Free Capitalist Network - Community Archive
Mises Community Archive
An online community for fans of Austrian economics and libertarianism, featuring forums, user blogs, and more.

Are Optometrist Wrong? Eyes Don't Change Shape?

rated by 0 users
This post has 5 Replies | 2 Followers

Not Ranked
Posts 2,028
Points 51,580
limitgov Posted: Fri, Nov 2 2012 12:12 PM

Do people need glasses because the ciliary muscle gets weak instead?  Because we don't work it out enough, focusing on far away things and close things?

Could I restore my vision completely to 20/20, by just using pinhole glasses and trying to focus on far away things and close things for several minutes a day?


  • | Post Points: 35
Not Ranked
Posts 69
Points 1,600

I don't know how much I buy some of the claims made in this article, however I can talk from experience:

As a child, my optician used to prescribe me "exercises" to do. Cover up one eye and focus on objects for X-time, do the same with the other, read things of various sizes and distances without glasses.

They said that if I had any hope of my vision improving through "exercises' it would have to happen before a certain age (I think, 11?), otherwise I would have to wear glasses/contacts for the rest of my life, or undergo surgery.

As a child, I didn't want to do these exercises, and my parents had little luck in making me. I'm stuck with glasses today. Would I still have been if I did the exercises? Who knows? They must work with some people, else the opticians would recommend it. But why a cut off age?

  • | Post Points: 35
Not Ranked
Posts 429
Points 7,400

If your vision is bad enough (like mine), I don't think anything is going to bring you back to 20/20.

  • | Post Points: 20
Not Ranked
Posts 1,485
Points 22,155
Kakugo replied on Fri, Nov 2 2012 1:51 PM

I have worn glasses since I was eight.

That article is a lot of b***ocks. I have talked to both physicians and opticians about this. You don't lose your sight because your eye muscles get weak (more on that later), you lose sight because your retina has issues. These may vary from having too long of an eye bulb to various age-related refractive problems. In short it's an optical issue that can only be addressed by correcting the retina, either through lenses or surgery.

The muscle issue is mostly related the so called predominant eye. Most people have a "stronger" eye which over the years become dominant as the brain uses it as the main source of visionary input. This was once "cured" by forcing children to wear eyepatches (nowhere near as classy as a pirate's) to force the brain into using the weaker eye. Modern medical science has mostly debunked this theory and instead prefers a set of exercises (usually carried out under an optician's supervision) to minimize issues. Even if one eye is very slightly stronger than the other, over the course of the years the predominant use of a single eyebulb will cause muscular issues. The affected muscles are usually the so called internal recti, muscles located inside the eye socket next to the nose. There are well defined sets of exercises to exercise these muscles which mostly revolve around changing focus. Again, these exercises should be carried out under an optician's supervision because not two set of eyes are the same and they tend to fatigue the brain over the long run.

Also consider this. Modern lenses are an engineering marvel. With high quality Rodenstock or American Optics lenses (Zeiss are overrated and grossly overpriced) I have 12/10 vision. Despite my heavy myopia these lenses are just a few millimeters thin. Eyesight is not one of those things I want to **** with.

Together we go unsung... together we go down with our people
  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 496
Points 8,945

im with nonantianarchist on this.  My eyes are awful and i can almost guarantee just from being damn near blind my whole life that this wont work.

though i will admit that some blur in your vision is related to eye weakness generally associated with old age.

Eat the apple, fuck the Corps. I don't work for you no more!
  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 432
Points 6,740
Groucho replied on Fri, Nov 2 2012 2:18 PM

Samuel Smith:
why a cut off age?

Plasticity perhaps?

An idealist is one who, on noticing that roses smell better than a cabbage, concludes that it will also make better soup. -H.L. Mencken
  • | Post Points: 5
Page 1 of 1 (6 items) | RSS