Take a look at this brief abstract of a monkey myopia study published in 2013 in Investigative Ophthalmology:

Negative lens-induced myopia in infant monkeys: effects of high ambient lighting.



To determine whether high light levels, which have a protective effect against form-deprivation myopia, also retard the development of lens-induced myopia in primates.


Hyperopic defocus was imposed on 27 monkeys by securing -3 diopter (D) lenses in front of one eye. The lens-rearing procedures were initiated at 24 days of age and continued for periods ranging from 50 to 123 days. Fifteen of the treated monkeys were exposed to normal laboratory light levels (∼350 lux). For the other 12 lens-reared monkeys, auxiliary lighting increased the illuminance to 25,000 lux for 6 hours during the middle of the daily 12 hour light cycle. Refractive development, corneal power, and axial dimensions were assessed by retinoscopy, keratometry, and ultrasonography, respectively. Data were also obtained from 37 control monkeys, four of which were exposed to high ambient lighting.


in normal- and high-light-reared monkeys, hyperopic defocus accelerated vitreous chamber elongation and produced myopic shifts in refractive error. the high light regimen did not alter the degree of myopia (high light: -1.69 ± 0.84 D versus normal light: -2.08 ± 1.12 D; P = 0.40) or the rate at which the treated eyes compensated for the imposed defocus. Following lens removal, the high light monkeys recovered from the induced myopia. The recovery process was not affected by the high lighting regimen.


In contrast to the protective effects that high ambient lighting has against form-deprivation myopia, high artificial lighting did not alter the course of compensation to imposed defocus. These results indicate that the mechanisms responsible for form-deprivation myopia and lens-induced myopia are not identical.


High ambient lighting, form deprivation myopia, why Jake, you ask?

Not really the point.  The point is that lens-induced myopia is so well accepted in medical science at this point, that it’s used as a foregone conclusion in myopia related studies.  (And yes, those monkey eyes are very similar to human eyes.)   I’m using the study as one of the thousands of possible examples where it’s stated, matter of factly, that a minus lens was used to induce myopia.  Nobody really argues anymore that minus lenses cause more myopia.

Remember, two different types of myopia.  First there is pseudo myopia, the low diopter stuff, that just happens when you do too much close-up.  And then there’s lens-induced myopia, which happens when pseudo myopia is “treated” with minus lenses.

Another excerpt, this time from the American Optometric Association:

Nearsightedness is a very common vision condition affecting nearly 30 percent of the U.S. population. Some research supports the theory that nearsightedness is hereditary. There is also growing evidence that it is influenced by the visual stress of too much close work.


You’re going to notice more of this “oh well maybe something something else, too” backpedaling in more recent years via the official channels.  Yes, visual stress, geniuses.

But there’s the huge breakdown between medical science and consumer education.

Science has established lens-induced myopia as a well researched premise.  And even the most mainstream of optometry admits that near work can no longer be ignored as contributor to the onset of myopia.

The dots aren’t being connected, though, except of course here (and quietly, in inquisitive optometrist’s offices, if you know to ask the right questions).  ;-)

Why the dead horse today?  It’s about 10PM, somewhere in a hotel in Kuala Lumpur, and I didn’t bring the external drive with my studies stash.  And I’m exhausted.  And even if the horse is dead, it is our horse.  Need to beat it sometimes.  Because it bears repeating that those glasses everybody is wearing, medical science uses them to create myopia in just about every kind of animal with similar-to-human eyes, in thousands of studies, for decades now.

*and a Jake shrugs*


Houskeeping Note:  Guess who’s just leaped over the 20.000 follower mark on Twitter?  No, not me.  We did.  Or at least our combined voice for #endmyopia.  And we’re just something like two months in, on the Twitter campaign. 

We’s gonna need more sticks.