is there actually any solid evidence that screen time causes myopia? my entire family wear glasses with the sole exception of me and i spend drastically more time in front of screens than they do
A side effect of spending many hours inside staring at a screen is that you are typically not exposed as much to outside brightness levels. The level of light that your eyes receive has a drastic impact on the way that your eye develops and not getting enough leads to myopia because the different parts of the eye end up growing at different rates.
Of course, when your eyes have fully developed you want to avoid the bright light to prevent cataracts. It's hard to win in biology.
Not in the sense that the screen, or any near work is the primary cause. Except for genetic factors it seems more related to the exposure to light of a brightness which can usually only be found outdoors.
Obviously this can correlate with both screen time, reading, and washing the dishes.
The belief* I had was that it is actually long periods of focus at a restricted set of ranges, eg some kind of atrophy. Though as in the footnote I realize this could be absorbed nonsense that followed the standard “screens == poor vision”. Happily when I was a child the threat to vision was reading books, which modern children are no longer at risk of ;)
* when I went to write this reply I realized that I don’t recall actually reading a paper on it, so it’s quite possible that it’s just another “everyone knows”-type fallacy
It's not really about myopia as such... There's really two things going on here: (1) Many people increasingly regard video games as an addictive drug [1]. And there's plenty of anecdotal evidence of young men literally dying because they don't do anything else but play video games for 10+ hours a day, everyday. For various reasons, Chinese culture takes a very, very dim perspective of addictive drugs. (2) Some people believe Tencent is too powerful. It's well on its way to being China's first trillion dollar company and it's not just a Chinese company any more, it's a multinational corporation (MNC). For various reasons, Chinese culture takes a very dim perspective of MNCs [3].
I suspect pragmatism will win in the end though. There's enormous demand for video games and it's simply not practical to completely ban them a la actual chemical drugs. To do so would also be ceding what is likely a trillion dollar market to South Korea... which would be totally insane.
It's genetic - some eyes grow incorrectly and the lens doesn't focus on the retina. It runs in my family, and I'll bet it runs in many Chinese families.
I had LASIK 13 years ago and haven't looked back. Will we see a wave of LASIK surgery in Chinese communities in the near future?
As far as I've read about it, correlations have been found, but not pointing to any single primary cause. For example, it might be that if you have N out of M unfavorable gene-environment interactions, the development of your vision suffers enough to be considered myopic.
China's Ministry of Education, in a notice late on Thursday, directed the publishing regulator to limit the number of new online video games, take steps to restrict the time young people spend playing games and explore an age-appropriate system for players.
Ah, the face of fascism. Imagine a country limited the amount of paintings that are allowed to be drawn, or the amount of books that are being written. Or introduces age limits for paintings. Crackdown on art because art expresses that which the Chinese government does not want to hear... Myopia my ass. What an excuse.
How can a sensitive organ like the eyes just keep on taking the sustained stress of bright blue light day after day, hour after hour, with little break and rest as programmers aren't too fond of doing (flow), without tensing up thus changing refraction? It's just physics and a very logical problem to tackle.
It's logical, but unfortunately not true. I've 20/20 vision after beeing a computer geek for 20 years and working daily (8+hours) staring at a computer screen programming for the last 10 years. So clearly computer screens don't cause myopia (although they might accelerate (or decelerate) it in combination with other factors).
Yeah same here. My friend wears glass and explained after he got his new prescription glasses that he could see in 20/20 again. We did a test because I was curious and I could still see much much better than him even with his new prescriptions. I've probably spent at least 8 hours every day for the last 15 years looking at a screen (often not in the best of light either) and my eye sight is great.
Are you a farmer? In the tropics? What about sustained sunlight in the open is not stressful? I live in a very hot climate and my eyes are very sensitive to the harsh sun. It's a bit more than obvious you'll have eye disease and your eyesight will deteriorate faster if you take direct sunlight for hours a day. Much worse than blue light, maybe, but much less common for white collar workers.
Your comparison is unfair unless you think the working class have it easy in developing countries.
I've heard this kind of argument a number of times before... but I really don't understand what foundation it grows from.
Our organs generally do not take "breaks", with the primary exception being our brain. Hearts don't take power-naps, skin doesn't... I dunno, stop being skin? Your digestive system may seemingly reverse course at times, but it essentially never stops. Why is it such a common belief that [organ X] obviously needs to take a break and that'll fix things?
It's being proven that fasting is very beneficial. What about that analogous situation don't you understand, exactly? Suggesting the skin and heart would have undergone natural selection to need breaks from their normal functioning is intellectually disrespectful or plain stupid. Some species actually do change skin, but apparently not so easy for monkeys. You also ignore sexual selection in that case.
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. Even with fasting it's not like it (or the bacteria in your gut) stops, it just changes for a bit.
Nutrition "science" is currently most-accurately applied with scare-quotes intact. Much can be learned and life can be improved by available information, but practically nothing is proven concisely. Broadly I agree with you - light fasting appears mostly beneficial from what I've seen - but under no circumstances can you accurately claim it is proven, and even "tangentially beneficial" / "being proven" is overwhelmingly up for debate.
And tbh I'm not sure how molting jives with sexual selection. Maybe? But how in the world do you prove that's relevant in humans?
+ I was suffering from increasing myopia and astigmatism yearly.
+ It turns out my power was all wrong, it was wrong by 2 dipoters !!
+ Why ?
+ It turns out if you spend 12 hours a day in front of a computer, you start suffering from 'pseudo myopia', a temporary state where your ciliary muscles cannot relax, its quite harmless and normally reverses within 1 week of no screen time, but if you go to an optician - unless they correct for it they will give a wrong power !! which acts as a negative feedback to increase your power !! :(
+ The solution is quite simple and that is to check your power under dilation (3 days of blurryness ). I managed to fix all my headache and eye pain once I got the correct power but I am quite pissed about the whole thing.
+ I apply 0.01 atropine before sleeping to force relax my ciliary muscles since I cannot quit coding.
+ Sunlight is key but only when you are young, as you get older and see more opticians, wrong power can do more harm than lack of sunlight.
+ Atropine works even without sunlight, it the best control mechanism we have in 2018 (outside of taking up a non screen job or working outdoor )
The doctor normally gives you a different muscle relaxant, you wont be able to read for 3 days.
The reason why more opticians do not do this is because its inconvenient for the patient, I beg to differ since my ability to see things is worth a lot more than 3 days of paycheck.
I saw a lot of different optician / doctors for it, but finally an optician / doctor researcher with a Phd fixed it for me.
I had this done before getting laser eye surgery to ensure my prescription was correct (it was wrong, just like yours) but the effect wore off within 24 hours. It is very inconvenient though, my pupils were fully dilated and I couldn't see anything within 2 feet of me!
That's brilliant! I noticed on vacations (before smartphones) where would spend most of the time looking at the horizon, that after less than a week, my eyesight would be so much clearer.
I always thought that myopia was caused by the old CRT screens or more like the too much time in front of screens was true 20 years ago. But not anymore.
Prior to my late teens (I'm 34 now) my screen time was extremely limited yet I have quite high prescription glasses which I've worn since the age of 8/9. My prescription has changed very little since my early 20s.
It's convinced me that my nearsightedness has come about due to the nights I spent reading books by the light of the streetlight outside my bedroom or a torch when I was a kid (after I was supposed to have gone to bed).
So IMO, what you really want to do is to avoid sitting in a dark room with a bright screen glaring in your face or straining to watch long movies and binge watching TV on your tiny 6 inch phone screen or read books without the aid of at least a lamp next to you. In general, use common sense and don't take things to the extreme. Anything that accelerates fatiguing the eyes should be avoided. That's not to say don't sit in front of a screen all day; that's pretty much all I do, but in a well lit room and with regular breaks my eyes never experience fatigue. Also, as someone else posted, having the right prescription for your glasses is also important.
I've been in front of a screen mostly all day for the past twenty years, and still have 20/10 vision. It's better than anyone else's that I know. There seems to be more to the story than just habit.
I've been in front of screens a huge number of my time during most of my youth and still had 20/20 for both eyes. At 25 my sight started decreasing and now I need glasses if I want to look at something in the distance. I have two theories about this, it's either my genes, or it's the fact that I started using a macbook pro with full luminosity at all time (even during the night) when I was 25.
Let’s not share anecdata or come to conclusions based on those anecdotes. As a community, we should be smarter than that, this is how shit like vaccine-denial starts.
And the following anecdote-laden discussion of “nun uh, not me” and “me too” is just so uninteresting.
Tencent owns 40% of Epic Games, 100% of Riot, and I think 10-15% of Bluehole. As well as 85% of Supercell, 80% of Path of Exile, 5% of Ubisoft, 5-10% of Activision (Blizzard), and notable shares in a variety of smaller studios that publish Cities: Skylines, Crusader Kings, Lineage 2, etc. They also fully manage the publication of games like Candy Crush and PUBG in China and even developed PUBG Mobile.
Tencent basically originated as an instant messenger with gaming integration so it's no surprise that they have large stakes in the gaming industry. It also helps that they're a huge company that dwarfs every gaming company in existence.
Have you heard of League of Legends? Path of Exile? Clash of Clans? Gears of War? They entirely own one of those, and own significant shares in the others.
I don't think this is about what can be found on Wikipedia. The reality here is that this company doesn't seem to create it's own games, but habitually acquires creative companies.
More to the point, it seems to be little more than a gateway company, selectively permitting the operation of a limited selection of pre-approved properties to operate within the confines of a planned ecosystem that is slightly more advanced than an artificial monopoly.
That companies acquired by this shell entity have continues to produce games after being acquired, should not be regarded as the shell company creating games itself.
Sure, it's clear that all of the games that I and others mentioned were not created by TenCent. Again, that's something that takes about 1 minute to discover on Wikipedia. But you moved the goalposts. Nobody upthread asked if Tencent had independently created any games. You are the first person to mention that. Why move the goalposts?
Seriously, this is Hacker News; most commenters here have at least some understanding of the nature of corporations. If you don't understand how companies work, at this ultra-fundamental level, and you think "how is it possible that this 'gaming company' can be worth half a trillion US dollars, but I've never heard of them", and it doesn't immediately occur to you that they're probably not really making the games themselves, and yet you're still curious enough to post the comment that quantitative posted, then you would be very much benefited by going and reading the entire Tencent article, top to bottom, and now you'd know something useful about how the world works.
I agree with you that Tencent appears to be primarily an investment-oriented holding conglomorate. I might even say that:
Tencent Holdings Limited (Chinese: 腾讯控股有限公司; pinyin: Téngxùn Kònggǔ Yǒuxiàn Gōngsī) is a Chinese multinational investment holding conglomerate founded in 1998, whose subsidiaries specialise in various Internet-related services and products, entertainment, artificial intelligence and technology both in China and globally.[3]
Tencent owns Riot Games which makes League of Legends. It also owns a majority stake (84.3%) in Supercell which makes Clash of Clans. It also owns the rights to PUBG on mobile
when I was in high school, we had only a few students out of a class of total >50 not having myopia, it is so common in northeast Asia - in Seoul, 96.5 percent of >19-years old nearsighted[1].
1. If it isn't a serious problem for you, don't fix it. You were initially meant to be a hunter-gatherer, not an office employee. Your eyes' resting focus point is about 6 meters away (~20ft, this is where "20/20 sight" comes from). If you need to spend the entire day looking at something that is 1 meter away, it's normal and expected for your eyes to readjust.
2. Don't blame it on yourself. It's mostly genes. Some people can spend 15 hours a day in front of a computer, and still see like hawks. For others, reading a book 30 minutes a day can be enough to cause severe nearsightedness.
Is there a valid reason to "treat" nearsightedness if it isn't a problem? I never cared about mine. A few times I tried somebody's glasses and surely enough I could see much better at a distance. But it's not something I need in daily life.
Exactly. I cannot drive without glasses, and glasses (expensive ones, mind you) cause me pain and a tickling sensation. This isn't much of a problem for me, as I drive 20 minutes a day. If I were a professional driver though, I'd definitely go for a surgery.
This is just so false and uninformed, couple of dacades earlier in China people with glasses on were seen as a rarity, meant he's not a peasant.
The current myopia near-crisis in China is clearly a sociological one, the gaokao is every Chinese teen’s only and foremost task，and they live their lives in drab & carmped concrete forests，don’t have idyllic backyards and weekend outings.
Teens are required to sit in cramped classrooms (we don't change room every course) more than 10 hours a day 6 days or more a week,the already meager physical and art classes (1 class a week each at best) were routinely canceled, to do the countless exam preparation and simulation, to get them to become the ultimate exam-taking machines, the higher score the students get in the gaokao, the more famous their school, teachers, principal will be，and yeah more money.
Beware Americans, this is what happens in China where there are no affirmative action or anything, pure meritocratic admissions.
This is also why I alwayes laugh it off at Chinese's high GRE or IELTS scores,or wharever high scores and statistics, as a fellow Chinese I just know all too well how they got it and it certainly doesn't represent their real level.
My first visit to China was in 1999, and glasses were already common back then, especially in the big cities I went to. The way they did eye sight exams at the eye glass shop was horrendous, however (my friend got a pair while we were there). It really is kids studying too much, I agree, but it could have also been TV back then and other things.
That's kind of a survivorship bias, and again uninformed.
People in China aren't allowed to move to cities freely especially back then, there are hukous to bind you to your birthplace, back then there were even police in Shenzhen dedicated to rounding up migrant workers (so called "blindly-moving migrants") and sending them back.
What I want to say is that you likely went to some major cities and observed people there, without realizing that those people are entitled to live there, meaning good chunk of them are well-educated and that education was a privilege you need to fight for, that means dedicated learning.
If myopia in China is genetic, then there is a big contradiction: in a generation of teens, those early drop-outs who went to factories and those who were putter around in schools rarely were myopic, yet those who are good academically and skinny had a high rate of myopia.
Yes, people who study hard and perhaps watch too much TV will have more eye problems, but they also have to use their eyes more and will be diagnosed more often with eye problems. You don’t need great eye sight to pick rice, and it is very probable that many farmers have bad vision but just never care (or could even afford) glasses, especially back 20 years ago.
A couple of decades ago, not being a peasant was a rarity outside of developed countries. According to Wikipedia, China's rural population was 97% in 1950. Now it's 50% or so.
I mean no offense, I was born in a Warsaw Pact country.
Non taken, I was referring to "Don't blame it on yourself. It's mostly genes." By this logic, "Don't blame it on yourself. being a peasant or not is mostly genes."
The thing is, myopia is simply caused by eye fatigue, few may be somehow congenital or hereditary, and it might be slightly comminicable through behavior patterns; "Some people can spend 15 hours a day in front of a computer, and still see like hawks" , some people stare at screens nonstop, some look away constantly.
Do you mean blame as in moral responsibility or as in causality? It's a crucial difference that people miss too often.
Of course, suffering guilt over a thing like this is not very productive. But correcting your behaviour, like letting your eyes rest, is still a good idea.
Actually it's mostly not genes but your day to day habits and science know from a long time how to reverse it (well, eyes doctors mostly don't know it...):
https://endmyopia.org/the-elephant-in-the-room/
This guy is a self-promoter and a fraud. He pushes some "cillary pop" idea that the eyes "pop" into position after looking at far objects for a long time. This has zero scientific evidence.
He has refused to come debate a scientist and markets a "secret" method for fixing eyes.
In short, I am all for natural eyesight fixes, but this guy is a fraud.
Why doesn't he get a group of twenty people together, record their progress, and then become a billionaire selling his method? I totally would if I had "the secret". In fact, if anyone wants to fund me to do eye-exercise research, I will quit my job right now.
There is no method. The blog and videos are public and free. Might be hard to understand for those earning billions of revenue from lenses and frames. Requires time investment to learn basic eye health principles which are well known to vision therapists.
The videos and blog are free. The paid service is for “coaching”. There are thousands of people in a Facebook group who discuss the free material on videos and blog. Based on the Facebook discussions, almost no one pays for the coaching, and even if you want to pay, you need an invite. The author seems to have a separate business unrelated to eye health. If he is trying to make money from the blog, he is doing a terrible job by giving away so much for free and making the paid service so hard to buy.
All of that is irrelevant to the point that the scientific knowledge is public, cited and requires no payment. If you are someone motivated to improve your vision, you get to decide whether you will believe what you can see with your own eyes. You can also find a vision therapist via covd.org, which can easily cost a few thousand dollars in the US.
You haven't answered my question on why he hasn't presented concrete proof if he is so sure his method works. Or would that hurt sales?
Edit: Your reply is as deep as the nesting goes, so I am just replying here. I will look into your link, but you really have done nothing to substantiate your claims.
There are many people in the Facebook group who can speak firsthand of their success in applying knowledge that has been known to vision therapists for decades. Anyone interested in improving their own vision can quickly find out for themselves. This is not specific to any one person’s “method”. Or you can pay for a licensed professional from http://covd.org
Edit: you are essentially asking for an explanation of behavioral opthalmology in an Internet comment. Any COVD professional will happily answer your questions for a fee. The Endmyopia site tries to communicate some of those principle in layman language, and it has required dozens or hundreds of blog posts and answers to reader questions. The link above provides a condensed explanation.
If wearing glasses works for someone, they are unlikely to seek out alternatives. The people who seek alternatives are motivated because glasses are not meeting their use cases, e.g. myopia has steadily worsened. That motivation then justifies their effort to learn the principles used by vision therapists, or the budget to pay a vision therapist for structured vision therapy that lasts months to years.
I used to read theories about what causes near-sightedness, whether it was spending too much time in the dark, or reading small text, or sitting too close to the TV (my parents' favourite theory), or whatever the pop theory of the day is. But the older I get, the more convinced that I've just had bad luck with the genetic lottery.
I don't think that environmental factors have as much of an effect as people think. Genetics and luck play the biggest part.
Indigenous populations (of most colonised countries) tend to have far lower rates of nearsightedness compared to Caucasians, despite living in the same environment. I think that maybe myopia was much more disadvantageous in Indigenous environments with an emphasis on hunting and traveling across wilderness than it was in Europe, with all its cities and roads. The ability to spot animals and landmarks from a long distance is much more important in areas with large open spaces, like the American Plains or Australia's interior, than it is in more densely forested and populated areas like Europe.
Seems to be refuted by [1] though there's no source.
>while the older generation of the Inuit in Canada had nearly no cases of near-sightedness, between 10 and 25 percent of the next generation was myopic
5% daily swings are perfectly normal in Chinese consumer internet stocks ;)
It's a buying opportunity. Gaming is a big source of Tencent revenue, but expect "online-to-offline" transactions growth to skyrocket. Everything from food delivery to ride sharing to movie tickets to doctor's office visits. To autonomous experiences mediated by AI that can barely be conceived of yet.
So, this is a good thread to ask - anyone ever try eye exercises in earnest?
The most logical one to do for me seems to be the near-focus, far-focus shifting. If it's a traditional muscle issue, then that should train it. (Though it seems that science can't decide whether muscles relax or contract to focus, and if they relax, it seems training them might make things worse).
I have tried keeping up 10 minutes of training a day for a while, and I didn't notice consistent improvement, but noticed great variance day-to-day.
I've done some against my double vision (a bunch of regular exercises at the doctors office with special machines and exercises at home). Seems to have worked, but obviously that's different muscles than myopia.
How much time did you put in? Hours a day / overall duration of the program?
It seems to me that there has never been any real research into fixing eyes naturally - it takes 2-3 years to learn to do a one-arm chin up. It seems like fixing your eyes might take a similar level of effort, yet research was never done on that scale.
Not sure, quite a while ago. rough estimate: Sessions at a "school" every 3 weeks or so for a few months, maybe an hour each, and 10 minutes at home most days? (supposed to do it daily, but I was a kid and certainly didn't actually remember it daily)
Seems like this kind of therapy is quite controversial though, with not much scientific consensus it actually helps.
We are taking this story too literally. China isn't going after video games in fear of eye health. This is an attempt to save their youth from video game addiction, and the affront of video game influence on their culture.
In America we would bristle at the thought of our government asserting control in how our time is spent. It's clear China has done investigation into the health effects of video game addiction has on their people, and this is the first step in correcting it. They are simply being careful to control the perception as they impose limits.
China really does have a myopia epidemic, and treating it is costly for the state. Preventing it by essentially forcing children to play outside will result in large cost savings.
92 comments
[ 2.7 ms ] story [ 173 ms ] threadOf course, when your eyes have fully developed you want to avoid the bright light to prevent cataracts. It's hard to win in biology.
Obviously this can correlate with both screen time, reading, and washing the dishes.
* when I went to write this reply I realized that I don’t recall actually reading a paper on it, so it’s quite possible that it’s just another “everyone knows”-type fallacy
I suspect pragmatism will win in the end though. There's enormous demand for video games and it's simply not practical to completely ban them a la actual chemical drugs. To do so would also be ceding what is likely a trillion dollar market to South Korea... which would be totally insane.
[1] https://index.qz.com/1024281/honor-of-kings-called-a-drug-in...
[2] http://www.ejinsight.com/20180608-tencent-walking-a-fine-lin...
[3] https://www.brookings.edu/articles/are-chinas-multinational-...
I had LASIK 13 years ago and haven't looked back. Will we see a wave of LASIK surgery in Chinese communities in the near future?
Ah, the face of fascism. Imagine a country limited the amount of paintings that are allowed to be drawn, or the amount of books that are being written. Or introduces age limits for paintings. Crackdown on art because art expresses that which the Chinese government does not want to hear... Myopia my ass. What an excuse.
https://www.nature.com/news/the-myopia-boom-1.17120
So gaming restrictions may indirectly help the problem, but only if it results in more time spent outdoors in bright light.
Too little time outside: myopia and lack of vit D. Too much time: skin cancer
No exercise: bad. A little bit more exercise than usual: oh everything hurts now
I would suspect that it's because they've evolved to take the stress, since we live on a planet that orbits a reasonably bright sun.
The outdoors on a sunny day is an order of magnitude brighter than even a well lit office or a computer screen.
Your comparison is unfair unless you think the working class have it easy in developing countries.
Our organs generally do not take "breaks", with the primary exception being our brain. Hearts don't take power-naps, skin doesn't... I dunno, stop being skin? Your digestive system may seemingly reverse course at times, but it essentially never stops. Why is it such a common belief that [organ X] obviously needs to take a break and that'll fix things?
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. Even with fasting it's not like it (or the bacteria in your gut) stops, it just changes for a bit.
Nutrition "science" is currently most-accurately applied with scare-quotes intact. Much can be learned and life can be improved by available information, but practically nothing is proven concisely. Broadly I agree with you - light fasting appears mostly beneficial from what I've seen - but under no circumstances can you accurately claim it is proven, and even "tangentially beneficial" / "being proven" is overwhelmingly up for debate.
And tbh I'm not sure how molting jives with sexual selection. Maybe? But how in the world do you prove that's relevant in humans?
+ I was suffering from increasing myopia and astigmatism yearly.
+ It turns out my power was all wrong, it was wrong by 2 dipoters !!
+ Why ?
+ It turns out if you spend 12 hours a day in front of a computer, you start suffering from 'pseudo myopia', a temporary state where your ciliary muscles cannot relax, its quite harmless and normally reverses within 1 week of no screen time, but if you go to an optician - unless they correct for it they will give a wrong power !! which acts as a negative feedback to increase your power !! :(
+ The solution is quite simple and that is to check your power under dilation (3 days of blurryness ). I managed to fix all my headache and eye pain once I got the correct power but I am quite pissed about the whole thing.
+ I apply 0.01 atropine before sleeping to force relax my ciliary muscles since I cannot quit coding.
+ Sunlight is key but only when you are young, as you get older and see more opticians, wrong power can do more harm than lack of sunlight.
+ Atropine works even without sunlight, it the best control mechanism we have in 2018 (outside of taking up a non screen job or working outdoor )
The reason why more opticians do not do this is because its inconvenient for the patient, I beg to differ since my ability to see things is worth a lot more than 3 days of paycheck.
I saw a lot of different optician / doctors for it, but finally an optician / doctor researcher with a Phd fixed it for me.
https://www.webmd.com/drugs/2/drug-336/cyclopentolate-ophtha...
The strongest dilation is 1% Atropine that wears out in 14 days, but gives you the most correct power.
Milder dilation lasts for 3-4 days, but is about 70% correct, so you could just do some maths to extrapolate (even though its not not ideal).
Weakest dilation lasts for hours but the lowest accuracy of the three options.
Anyway next time ask for 3 days dilation just to be extra sure and take 2 days off.
I couldn't get hands on it at first, so what I did was buy 1% atropine (easier to get) and used a syringe to dilute it using normal tear drops.
Somebody told me its not a good idea but I had no other options :(
I was fortunate enough to have somebody traveling to Asia, to get me 2 years of supply.
In Asia too its not easy to get your hands on it, I finally figured out that its easily and cheaply found if you ask around the pediatric department.
1) Look around in your country, pediatric eye doctors.
2) See if you find somebody traveling to Singapore, Honk Kong or Beijing.
3) If you really cannot get your hands on it (try ebay or something ) I will see if I can help.
But really talk to a doctor first, its just what I know and I have no medical training.
It's convinced me that my nearsightedness has come about due to the nights I spent reading books by the light of the streetlight outside my bedroom or a torch when I was a kid (after I was supposed to have gone to bed).
So IMO, what you really want to do is to avoid sitting in a dark room with a bright screen glaring in your face or straining to watch long movies and binge watching TV on your tiny 6 inch phone screen or read books without the aid of at least a lamp next to you. In general, use common sense and don't take things to the extreme. Anything that accelerates fatiguing the eyes should be avoided. That's not to say don't sit in front of a screen all day; that's pretty much all I do, but in a well lit room and with regular breaks my eyes never experience fatigue. Also, as someone else posted, having the right prescription for your glasses is also important.
And the following anecdote-laden discussion of “nun uh, not me” and “me too” is just so uninteresting.
They're worth trillions of dollars, but I've never played any of their games?
Tencent basically originated as an instant messenger with gaming integration so it's no surprise that they have large stakes in the gaming industry. It also helps that they're a huge company that dwarfs every gaming company in existence.
Here, let me help:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tencent
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tencent_Games
Seriously, go spend 15 minutes on wikipedia.
More to the point, it seems to be little more than a gateway company, selectively permitting the operation of a limited selection of pre-approved properties to operate within the confines of a planned ecosystem that is slightly more advanced than an artificial monopoly.
That companies acquired by this shell entity have continues to produce games after being acquired, should not be regarded as the shell company creating games itself.
Seriously, this is Hacker News; most commenters here have at least some understanding of the nature of corporations. If you don't understand how companies work, at this ultra-fundamental level, and you think "how is it possible that this 'gaming company' can be worth half a trillion US dollars, but I've never heard of them", and it doesn't immediately occur to you that they're probably not really making the games themselves, and yet you're still curious enough to post the comment that quantitative posted, then you would be very much benefited by going and reading the entire Tencent article, top to bottom, and now you'd know something useful about how the world works.
I agree with you that Tencent appears to be primarily an investment-oriented holding conglomorate. I might even say that:
Tencent Holdings Limited (Chinese: 腾讯控股有限公司; pinyin: Téngxùn Kònggǔ Yǒuxiàn Gōngsī) is a Chinese multinational investment holding conglomerate founded in 1998, whose subsidiaries specialise in various Internet-related services and products, entertainment, artificial intelligence and technology both in China and globally.[3]
[1] https://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2017/01/10/commentary/j...
1. If it isn't a serious problem for you, don't fix it. You were initially meant to be a hunter-gatherer, not an office employee. Your eyes' resting focus point is about 6 meters away (~20ft, this is where "20/20 sight" comes from). If you need to spend the entire day looking at something that is 1 meter away, it's normal and expected for your eyes to readjust.
2. Don't blame it on yourself. It's mostly genes. Some people can spend 15 hours a day in front of a computer, and still see like hawks. For others, reading a book 30 minutes a day can be enough to cause severe nearsightedness.
The current myopia near-crisis in China is clearly a sociological one, the gaokao is every Chinese teen’s only and foremost task，and they live their lives in drab & carmped concrete forests，don’t have idyllic backyards and weekend outings.
Teens are required to sit in cramped classrooms (we don't change room every course) more than 10 hours a day 6 days or more a week,the already meager physical and art classes (1 class a week each at best) were routinely canceled, to do the countless exam preparation and simulation, to get them to become the ultimate exam-taking machines, the higher score the students get in the gaokao, the more famous their school, teachers, principal will be，and yeah more money.
Beware Americans, this is what happens in China where there are no affirmative action or anything, pure meritocratic admissions.
https://www.google.com/search?q=Maotanchang+Middle+School
This is also why I alwayes laugh it off at Chinese's high GRE or IELTS scores,or wharever high scores and statistics, as a fellow Chinese I just know all too well how they got it and it certainly doesn't represent their real level.
People in China aren't allowed to move to cities freely especially back then, there are hukous to bind you to your birthplace, back then there were even police in Shenzhen dedicated to rounding up migrant workers (so called "blindly-moving migrants") and sending them back.
What I want to say is that you likely went to some major cities and observed people there, without realizing that those people are entitled to live there, meaning good chunk of them are well-educated and that education was a privilege you need to fight for, that means dedicated learning.
If myopia in China is genetic, then there is a big contradiction: in a generation of teens, those early drop-outs who went to factories and those who were putter around in schools rarely were myopic, yet those who are good academically and skinny had a high rate of myopia.
I mean no offense, I was born in a Warsaw Pact country.
The thing is, myopia is simply caused by eye fatigue, few may be somehow congenital or hereditary, and it might be slightly comminicable through behavior patterns; "Some people can spend 15 hours a day in front of a computer, and still see like hawks" , some people stare at screens nonstop, some look away constantly.
Do you mean blame as in moral responsibility or as in causality? It's a crucial difference that people miss too often.
Of course, suffering guilt over a thing like this is not very productive. But correcting your behaviour, like letting your eyes rest, is still a good idea.
He has refused to come debate a scientist and markets a "secret" method for fixing eyes.
In short, I am all for natural eyesight fixes, but this guy is a fraud.
"
BackTo 20/20
$$$ Paid Program
20 Minutes Structured Sessions
Member Exclusive Support Forum
Step By Step Approach Back To 20/20
Personal Guidance With Jake
"
https://endmyopia.org/consultations/
All of that is irrelevant to the point that the scientific knowledge is public, cited and requires no payment. If you are someone motivated to improve your vision, you get to decide whether you will believe what you can see with your own eyes. You can also find a vision therapist via covd.org, which can easily cost a few thousand dollars in the US.
Edit: Your reply is as deep as the nesting goes, so I am just replying here. I will look into your link, but you really have done nothing to substantiate your claims.
Here is a different site which independently reached similar conclusions: https://gettingstronger.org/2016/03/faq-for-vision-improveme...
Edit: you are essentially asking for an explanation of behavioral opthalmology in an Internet comment. Any COVD professional will happily answer your questions for a fee. The Endmyopia site tries to communicate some of those principle in layman language, and it has required dozens or hundreds of blog posts and answers to reader questions. The link above provides a condensed explanation.
If wearing glasses works for someone, they are unlikely to seek out alternatives. The people who seek alternatives are motivated because glasses are not meeting their use cases, e.g. myopia has steadily worsened. That motivation then justifies their effort to learn the principles used by vision therapists, or the budget to pay a vision therapist for structured vision therapy that lasts months to years.
I don't think that environmental factors have as much of an effect as people think. Genetics and luck play the biggest part.
Indigenous populations (of most colonised countries) tend to have far lower rates of nearsightedness compared to Caucasians, despite living in the same environment. I think that maybe myopia was much more disadvantageous in Indigenous environments with an emphasis on hunting and traveling across wilderness than it was in Europe, with all its cities and roads. The ability to spot animals and landmarks from a long distance is much more important in areas with large open spaces, like the American Plains or Australia's interior, than it is in more densely forested and populated areas like Europe.
That wasn't the case 20 years ago.
I mean...doesn't that seem....unlikely to you that genetics in Korea changed that much in 20 years?
There's a lot of pretty established research (not pop theories) about short-sightedness, which has already been referenced in this thread.
>while the older generation of the Inuit in Canada had nearly no cases of near-sightedness, between 10 and 25 percent of the next generation was myopic
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Near-sightedness#Causes
It's a buying opportunity. Gaming is a big source of Tencent revenue, but expect "online-to-offline" transactions growth to skyrocket. Everything from food delivery to ride sharing to movie tickets to doctor's office visits. To autonomous experiences mediated by AI that can barely be conceived of yet.
The most logical one to do for me seems to be the near-focus, far-focus shifting. If it's a traditional muscle issue, then that should train it. (Though it seems that science can't decide whether muscles relax or contract to focus, and if they relax, it seems training them might make things worse).
I have tried keeping up 10 minutes of training a day for a while, and I didn't notice consistent improvement, but noticed great variance day-to-day.
It seems to me that there has never been any real research into fixing eyes naturally - it takes 2-3 years to learn to do a one-arm chin up. It seems like fixing your eyes might take a similar level of effort, yet research was never done on that scale.
Seems like this kind of therapy is quite controversial though, with not much scientific consensus it actually helps.
In America we would bristle at the thought of our government asserting control in how our time is spent. It's clear China has done investigation into the health effects of video game addiction has on their people, and this is the first step in correcting it. They are simply being careful to control the perception as they impose limits.