Based on recent studies in Australia and Asia they recommend two hours of daily time outdoors for children to prevent myopia.
So it isn’t caused by looking at things close up, the confound was that people who spend a lot of time looking at things close up tend to do so under artificial light.
I don't even have very bad myopia (-2.75/-3.25), but I kick myself for not spending as much time outside during my childhood as some of my friends did.
The laser is definitely uncomfortable, hard to say if it's even pain when your ocular globe is injected with so much anesthetic. Brain freeze, but extremely acute and right behind your eyeball might be accurate. During one of the prophylactic treatments he did some 'spot welds' near my optic nerve. I couldn't tell if I was even looking at his ear like he told me to, every burst of green triggered my reflexes. It was impossible to keep my other eye open. At least the discomfort is so temporary, I forget about it until someone asks if it was painful.
All the science since I was born seems to be all study, no fix.
https://www.aao.org/eye-health/news/low-dose-atropine-kids-w...
Otherwise it looks like an option not considered seriously. I'm not going to medicate daily for the rest of my life to "decrease or slow by about a half". The promised result is wimpy - you still need to wear the same glasses till the end of your life, but hey, they have different numbers.
You wouldn't medicate for the rest of your life, just until adolescence, when eye growth slows down.
The promised result is far fewer high myopes, which means fewer retinal detachments and other risks of high myopia.
If it’s genetic, the numbers should stay relatively stable.
If its from a behaviour, there might be variation
You do realize that "natural evolution" doesn't happen within time scales of less than a single generation, right? The environment can change faster than that.
Both my parents are past -8, maybe -9 or -10? I forget, got some realllly thick glasses.
We’re talking about probabilities and statistics over large populations. Not every child who plays outside will avoid myopia, like yourself. But looking at the population, the expectation is that children who get more sunlight tend to have a lower incidence of myopia and weaker myopia.
You would probably have to put stage lighting in your house to get the same affect as being outside. My eyes behave pretty different and seem to get a "workout" when I am outside in sunny weather.
But regarding the lighting itself, yes i do think it is similar to stage lighting (brighter, i assume). Thermal and power is a significant concern with the lighting iirc, but i'm not too familiar. If i recall correctly the post that advocated these as a video and had an explanation on the difficulties. It heated up the room significantly.
With that said i want to stress that this was some post i saw several years ago, and i can't seem to find the video anymore. Iirc the lights were insanely bright, though.
My workbench is illuminated to 10,000 lux, which compares to common daylight conditions. Just lighting that small area requires 120 watts of high-efficiency LEDs. Lighting the whole room to that level would require nearly two kilowatts of LEDs. Most "super strong indoor lighting" is in fact very dim compared to sunlight. We don't realise it, because our visual system is incredibly adaptable to changing illumination conditions.
Sunlight is just incredibly bright. There's a reason why film crews often need to use huge metal halide lamps powered by a generator truck - it takes an immense amount of power to compete with daylight.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illuminance
https://www.arri.com/en/lighting/daylight/arri-daylight-18-1...
Normal indoor lighting is a few hundred lux and with the right setup, I was able to increase it to 1000 lux at where my head is generally physically located.
"Upon transcranial delivery, NIR light has been shown to significantly increase cytochrome oxidase and superoxide dismutase activities which suggests its role in inducing metabolic and antioxidant beneficial effects. Furthermore, NIR light may also boost cerebral blood flow and cognitive functions in humans without adverse effects. In this review, we highlight the value of NIR therapy as a novel paradigm for treatment of visual and neurological conditions, and provide scientific evidence to support the use of NIR therapy with emphasis on molecular and cellular mechanisms in eye diseases." [1]
NIR = near infrared light, 670 nm wavelength. This wavelength is present in sunlight, but not found in basically any indoor lighting with the possible exception of full spectrum LEDs and IR bulbs. Another study found improvement from NIR exposure, but only from exposure in the morning (for three minutes, once a week, at 670nm wavelength), and only in individuals older than 38. The study proposes that the effects they found from NIR exposure is due to improved mitochondrial function in the retina. [2]
The human retina ages faster than other organs, with a 70% decline in functional ATP production by mitochondria over a lifetime. The aging mitochondria, in addition to not producing as much ATP, also spit out junk amino acids that can cause chronic inflammation in the area (and signal cell death where none is called for?). As an aside, improved mitochondrial function is also proposed to be responsible for the significant health benefits of fasting and prolonged calorie restriction.
Another study also theorizes this mechanism:
"Our data suggest, 670 nm light can significantly improve aged retinal function, perhaps by providing additional adenosine triphosphate production for photoreceptor ion pumps or reduced aged inflammation." [3]
More study is clearly called for the better understand what is going on here and why. It seems like it could potentially have implications for age-related degeneration throughout the entire body, not just in the retina.
[1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7738953/\\ [2] https://academic.oup.com/biomedgerontology/article/75/9/e49/... [3] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5364001/
Tell you to do something every day for the rest of your life. If it does not work, scold you for slacking off. If your vision does not degrade, praise it all on the topical bullshit therapy.
NIR has been known to be useful for a while. Closer to 1000nm, penetrates deeper, but isn't as 'potent'
670nm is great, but you can notice it when it's on, ESPECIALLY if it's the only light in your room, which can be annoying.
It's true that NIR stuff is healthy for your eyes, but HOW much so, is up to debate.
I've bought 10 30 W NIR bulbs to no effect (range from 650nm-950nm), but on the other hand blue light bulbs have been helpful with increasing visual accuity (shorter wavelengths appear to your eyes as fuzzy, so your eyes push themselves to refocus more often, though at the downside of low dopamine levels and no will to do anything {maybe this goes away with time? But I've spent a few days doing nothing due to blue light and I like to be productive}, while red light has no effect on motivation, but worsens my eyesight (light appears in focus, no need to refocus, eyes get "lazy")
All of this anecdotal, but I really do like reading/learning about this stuff and NIR seems to be more fad than not in real world situations
So maybe just being outside isn't enough, but it obviously has other health benefits.