses at all (You can pretty much get
used to it, but I don't recommend it, because it makes it much more
difficult to look over your shoulder before changing lanes in traffic).

I thought I'd put this up to point out that there is at least one option
consistent with current knowledge for those who want to feel they are
doing something about their myopia - get outdoors more (even if much of
this is just taking your lunch break outside or reading on the patio
like me). At least under the moderate UK weather conditions it may not
do you a lot of good, but it's not going to do you any harm.
--
A.G.McDowell

On Dec 11, 9:47*am, "A.G.McDowell" <mcdowe...@mcdowella.demon.co.uk>
wrote:
> In February I heard of possible links between myopia and exposure to
> sunlight (e.g. search orhttp://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20427331.
> 100-generation-specs-stopping-the-shortsight-epidemic.html?page=2 orhttp://www.physorg.com/news150487968.html). I have always spent a lot of
> time reading indoors, and have got more shortsighted every year. I
> decided to spend a great deal more time outdoors and see what happened.
> I have just had my yearly eye test. My optician tells me that I am
> slightly less short sighted (from about 20 dioptres + astigmatism to
> about 19 dioptres + astigmatism) and my corrected visual acuity is just
> under one line better.
>
> There are apparently three possible explanations:
> 1) Ageing eyes - I am now 47, so it is about time I stopped getting more
> and more short sighted.
> 2) More sunlight as above.
> 3) Some theories suggest that correction of peripheral vision may have
> an impact. I have had to start using blended lenticular lenses, which
> don't correct at the edges of the lenses at all (You can pretty much get
> used to it, but I don't recommend it, because it makes it much more
> difficult to look over your shoulder before changing lanes in traffic).
>
> I thought I'd put this up to point out that there is at least one option
> consistent with current knowledge for those who want to feel they are
> doing something about their myopia - get outdoors more (even if much of
> this is just taking your lunch break outside or reading on the patio
> like me). At least under the moderate UK weather conditions it may not
> do you a lot of good, but it's not going to do you any harm.

My "protocol:"

- Practice meticulous visual hygiene, including frequent breaks

- Get plenty of fresh air, sunshine, and vigorous exercise

- Eat a varied diet, rich in fresh fruits and vegetables

- Practice ocular motility exercises (a/k/a yoga for the eyes)

- Use periocular warming (a WARMED (not hot) corn or rice bag over
closed eyes, for about 10 minutes, a few times a day)

This counters any ill effects ever postulated by idiots like Otis
Brown, and without introducing the risk of unintended consequences
like diplopia.

As you implied: can't hurt; might help. But ... almost certainly ONLY
for accommodative myopia; NOT axial-length myopia.

In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Mike Tyner
<(E-Mail Removed)> writes
>
>"A.G.McDowell" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote
>
(trimmed)
>
>It is rare for myopia to increase between 30 and 50. It common for it to
>improve.
>
I appear to be a rare case. One of the most worrying things was how
opticians started telling me that my eyesight would stop changing soon
pretty much as soon as I left university, but until this year (now 47) I
grew more short-sighted every year. Increasing myopia after University
is not unknown:

The paper "A Longitudinal Investigation of Adult-Onset and Adult-
Progression of Myopia in an Occupational Group" finds onset of myopia at
ages of 22-44. It finds 45% showing a myopic change over the length of
the study in a group with a median age of 29.7, and an age range of
21-64.

The study "Darkness and near work: myopia and its progression in third-
year law students." finds increasing myopia in law students of mean age
27 years, with a myopic increase in 83%.

(I found these on the internet, so I expect that searching will turn up
at least the abstract).

My lifestyle may be an extreme case. I liked reading and studying at
University, almost self-directed, and this became my ideal lifestyle. A
co-worker once commented correctly that, during winter, I rarely saw the
sun, because I was commuting before dawn and after sunset and indoors at
work all day. I work with computers. Anecdotally this is associated with
short sight. The health and safety agencies never found a link, but I
note that computer screens are often placed away from sunlight to
minimise glare.

The paper at http://www.newscientist.com/article/...1.100-generati
on-specs-stopping-the-shortsight-epidemic.html?full=true reports both
observational studies on people and experimental studies on chicks
reaching the same conclusion. I am inclined to believe that I am a rare
case of late myopia progression because I preserved into middle age the
lifestyle that typically produces myopia during school and university.

(Interesting counter-argument from that web page: a submariner reports
that he is not aware of increased myopia amongst his colleagues. That
environment would be an interesting test case. I would like to see a
proper survey from there, but I believe that there may be security
constraints).
--
A.G.McDowell

Dear A.G.,

Subject: Being told "fibs" about your eye's not going down.

When we place our natural eyes in a long-term "near" enviroment, they
"adjust" in a negative direction.

It is well known that this is the case for the natural eye (by second-
opinion ODs and MDs). It is DENIED by majority-opinion ODs as you are
well aware from their posts on sci.med.vision.

WIth each "new" minus, your eyes simply adjust as shown in this
(second-opinion) graph of the natural eye's response to BOTH a long-
term near, compounded by a strong miinus lens.

http://myopiafree.i-see.org/soonicansee/index.html

Enjoy,





On Dec 12, 1:33*am, "A.G.McDowell" <mcdowe...@mcdowella.demon.co.uk>
wrote:
> In article <sJWdnQOVrIk1S7_WnZ2dnUVZ_uudn...@giganews.com>, Mike Tyner
> <mty...@mindspring.com> writes
>
> >"A.G.McDowell" <mcdowe...@mcdowella.demon.co.uk> wrote
>
> (trimmed)
>
> >It is rare for myopia to increase between 30 and 50. It common for it to
> >improve.
>
> I appear to be a rare case. One of the most worrying things was how
> opticians started telling me that my eyesight would stop changing soon
> pretty much as soon as I left university, but until this year (now 47) I
> grew more short-sighted every year. Increasing myopia after University
> is not unknown:
>
> The paper "A Longitudinal Investigation of Adult-Onset and Adult-
> Progression of Myopia in an Occupational Group" finds onset of myopia at
> ages of 22-44. It finds 45% showing a myopic change over the length of
> the study in a group with a median age of 29.7, and an age range of
> 21-64.
>
> The study "Darkness and near work: myopia and its progression in third-
> year law students." finds increasing myopia in law students of mean age
> 27 years, with a myopic increase in 83%.
>
> (I found these on the internet, so I expect that searching will turn up
> at least the abstract).
>
> My lifestyle may be an extreme case. I liked reading and studying at
> University, almost self-directed, and this became my ideal lifestyle. A
> co-worker once commented correctly that, during winter, I rarely saw the
> sun, because I was commuting before dawn and after sunset and indoors at
> work all day. I work with computers. Anecdotally this is associated with
> short sight. The health and safety agencies never found a link, but I
> note that computer screens are often placed away from sunlight to
> minimise glare.
>
> The paper athttp://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20427331.100-generati
> on-specs-stopping-the-shortsight-epidemic.html?full=true reports both
> observational studies on people and experimental studies on chicks
> reaching the same conclusion. I am inclined to believe that I am a rare
> case of late myopia progression because I preserved into middle age the
> lifestyle that typically produces myopia during school and university.
>
> (Interesting counter-argument from that web page: a submariner reports
> that he is not aware of increased myopia amongst his colleagues. That
> environment would be an interesting test case. I would like to see a
> proper survey from there, but I believe that there may be security
> constraints).
> --
> A.G.McDowell

On Dec 12, 7:39*am, Otis <otisbr...@embarqmail.com> wrote:
> Dear A.G.,
>
> Subject: *Being told "fibs" about your eye's not going down.
>
> When we place our natural eyes in a long-term "near" enviroment, they
> "adjust" in a negative direction.
>
> It is well known that this is the case for the natural eye (by second-
> opinion ODs and MDs). *It is DENIED by majority-opinion ODs as you are

Monkeys? Form-deprivation? Lid-suturing??

YOU may be an ape, Otis, but -- Mr. McDowell -- despite sharing his
surname with one of the stars of "Planet Of The Apes" -- is likely
human.

Breaks, Otis.

Breaks, fresh air, exercise, and sunshine are pretty effective at
relieving pseudomyopia.

Now .... how is it that you failed to keep your own niece (, for God's
sake,) from becoming a myope with a restricted driver's license?

It's because you're a fraud, Otis.

In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
"A.G.McDowell" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:


> My lifestyle may be an extreme case. I liked reading and studying at
> University, almost self-directed, and this became my ideal lifestyle. A
> co-worker once commented correctly that, during winter, I rarely saw the
> sun, because I was commuting before dawn and after sunset and indoors at
> work all day. I work with computers. Anecdotally this is associated with
> short sight. The health and safety agencies never found a link, but I
> note that computer screens are often placed away from sunlight to
> minimise glare.
>
> The paper at http://www.newscientist.com/article/...1.100-generati
> on-specs-stopping-the-shortsight-epidemic.html?full=true reports both
> observational studies on people and experimental studies on chicks
> reaching the same conclusion. I am inclined to believe that I am a rare
> case of late myopia progression because I preserved into middle age the
> lifestyle that typically produces myopia during school and university.

Whenever I see a conclusion drawn from a simple correlation (near work
causes myopia), I attempt to turn the conclusion around. In this case,
I propose that myopia causes near work. This seems true in my life. I
was not diagnosed with myopia until fourth grade. By this time, I had
already learned how to be a failure at ball sports, presumably because I
had failed to learn eye-hand coordination since I couldn't see the ball
very well. On the other hand, I was very successful at reading, perhaps
because I could see the book very well.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA
(E-Mail Removed)

In article <dabel-(E-Mail Removed).
au>, Dan Abel <(E-Mail Removed)> writes
>In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> "A.G.McDowell" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>
>> My lifestyle may be an extreme case. I liked reading and studying at
>> University, almost self-directed, and this became my ideal lifestyle. A
>> co-worker once commented correctly that, during winter, I rarely saw the
>> sun, because I was commuting before dawn and after sunset and indoors at
>> work all day. I work with computers. Anecdotally this is associated with
>> short sight. The health and safety agencies never found a link, but I
>> note that computer screens are often placed away from sunlight to
>> minimise glare.
>>
>> The paper at http://www.newscientist.com/article/...1.100-generati
>> on-specs-stopping-the-shortsight-epidemic.html?full=true reports both
>> observational studies on people and experimental studies on chicks
>> reaching the same conclusion. I am inclined to believe that I am a rare
>> case of late myopia progression because I preserved into middle age the
>> lifestyle that typically produces myopia during school and university.
>
>Whenever I see a conclusion drawn from a simple correlation (near work
>causes myopia), I attempt to turn the conclusion around. In this case,
>I propose that myopia causes near work. This seems true in my life. I
>was not diagnosed with myopia until fourth grade. By this time, I had
>already learned how to be a failure at ball sports, presumably because I
>had failed to learn eye-hand coordination since I couldn't see the ball
>very well. On the other hand, I was very successful at reading, perhaps
>because I could see the book very well.
>
This sort of problem is why I am interested that the paper quoted above
reported experimental studies on chicks as well as observational studies
on humans. The experimental studies on chicks appear to specify a unique
direction for the arrow of cause and effect. Note also that the studies
do not suggest that near work is the trigger (or environmental component
of a complex relation). They suggest lack of light of the intensity
experienced outdoors.
--
A.G.McDowell