MeiboVue

Halting nearsightedness epidemic goal of UH vision scientist - EurekAlert (press release)

ODwire.org NewsBot

ODwire.org NewsBot

NewsBot
Staff member
Jul 30, 2007
8,301
60
0
School/Org
Newsbot U
City
Barre
State
VT
  • Like
Reactions: Frederick Frost
ODwire.org NewsBot said:

Halting nearsightedness epidemic goal of UH vision scientist
EurekAlert (press release)
A clinic dedicated to using strategies that slow the progression of nearsightedness in children will be opening within the UH College of Optometry's University Eye Institute by the end of this summer. Open to the public, they will see children who are ...

and more »

Continue reading...
Click to expand...
There's a huge waste of taxpayer's money. Low to moderate myopia is desirable in today's world. The relation of pathologies to myopia is tenuous and only partly true for very high myopia , which is rare. I am a high myope, at 71, no pathology ,. just normal age related cataracts. Which are easily solved with modern surgery. And pharmalogical treatment soon.
Myopia is an advantage, not a disease.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Frederick Frost
Michael Molamphy said:
Myopia is an advantage, not a disease.
Click to expand...
Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 2002 Apr;80(2):125-35.
An evolutionary analysis of the aetiology and pathogenesis of juvenile-onset myopia.
Cordain L1, Eaton SB, Brand Miller J, Lindeberg S, Jensen C.
Author information
1
Department of Health and Exercise Science, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado 80523, USA. cordain@cahs.colostate.edu
Abstract
The available evidence suggests that both genes and environment play a crucial role in the development of juvenile-onset myopia. When the human visual system is examined from an evolutionary perspective, it becomes apparent that humans, living in the original environmental niche for which our species is genetically adapted (as hunter-gatherers), are either slightly hypermetropic or emmetropic and rarely develop myopia. Myopia occurs when novel environmental conditions associated with modern civilization are introduced into the hunter-gatherer lifestyle. The excessive near work of reading is most frequently cited as the main environmental stressor underlying the development of myopia. In this review we point out how a previously unrecognized diet-related malady (chronic hyperinsulinaemia) may play a key role in the pathogenesis of juvenile-onset myopia because of its interaction with hormonal regulation of vitreal chamber growth.

PMID:
11952477
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free full text
 
  • Like
Reactions: Frederick Frost
Michael Barris said:
Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 2002 Apr;80(2):125-35.
An evolutionary analysis of the aetiology and pathogenesis of juvenile-onset myopia.
Cordain L1, Eaton SB, Brand Miller J, Lindeberg S, Jensen C.
Author information
1
Department of Health and Exercise Science, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado 80523, USA. cordain@cahs.colostate.edu
Abstract
The available evidence suggests that both genes and environment play a crucial role in the development of juvenile-onset myopia. When the human visual system is examined from an evolutionary perspective, it becomes apparent that humans, living in the original environmental niche for which our species is genetically adapted (as hunter-gatherers), are either slightly hypermetropic or emmetropic and rarely develop myopia. Myopia occurs when novel environmental conditions associated with modern civilization are introduced into the hunter-gatherer lifestyle. The excessive near work of reading is most frequently cited as the main environmental stressor underlying the development of myopia. In this review we point out how a previously unrecognized diet-related malady (chronic hyperinsulinaemia) may play a key role in the pathogenesis of juvenile-onset myopia because of its interaction with hormonal regulation of vitreal chamber growth.

PMID:
11952477
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free full text
Click to expand...

Yes, but genetic and nutritional counseling aren't very lucrative. ;)

I first met Earle Smith at a continuing education meeting at UHCO many, many years ago. He was standing by his poster. I think it was glaucoma in primates, but not sure. I do know that he was doing lots of research inducing refractive error in primates. I've always been fascinated by the subject and did lots of reading myself, especially the works of Flitcroft on eye shape. An eye with a prolate posterior chamber will have more peripheral hyperopic defocus than an eye with a oblate posterior chamber. So that recognizes a possible genetic link between eye structure and myopiagenesis. I am also interested in the use of lenses in the manipulation of the retinal image but NOT involving ortho-K. My belief is that if we can target our treatments much more effectively if we knew more about the retinal image of the eye we are treating and then designing custom optics for that particular eye.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Frederick Frost
"The other half of this project will be to test the safety and efficacy of a new pharmaceutical agent that has shown promise in previous studies to slow the development of myopia"


Does anyone know what is this new pharmacological agent?
 
Frederick Frost said:
"The other half of this project will be to test the safety and efficacy of a new pharmaceutical agent that has shown promise in previous studies to slow the development of myopia"


Does anyone know what is this new pharmacological agent?
Click to expand...

The only other drug that I remember being tested was pirenzepine. I'm not sure what ended the clinical trials. I do see that they are looking at pirenzepine as a treatment for peripheral neuropathy.

It's probably some other selective anti-muscarinic agent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Frederick Frost
Greg Gemoules said:
The only other drug that I remember being tested was pirenzepine. I'm not sure what ended the clinical trials. I do see that they are looking at pirenzepine as a treatment for peripheral neuropathy.

It's probably some other selective anti-muscarinic agent.
Click to expand...
Pirenzepine has been shown to show down progression clinical trials. I think the problem is that it's not a patentable drug anymore just like atropine. So the question is who's going to go through the expense of the FDA process and if approved risk other companies producing it. Maybe with the new FDA rules that allows Valeant/B&L to charge us $80 a bottle for 2.5% phenylephrine it might be worth it now.
 
Last edited:
The claim that by never playing outdoors, kids tend to myopia is also bunk. I played outside 4 to 8 hours per day from early age to about 14 yr. old, and had a progressive myopia early, genetic cause.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Allan Panzer
Michael Molamphy said:
The claim that by never playing outdoors, kids tend to myopia is also bunk. I played outside 4 to 8 hours per day from early age to about 14 yr. old, and had a progressive myopia early, genetic cause.
Click to expand...
Same as me. I was out until dark every day. No video games and only a little TV at night. I am -6.00.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Greg Gemoules
Michael Molamphy said:
The claim that by never playing outdoors, kids tend to myopia is also bunk. I played outside 4 to 8 hours per day from early age to about 14 yr. old, and had a progressive myopia early, genetic cause.
Click to expand...

I hope that readers will weigh your personal experience appropriately against studies of thousands of children on several continents and published in peer review journals.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Adam Lusk and Michael Barris
Greg Gemoules said:
One thing is clear: we're not going to eliminate myopia, and unless the treatment is easy to administer and cost-effective, the treatments won't reach sufficient numbers of patients.
Click to expand...
I was determine to stop it in my son, so we threw everything we had at him. He is -6.00. Some times genetics beats us.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Scott Lauer and Mark Bullimore
Lloyd Pate said:
Same as me. I was out until dark every day. No video games and only a little TV at night. I am -6.00.
Click to expand...
any stig? I was .75 to 1.25 WR.
Any other O.D.s with genetic based myopia out there? Had Lasik or PRK? even the dreaded RK!!!? Myopes unite: myopia is an advantage, not a disease.
 
Mark Bullimore said:
I hope that readers will weigh your personal experience appropriately against studies of thousands of children on several continents and published in peer review journals.
Click to expand...
I reject that ivory tower nonsense, from UCB etc, and trust my astute observational skills for 40 years of testing myopes and their parents. With a highly diverse population base here in CA. Many studies ignored the parents myopia, and were not racially diverse.
 
Greg Gemoules said:
Did you take his personal electronic devices away?
Click to expand...
My son was on Game Boy and all manner of books, electronic games, all at 10 to 14" from age 2. He has achieved spectacular academic success and plays his fav. sport as well. Major Universities such as MIT, Columbia, Stanford, Duke, and many others are vying for his attention. LONG LIVE MYOPIA..
 
Greg Gemoules said:
One thing is clear: we're not going to eliminate myopia, and unless the treatment is easy to administer and cost-effective, the treatments won't reach sufficient numbers of patients.
Click to expand...
At a recent CE by a well qualified UCBSO academic, she presented their treatments for progressive myopia, but no data to prove anything works. Some serious money can be made though, from anxious parents.
 
I treated a LASIK surgeon's children for the past 7 years. The son was 13 and already a -9.00-3.00 She had atropined them, made them play outside, restricted all electronics, reduced their contacts to -7.00 without cyl and still...

So, she wanted Ortho K.

I got the son to pl-3.00 but as usual, it wasn't good enough. Even though she said..just get him to a -5.00...
The daughter on the other hand at 9 was a -3.00 or so..she is now 16 and mom of course measures axial length regularly...can you even imagine.

She called me and said..well, it increased .2mm..sure enough I had to increase the power in the ortho k lens.

Nothing works 100%. But my experience is that Ortho K works the best of all so far.

If either of my kids were myopic, I would put them in Ortho K. Fortunately for them, both are emmetropes..

Mom is an emmetrope. Dad is a high myope...so you can easily see it has nothing to do with IQ since my myopia obviously did not go along with my IQ..glad the rest of you got brains to go with your myopia..
 
Allan Panzer said:
I treated a LASIK surgeon's children for the past 7 years. The son was 13 and already a -9.00-3.00 She had atropined them, made them play outside, restricted all electronics, reduced their contacts to -7.00 without cyl and still...

So, she wanted Ortho K.

I got the son to pl-3.00 but as usual, it wasn't good enough. Even though she said..just get him to a -5.00...
The daughter on the other hand at 9 was a -3.00 or so..she is now 16 and mom of course measures axial length regularly...can you even imagine.

She called me and said..well, it increased .2mm..sure enough I had to increase the power in the ortho k lens.

Nothing works 100%. But my experience is that Ortho K works the best of all so far.

If either of my kids were myopic, I would put them in Ortho K. Fortunately for them, both are emmetropes..

Mom is an emmetrope. Dad is a high myope...so you can easily see it has nothing to do with IQ since my myopia obviously did not go along with my IQ..glad the rest of you got brains to go with your myopia..
Click to expand...

OK, let me see if I understand this. You reduced the son's myopia by 9 diopters with Ortho K? Could you post the topographies for my education? I thought the average reduction from OK was about 2.5 or 3.0 diopters. What size was the treatment zone? I bet it was small and his pupil was huge, which means the positive spherical aberration is probably off the charts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mark Bullimore
Allan Panzer said:
I treated a LASIK surgeon's children for the past 7 years. The son was 13 and already a -9.00-3.00 She had atropined them, made them play outside, restricted all electronics, reduced their contacts to -7.00 without cyl and still...

So, she wanted Ortho K.

I got the son to pl-3.00 but as usual, it wasn't good enough. Even though she said..just get him to a -5.00...
The daughter on the other hand at 9 was a -3.00 or so..she is now 16 and mom of course measures axial length regularly...can you even imagine.

She called me and said..well, it increased .2mm..sure enough I had to increase the power in the ortho k lens.

Nothing works 100%. But my experience is that Ortho K works the best of all so far.

If either of my kids were myopic, I would put them in Ortho K. Fortunately for them, both are emmetropes..

Mom is an emmetrope. Dad is a high myope...so you can easily see it has nothing to do with IQ since my myopia obviously did not go along with my IQ..glad the rest of you got brains to go with your myopia..
Click to expand...
Ortho K did nada for my son.
 
OK..since its pretty hard to believe..here is the exam form..redacted...and the topos..had to shoot with my cell phone so I could leave off the name..

It can be done...

IMG_4286 (1).JPG


IMG_4286.JPG


Kept adding and removing the file because it went one page only then two with the name..I'm not that computer literate.
Anyhow, the ks which you cannot see well on the Iphone picture went from about 44 to 36
It definitely worked.

There is not doubt in my mind..this is using the wave software.

Now we have all heard..oh you can only get this or that..

With GOV lenses..which my success has been limited..they have actually gotten in the double digits..feel free to doubt, but there is the record..and its almost 8 years ago..

It is that stupid central island that left the cylinder..its clearly visible.
 

Attachments

  • img03122017_0003.pdf
    53.5 KB · Views: 347
Last edited:
Allan Panzer said:
I included the record..pl-3.25..Sorry, but I didn't want to upload the real file because of the name..
So picture is sort of there.
Click to expand...

I reposted since you added information since my first post.

OK, to me that astigmatism looks irregular because of the small area, and I am surprised that you got such good acuities because of that. The zone looks small as I had expected, and I'll say again that I doubt that anybody could do such a small zone with LASIK these days. I would expect scotopic vision to be compromised a lot, but what the heck, he's too young to drive.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
LENZ REleases Positive Phase 3 Presbyopia Data
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Webinars
Menu