Reversing myopia

[Anonymous No.14693087]

Can you reverse myopia with plus lens?
I have ordered a few cheap plus lens glasses to correct my myopia.

Unfortunately I've been looking for peer reviewed research but can't find any.

[Anonymous No.14693103]

>>14693087
Maybe, but people have had mixed results with it. The Endmyopia movement recomrnds that you wear 0.25 diopter lower glasses than your prescription, and then practice "active focus" over time your eyes will adapt and after 3 months you can decrease the diopters 0.25 more.

Decrease close up time, and move your computer screen as faar away as when you start to see blurr, and practice active focus on it.

https://youtu.be/uDycBQJYVx0

[Anonymous No.14693111]

>>14693087
The problem with plus lenses is that if you get too much blurr, your eyes cant focus, and thus they dont get the stimuli needed to reverse myopia.

They might work if you do close up work

[Anonymous No.14693129]

>>14693103
Yeah they call it print pushing. But there's been no damn proof or peer review research

>>14693111
Yeah they're good for close glasses

[Anonymous No.14693202]

Myopia is a sign of higher IQ ubermensch.
Regular vision is a regular person.
Farsightedness is a subhuman.

It's pretty simple

>myopia = elongated stretched eyes = elongated stretched brain with more surface area
>20/20 vision = normal brain
>hyperopia = squished tiny eyes = squished smaller brain

I'm not meming. Everyone who's farsighted I've ever met has been a total retard.

[Anonymous No.14693236]

>>14693087
>>14693202
It's a symptom of lead deficiency. I'm not sure to what extent it can be fixed after it develops.
Lead deficiency also causes the cognitive defects.
It seems it basically robs you of the capacity for abstract thought. You can no longer look at an issue, pick what is important, summarize and simplify it towards the essential. This is what allows normal people understand the world, using their own mind, and think about things independently.
In the lead deficient, this mechanism gets broken, so everything seems overwhelmingly complex. The worst thing about it that the deficient are oblivious to this defect. Their broken abstract thinking means that they can't comprehend how things could be simplified the way others simplify them, so they see them as uninteligent people who can only understand things too simply, and themselves as the smart guys, who understand how complex things really are. Naturally, this causes a lot of trouble in my attempts to fix the issue, as the deficient can't be explained that they are retarded, and the remaining normal people are gatekeeped from any position where their decisions could matter, because the deficient see them as retarded.

[Anonymous No.14693262]

>>14693129
>Yeah they call it print pushing. But there's been no damn proof or peer review research
That wouldn't be good for the industry that wants to sell you glasses and contacts.

[Anonymous No.14693265]

>>14693236
>It's a symptom of lead deficiency. I'm not sure to what extent it can be fixed after it develops.
Lead causes myopia, but deficiency also causes myopia? Weird how that works.

[Anonymous No.14693277]

>>14693262
I want more arguments

[Anonymous No.14693353]

>>14693277
If you want evidence-based treatment, then spend as much time outdoors as possible. We know that bright light is protective against myopia.

[Anonymous No.14693503]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x5Efg42-Qn0

didn't we have this thread a few days ago?

[Anonymous No.14693516]

I'm sure it will be alright.

[Anonymous No.14694426]

>>14693265
>>14693265
Are you a bot? Where did I write that lead causes myopia? I have ever only written that it's its deficiency.

[Anonymous No.14694506]

>>14694426
Lead damages vision.

[Anonymous No.14694515]

>>14694506
No. It's essential for vision.

[Anonymous No.14694522]

>>14694506
No. It's essential for vision. Explain why people have very poor vision after it gets removed, if you disagree.

[Anonymous No.14694550]

>>14694522
>Explain why people have very poor vision after it gets removed, if you disagree.
Lack of bright light due to time spent indoors.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/opo.12069
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/16/14/2595
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1751-1097.2009.00637.x
https://iovs.arvojournals.org/article.aspx?articleid=2705915
https://iovs.arvojournals.org/article.aspx?articleid=2212760
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0127863

[Anonymous No.14694553]

>>14694522
>>14694550
BTW, Chinese children have high levels of lead, and their myopia rates are extremely high.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160412019326078

[Anonymous No.14694827]

Maybe myopia is excess vitamin a.

Sun exposure reduces myopia.

Sun exposure reduces vitamin a.

[Anonymous No.14695107]

>>14694550
Most of those are ambiguous as they were done with animals that wore either diffusers or minus lenses, (both are known yo induce myopia) so if anything it could be concluded that the eye doesn't emmetropize when the light is way too strong, and you misread this one:
>https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1751-1097.2009.00637.x
The animals were less myopic the less light they were exposed to.
>>14694553
Notice the units are different, also they describe a drop in the relevant years. (I suspect they might also know that it's the real cause)

[Anonymous No.14695159]

>>14694553
>>14694553
Myopia rates in China began to decline in recent years: http://english.www.gov.cn/statecouncil/ministries/202110/26/content_WS6177bf86c6d0df57f98e3d4e.html Note this is pretty decent for Asians, 90+% of people need glasses in some Asian cities, like Seoul. It seems that whites can do somewhat better than Asians, in Australia, whites didn't get comminly myopic until lead levels dropped below ~11 mcg/dl, when Asians in Australia already had very high rates.
>In 2007, Queensland Health studied the lead levels of children living in Mount Isa aged between one and four years of age.13 Of 400 children tested, 11.3% had blood lead concentrations
>0.48 μmol/L (10 μg/dL), [...] Repeated sampling in this same age group in 2010 showed the percentage of children with levels
>0.48 μmol/L (10 μg/dL) reduce to 4.8%. [...] Since these reports were published, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) has reduced the actionable limit of blood lead to 0.24 μmol/L (5 μg/dL).
>More recently in 2017, a pilot study assessing the blood lead of 30 children aged between one and seven years of age living in Mount Isa was published.15 Using the updated actionable limit of 0.24 μmol/L (5 μg/dL), 40% either reached or exceeded this level.
____________
>French et al. [14] found that the prevalence of myopia in children aged 12 years living in Sydney over a 6-year period (from 2004-2005 to 2009-2011) increased from 4.4% to 8.4% in Caucasian and from 38.5% to 42.7% in East Asian children, respectively.

[Anonymous No.14695186]

>>14693087
just replace your corneas.

[Anonymous No.14695196]

>>14695159
Sry. Bad copypaste
>In 2007, Queensland Health studied the lead levels of children living in Mount Isa aged between one and four years of age.13 Of 400 children tested, 11.3% had blood lead concentrations >0.48 μmol/L (10 μg/dL), with a higher proportion of Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander children affected. >Repeated sampling in this same age group in 2010 showed the percentage of children with levels >0.48 μmol/L (10 μg/dL) reduce to 4.8%. Concern was again raised regarding the higher proportion of Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander children with elevated blood lead levels.13 Since these reports were published, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) has reduced the actionable limit of blood lead to 0.24 μmol/L (5 μg/dL).14

>More recently in 2017, a pilot study assessing the blood lead of 30 children aged between one and seven years of age living in Mount Isa was published.15 Using the updated actionable limit of 0.24 μmol/L (5 μg/dL), 40% either reached or exceeded this level. The authors again reported a higher proportion of Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander children affected. Despite these findings spanning more than a decade, there is no annual, community-wide screening program currently operating in Mount Isa.

[Anonymous No.14695308]

>>14693087
nigga just get laser eye surgery. shit is crazy good these days and is inexpensive. u'll be in and out in less than 30 minutes

[Anonymous No.14695371]

>>14695308
Poor choice, if it's reversible.

[Anonymous No.14695630]

>>14695371
if it's reversible it'll probably take years. just like it took years to develop

not worth it bro

[Anonymous No.14696547]

>>14695159
I'd put 0.9% down as within the margin of error. High school and college students in China have a myopia rate of 90%.

Do you have any direct evidence of deficient lead levels causing myopia, like a control and test group? Otherwise you're working with nothing but correlation, which doesn't eliminate many other factors (less bright light, more close-up work resulting in ciliary spasm, etc). The greatest risk for lead exposure in recent history was from industrial causes. In other words, in the last couple of centuries, we were likely exposed to far higher levels of lead than at any other point in our history. The Industrial Revolution was terrible in terms of exposure to heavy metals.

[Anonymous No.14697862]

>>14696547
>Do you have any direct evidence of deficient lead levels causing myopia, like a control and test group?
Yes. From the last thread: the prevalence of myopia was nearly halved in long term lead exposed workers compared to short term exposed workers, and even more of the long term exposed workers were hyperopic, while nobody in the short term exposed group was hyperopic:
https://www.bijojournal.org/article.asp?issn=1858-6538;year=2018;volume=5;issue=1;spage=12;epage=18;aulast=Elsir (see table 4)

>>14696547
>In other words, in the last couple of centuries, we were likely exposed to far higher levels of lead than at any other point in our history. The Industrial Revolution was terrible in terms of exposure to heavy metals.
No this is not the case per bone and hair, as well as sedimentary rock data. All point towards the opposite, heavy metals used to be present, and got depleted in the recent millenia.

[Anonymous No.14699675]

>>14697862
>the prevalence of myopia was nearly halved in long term lead exposed workers compared to short term exposed workers,
>see table 4
Huh?

>The distribution of refractive errors among short exposure participants as the following: about 23.5% were emmetropic, 5.5% were myopic and 9% were astigmatic.
>On the other hand, the distribution of refractive errors among long exposure participants about (24) % were emmetropic, 5% were myopic, 7.5% were hypermetropic and 19% were astigmatic

It's 5.5% vs 5%.

>>14697862
>No this is not the case per bone and hair, as well as sedimentary rock data. All point towards the opposite, heavy metals used to be present, and got depleted in the recent millenia.

https://dro.dur.ac.uk/11348/
>Man-made toxin exposure is one of the defining characteristics of the second epidemiological transition. Our analysis of previous data shows that lead levels in tooth enamel above 0.87 ppm are characteristic of exposure to anthropogenic lead. In British prehistoric and Early Medieval populations very low lead concentrations have been observed, but Roman, later Medieval and Post-medieval populations show much higher levels, up to 90 ppm. Our measurements of lead concentrations within the tooth enamel of four 17th and 18th century populations from Coventry and London show no detectable association between lead exposure and cribra orbitalia (as a possible indicator of anaemia caused by plumbism), but do show population differences which we attribute to lower exposure of poor and rural people compared to rich and urban people. No differences in lead exposure by sex were found. Lead isotope ratios indicate that coal smoke was not a major contributor to lead exposure, but that ingested lead from artefacts is the most likely source. We show that the lead to which people were exposed in the post-medieval period has a similar average isotope ratio to that in the Roman period, but differs from early and later medieval periods.

[Anonymous No.14699741]

>>14693087
>>14693103
I want to believe it's true but it just makes no fucking sense and I have yet to see any proof of anyone actually reverting back
>0.25 lower
that's pretty much almost nothing, so little that you can't clearly tell the difference normally and in fact I assure you most people with glasses already have 0.25 or more diopters missing from what their prescription should actually be (since their myopia progressed since getting the latest prescription)
But ok that's just one part of the endmyopia theory
>active focus
I am trying this on myself because why not; wearing myopic glasses when looking at a screen is useless anyway
But I have yet to see any improvement

[Anonymous No.14700066]

>>14699741
I dont know about plus lense therapy, but endmyopia has tons of people who improved their vision (me included)

https://youtu.be/E82Y3CgQQVQ

https://youtu.be/U0-AOs80Kp4

https://youtu.be/tvfMNURodu4

(To name a few)

[Anonymous No.14700083]

>>14700066
Are you saying the endmyopia method doesn't make use of lenses?
I'd check it out myself but apparently they only send you the 'course' via email for whatever reason

[Anonymous No.14700357]

if eye strain causes myopia then why don't hypermetropic people regress to emmetropia and then turn myopic, since they're constantly accomodating to see well?

[Anonymous No.14700468]

>>14699675
>It's 5.5% vs 5%.
No it isn't calculate the percentages yourself.
>Man-made toxin
More thousands of years:
https://iovs.arvojournals.org/article.aspx?articleid=2124447
Rome likely was able to restore consumption to near normal amounts. He data from ice cores suggest that a major disruption happened during the last ice age, peaking around 26ky ago (IIRC), and included the release of large amounts of metals.
Very little if any lead is manmade. As an element ut hasn't been made in any aporeciable amount.
It has been shown that fungi can obtain elements from minerals such as cinnabar, so their presence is natural, and mining can be reasonably expected to lead to their laxk in the food chain.

[Anonymous No.14700473]

>>14699675 #
>It's 5.5% vs 5%.
No it isn't calculate the percentages yourself.
>Man-made toxin
More thousands of years:
https://iovs.arvojournals.org/article.aspx?articleid=2124447
Rome likely was able to restore consumption to near normal amounts. The data from ice cores suggest that a major disruption happened during the last ice age, peaking around 26ky ago (IIRC), and included the release of large amounts of metals.
Very little if any lead is manmade. As an element it hasn't been made in any aporeciable amount.
It has been shown that fungi can obtain elements from minerals such as cinnabar, so their presence is natural, and mining can be reasonably expected to lead to their lack in the food chain.

[Anonymous No.14700504]

>>14699675
Sry, wrong link
>It's 5.5% vs 5%.
No it isn't calculate the percentages yourself.
>Man-made toxin
More thousands of years:
https://www.sciencealert.com/want-to-eat-real-palaeo-you-might-need-to-increase-your-toxic-metals
Rome likely was able to restore consumption to near normal amounts. The data from ice cores suggest that a major disruption happened during the last ice age, peaking around 26ky ago (IIRC), and included the release of large amounts of metals.
Very little if any lead is manmade. As an element it hasn't been made in any appreciable amount.
It has been shown that fungi can obtain elements from minerals such as cinnabar, so their presence is natural, and mining can be reasonably expected to lead to their lack in the food chain.

[Anonymous No.14701824]

>>14700357
all the far sighted people are mostly old because back then they didn't have to look at things up close

[Anonymous No.14703436]

>>14700083
Just watch jake steiners youtube videos. They are for free. You use sligtly weaker glasses than you are prescribed, so its slightly blurry. This blurr will be the "training" for the eyes to clear up with active focus.

[Anonymous No.14703489]

>>14703436
No this has been tried. Yes, this process still works, even in adults. (and it's fast, something like getting a free lasik every couple of months) The eyes of nearsighted people must either be aligning themselves wrong, or, even it seems they may actually be responding in the wrong way, unless the studies that show that not wearing glasses makes the eyes get worse faster are false, it seems that the eyes of the nearsighted respond to nearsighted blur by growing even more nearsighted.

Anyone who fixed their eyes by some "exercise" or other such technique must have had the true cause fixed by accident.