Ryzumvi

1 in 3 children worldwide is now nearsighted, study shows -CNN

William R. Hall said:
My two sons are the offspring of a second-generation Chinese mother. Both parents China born. Extended family all moderate myopes. Being emmetropic myself, so glad my sons followed suit.
Click to expand...
An emmetropic optometrist. Thats a small club I bet.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Jenifer Ambler and William R. Hall
Emmetropic mother (later presbyopic of course) and low myope father. High myope myself and my sister was a moderate myope. Lots of emmetropes and hyperopes on my mother's side. On my father's side, lots of high myopes so I know where I must have gotten it from!
 
Our plan to make the world myopic and keep the money rolling is working! Along with the FDA we can get more products to market for the myopic carbon based ATM machines.

You conspiracy theorists can quote me on that.
 
Jenifer Ambler said:
Emmetropic mother (later presbyopic of course) and low myope father. High myope myself and my sister was a moderate myope. Lots of emmetropes and hyperopes on my mother's side. On my father's side, lots of high myopes so I know where I must have gotten it from!
Click to expand...
Low to moderate myopia is the superior visual status. Not a "disease". MYopia is genetic, but there is a lot of variety in inheritance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Derek Coombs
Michael Molamphy said:
Low to moderate myopia is the superior visual status. Not a "disease". MYopia is genetic, but there is a lot of variety in inheritance.
Click to expand...
Hi Mike.

Are we talking plano to -1.25D? Ask any athlete or any hunter/gatherer what is the preferred refractive error. I also wonder if people were getting monofocal IOLs, would they ask to have a -3.00 endpoint or would they prefer plano to -0.50?
 
  • Like
Reactions: h.c. jang
Why is it that scientist are predicting that 50% of the population will have clinically significant myopia by 2050?
 
Joe DiGiorgio O.D. said:
Hi Mike.

Are we talking plano to -1.25D? Ask any athlete or any hunter/gatherer what is the preferred refractive error. I also wonder if people were getting monofocal IOLs, would they ask to have a -3.00 endpoint or would they prefer plano to -0.50?
Click to expand...
All depends on their individual visual needs. I had myself corrected to -1.25 after cataract surgery and have zero regrets. Never wear glasses at work which is where I spend most of my life. Throw on some distance only glasses when I drive or go to a ballgame.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Michael Molamphy, Mike Alvarez, Jenifer Ambler and 1 other person
Mike Ware OD said:
All depends on their individual visual needs. I had myself corrected to -1.25 after cataract surgery and have zero regrets. Never wear glasses at work which is where I spend most of my life. Throw on some distance only glasses when I drive or go to a ballgame.
Click to expand...
Yes, -1.25 for office based computer users is certainly pretty ideal. As a skier, I enjoy having great distance vision and just wearing non prescription goggles. I am plano in one eye and -0.50 in the other. I do wear Office PALs at work.
 
Mike Ware OD said:
All depends on their individual visual needs. I had myself corrected to -1.25 after cataract surgery and have zero regrets. Never wear glasses at work which is where I spend most of my life. Throw on some distance only glasses when I drive or go to a ballgame.
Click to expand...
Oh you’re the guy’s oculars I have to adjust every time. How’s BIO at -1.25D?

Always wondered about this. Being myopic almost my whole life thought I’d want to be Plano but the world gets closer the older I get.
 
Michael Molamphy said:
Low to moderate myopia is the superior visual status. Not a "disease". MYopia is genetic, but there is a lot of variety in inheritance.
Click to expand...
That'll be my preferred outcome after cataract surgery some day. I'm already used to wearing glasses for far, and I like being able to read in bed at night uncorrected. It would annoy the heck out of me to need to reach for a pair of readers all the time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Michael Molamphy
Joe DiGiorgio O.D. said:
Hi Mike.

Are we talking plano to -1.25D? Ask any athlete or any hunter/gatherer what is the preferred refractive error. I also wonder if people were getting monofocal IOLs, would they ask to have a -3.00 endpoint or would they prefer plano to -0.50?
Click to expand...
-1.00 to -3,00 in my opinion. Hunter gatherers are rare birds in the modern world. We need to see critically up close.. Athletes can easily and safely wear contacts, as I, a high myope, have done since teen years. Calling myopia a disease is nonsense. It is often an inconvenience, but then myopes are the superior students, aren't they.? Also very common in scientists. and O.D.s. Thank God for myopia.
 
Mike Ware OD said:
All depends on their individual visual needs. I had myself corrected to -1.25 after cataract surgery and have zero regrets. Never wear glasses at work which is where I spend most of my life. Throw on some distance only glasses when I drive or go to a ballgame.
Click to expand...
Good choice.
 
Michael Molamphy said:
Low to moderate myopia is the superior visual status. Not a "disease". MYopia is genetic, but there is a lot of variety in inheritance.
Click to expand...
I don't think "myopia is genetic" is a reasonable conclusion when the incidence of myopia has increased substantially in a generation. -Charlie
 
  • Like
Reactions: Evan C Beus and h.c. jang
Charles A McBride said:
I don't think "myopia is genetic" is a reasonable conclusion when the incidence of myopia has increased substantially in a generation. -Charlie
Click to expand...
Valid point. What about the kids that all have their nose buried in an iphone starting when there are still teething and they stay inside playing video games instead of playing outside and getting any natural daylight.

Does that have an impact on their vision development?
 
h.c. jang said:
Maybe only nearsighted people are reproducing. :p

A dominate gene? Not that anyone's shown that.
Click to expand...
A lecturer once flippantly said there are more myopes now because with the advent of glasses and contacts they can find each other and reproduce.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: Mike Alvarez, h.c. jang, William R. Hall and 1 other person
Jenifer Ambler said:
A lecturer once flippantly said there are more myopes now because with the advent of glasses and contacts they can find each other and reproduce.
Click to expand...
This is so true. Without our correction for -3.50 and -6 myopia (me), we wouldn't have been able to drive our cars to our first date. It was a real "blind date" indeed. Eventually 2 terrific kids, their myopia genetically matching us. Indisputable proof of the genetic basis of myopia, the superior visual state. .
 
Joe DiGiorgio O.D. said:
Valid point. What about the kids that all have their nose buried in an iphone starting when there are still teething and they stay inside playing video games instead of playing outside and getting any natural daylight.

Does that have an impact on their vision development?
Click to expand...
I played outside all day in the 50s and 60s , and was a progressive myope. My son rarely played outside, was on devices constantly, and his myopia equals mine. So this outdoor play/light hypothesis is bunk.
 
Charles A McBride said:
I don't think "myopia is genetic" is a reasonable conclusion when the incidence of myopia has increased substantially in a generation. -Charlie
Click to expand...
Yes, but not everyone is myopic. Some people have a genetic propensity to become myopic and our modern lifestyle is causing those genes to manifest
 
h.c. jang said:
Asians are planning to wipe out the emmetropic population.
Click to expand...
the-office-damn-it.gif
 
  • Haha
Reactions: h.c. jang
Michael Molamphy said:
I played outside all day in the 50s and 60s , and was a progressive myope. My son rarely played outside, was on devices constantly, and his myopia equals mine. So this outdoor play/light hypothesis is bunk.
Click to expand...
Same here! We'd run around the neighborhood and ride our bikes everywhere, until the moms called us in. Still ended up -800 ballpark. Less now post presbyopia. My increasing dislike of night driving heralds lenticular changes despite still-great acuities.

Daughter is a mild myope, lots of screen time but also outdoors a lot. Her husband is an emmetrope and a heavy duty gamer.

Grandkid has Noonan Syndrome so we're all curious what Rx and vision will be like. Normal so far. Gorgeous big blue eyes.
 
As long as the powerful can create a new magazine and flood your email folder with tidbits, it's all good.

Nature nurture. Whatever. If a kid is going super myopic on cycloplegic refraction, I don't really care if the axial length is changing. Really, I don't. And, if said kid is put on low dose atropine and followed closely for 6 months and there is a slowing of the progression, who cares? Let's do this. I am not one for keeping a spreadsheet on all my cases. I can say there is not question that LDA is a hit with me so far. But I recommend against "myopia management" treatment protocols as often as I recommend it.

Or, do we just update the refractive prescription and watch all the kids progress like crazy?

Mind, I am not talking about putting these treatment options on all myopic patients. Some are not progressing fast enough to make a difference.

Why do we need Treehouse Eyes?

I do wonder why we all have to have such hysteria about myopia as a disease. Sure I have a handful of myopic maculopathy patients, but I have seen as many peripheral retinal tears and deatachments in hyperopes.

Maybe we can be reasonable and not be all in or all out on this.
-G
 
I've seen this directly as emerging countries go from agrarian to industrial. My first missions trip 20 years ago to Honduras we saw almost zero myopia in adults and kids. Five or so years after that I started seeing some, then my most recent trip there was far more myopia in kids as they spent more time in school and on electronic devices than out in the fields. We didn't have near enough pre-made glasses for myopia as we didn't expect it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Peter E. Tencza O.D.
Funny at ICO on the 70s we were taught the correlation between near work and myopia.....


School and myopia....


wonder why it took so long for the rest??
 
According to what I learned at OSU.....

In the 1960's the percentage of children that were myopic was found to be.....

Drum roll please....

33%
 
Michael Molamphy said:
Detection has increased, not incidence.
Click to expand...
I suppose the burden of proof rest with those that disagree, but any chance you have proof of this? I don't believe it. -Charlie
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Macuhealth
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Webinars
Menu