Lasik

Is Lasik worth it? Anyone here who have done it or know someone who has? Also there was some meme picture with Lasik surgeons that used glasses, I think they were from Indonesia or Malaysia pls post it

Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14

Homeless People Are Sexy Shirt $21.68

Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14

  1. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Enjoy your eternal dry eyes and pain.

    Good luck, brownie homosexual.

  2. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I considered it. Went to an ophthalmologist for consultation. Price for each eye was something like $3,000. I ended up not doing it out of fear of dry eye concerns. I already have dry eyes and strain from looking at a computer all day, Lasik would only make it worse. Also, when you think about it, programmers don't need 20/20 vision anyway. You should be a foot away from your monitor. Doctor also told me I would eventually need reading glasses too anyway as I age (presbyopia), so I didn't see a point. I think it's worth if you're an athlete or you're old enough to where the risk is fine.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >athlete
      >get your head bonked
      >flap dislocated

  3. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I had Lasik, never had pain, no dry eye issues related to Lasik*
    *my optician wouldn't let me have Lasik until I fixed my original dry eye issue which he said was from not blinking enough while using a computer for 12 hours a day
    My issue is that 12 years later my eyes have basically reverted to pre-Lasik status but because I rarely go outside my short sightedness isn't an issue. It was perfect for 8-9 years until my eyes degraded again. Supposedly I can have it again but I think there's a newer treatment now which is better?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      you have presbyopia theres no cure you can try to distort your lens constantly with surgery but it wont fix the fact that your eyes are going to keep on degenerating

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        But I have no issue with nearby objects

  4. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It's absolutely worth it if you currently need to wear glasses/lenses almost all the time, otherwise don't bother.
    Also the tech is improving at a steady pace, so if you're on the edge about it just wait.
    >Indonesia or Malaysia
    NEVER do medical tourism outside of the civilized world, no amount of money is worth the risk.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I don’t understand why someone would even travel for lasik. It’s not that expensive.

  5. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Is Lasik worth it?
    Yes, I did it several years ago and now I can freely laugh at four-eyed nerds.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Lasik is shit, you need Smile.
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small_incision_lenticule_extraction

  6. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    OP here found the pic. Well I might consider doing it next year. The whole eye survey is for free anyway.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      If its so safe why do every one of them still wear glasses?

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >>>/x/

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        they clearly know something we don't. I wouldn't go to a merchant who avoids using his own products

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Because they know that the procedure doesn't address the root cause and only merely carves out permanent glasses on your cornea plus the extra risk (and the baseline risk from the root cause), see

        ABSOLUTELY NOT.

        Here's the ultimate redpill on myopia my dear anon.

        LASIK is like carving lenses on your cornea, it's like giving you permanent glasses. The problem is that myopia is due to an elongated eyeball. So LASIK does not address the root cause, and you will still have an elongated eyeball - which if high will carry the same risk of complications like retinal detachment. So not only with LASIK you're not addressing the root cause and carrying the same baseline risk, but you're adding another strata of risk in the form of LASIK complications which are VERY common (things that impair quality of vision like halos around lights at night, ...).

        Thankfully, myopia is reversible thanks to a method called the reduced lens method.
        - Wear close-up glasses (1.5-2 diopters less than your current prescription) for near work (anything involving a close screen)
        - Wear a slight undercorrection for distance vision (reduced distance glasses) with 0.25 diopter undercorrection from your current prescription (wear the prescription only for stuff like driving that requires high visual acuity). This will generate the necessary stimilus.
        - The hardest thing: Active Focus and doing it as a habit when you are engaged in distance vision
        - 4. Be sure to get distance vision in your life, preferably daily. At least 2 hours per day.
        https://wiki.reducedlens.org/wiki/Frequently_Asked_Questions/FFAQ#What_are_the_steps?

        Here are studies on animals' eyes showing reversal (why would it be any different with human eyes): https://wiki.reducedlens.org/wiki/Clinical_Studies

        Some examples of documented optician verified with the autorefractor machine improvements:

        You can find more if you search for them.

        You're welcome.

        .

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        OP here found the pic. Well I might consider doing it next year. The whole eye survey is for free anyway.

        Would you really chow down on a pizza that the pizza maker himself wouldn't touch with a ten-foot pole?

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >walk into pizzaria
          >see pizza man hard at work making pizza
          >"WTF, HE ISNT EATING HIS OWN PIZZA!"
          You have no idea why these men arent getting the surgery. It could be one of any number of reasons.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Yeah no, you are moronic, these people are well beyond the developing age, if it's safe and effective they should be the first ones to do it.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >never see the man eat the pizza he made, ever
            >y-you dont know, he might be allergic to it n shiet
            okay buddy

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >tan choon hwai johnson
      >tan chhon hwai
      >johnson

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >tan choon hwai johnson
      >tan chhon hwai
      >johnson

  7. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Got it done 11 years ago for treating really bad miopia, was around $1.4K per eye (clinic had a discount)
    >How bad is the procedure
    I'm really not ok with strange people poking around my face so it was really uncomfortable. No pain though.
    >Side effects
    I had dry eyes and glare at night for around 2 years. It's all been fading away slowly and now I barely need to use drops or have issues driving at night around morons with 100w LED headlights. I've developed slight hyperopia I think because seeing objects clearly at a distance of less than 5 inches is not possible anymore.
    >Are you blind again?
    I haven't noticed eyesight loss at long distances at all but I really take care of my eyes by avoiding eye strain as much as possible and never going outside without polarized sunglasses.

  8. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Just doesn't seem worth it judging from your responses. My father had it done at least 15 years ago, I will ask him and report back.

  9. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    i'll consider it as soon as one of the billionaires do it too
    also there are several methods, you should look them all up

  10. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I am too scared to do it myself but a few of my friends have done it. For them the first few days were the worst but after a while all the discomfort was gone and their vision was really good. They all carry around eye drops though so that's something to consider - you will always need to keep that in mind.
    The scary stories on the internet about the side effects are more than enough for me to now want to ever do this

  11. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Is Lasik worth it?
    I wear glasses all the time, and I don't think going to any kind of surgeon to correct my eyesight is worth it when I can wear my glasses. Sure, it is inconvenient, but I don't want to take risks and have side effects from that for the rest of my life. Not to mention, if you need to have an eye surgeon when you are older, you will probably just go blind since the chance of failure increases or they can't perform an operation on your eye(s) anymore.

  12. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    OP here
    Found there is various different ways of do it. Found some good and cheap place.
    So we have
    Lasek
    Trans-PRK <----lol
    FS-Lasik
    SMILE
    Now I will compare them all. The whole survey is for free anyway, so eye surgeon will probably find the best method for you.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      you can also get a lens implant. some of the implants are even reversible
      reversible implant has the upside of no modification to eye tissue at the downside of live long routine checks

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >lens implant
        just use contact lense, jesus

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          i do and what sucks is my prescription is an inbetween the standard values. My left eye has uncorrected astigmatism cause no lens with that value is made. As a result Night vision suffers
          implants meanwhile are custom tailored
          Implants are also sealed in the eye (after the incission has closed) They dont get dirty, they cant breed bacteria, basically all the restrictions of regular contacts dont apply

  13. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I had it done back in 2006, when they did not install some sort of permanent lens on top of it, or something like that.

    No loss, but one eye was slightly blurrier on all distances, which is a problem with tiny text or when very tired. I have a pair of glasses with one prescription lens and a normal one, but I use them it maybe once per month when going through spreadsheets at 1440p. But people who don't need glasses ask me how the frick can i see anything at that text size, so maybe it's not that bad.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Oh, I forgot to add:
      - So short sighted that I could not live without glasses
      - Incapable of wearing contact lenses
      - I probably would not have done it. Surgeon fricking hated me. Apparently I'm twitchy as frick, even with anaesthesia. Got told that a moron (a real certified one) in the next room took it better than me.

  14. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    There's a reason your eye Dr wears glasses, there's a reason they don't even wear contacts. They know, understand, and have heard of the risks and horror stories behind corrective eye surgery.

  15. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I'm not willing to do Lasik if it means my vision will degrade again.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >if it means my vision will degrade again
      unfortunately we cant yet stop the aging process

  16. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    You'll need reading glasses to see your monitor when you're 40, get your priorities straight.

  17. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I opted for PRK over LASIK as the flap never fully heals. Didn't want to take the risk of being poked in the eye someday and having it disloged.

    PRK recovery is awful though. Like someone rubbing sandpaper over your eye for a week.

  18. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    no. train your eye muscles for free instead of falling for the optician scam who, surprise, will progressively make your eyesight worse forcing you to regularly buy further prescriptions and new glasses

  19. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    if you have the money look into icl (intra ocular lens) it's better than lasik and you can swap for a new one when you get old, and no meme flare like laskek, only at least here is expensive as frick

  20. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    i know someone who had a terrible eyesight flaw, the glasses he wore were the width of a bottom of a jar
    he did lasik 15 or so years ago and his eyesight barely degraded

  21. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    My vision is dogshit but I’m more than okay with my glasses. My eyes immediately start watering if I even think about lasik or eyedrops or any kind of eye damage.

  22. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >cutting up your eyes
    I wouldn't do it for any amount of money.
    The surgery literally is nightmare fuel and akin to torture.

  23. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    You can literally just train your eyes to see better until you don't need glasses anymore.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      this. it's such a shameless scam once you sit down and think about it

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      no. train your eye muscles for free instead of falling for the optician scam who, surprise, will progressively make your eyesight worse forcing you to regularly buy further prescriptions and new glasses

      Tell me how to correct -8 dioptries with your snake oil.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Literally everything about the method is explained in my post

        ABSOLUTELY NOT.

        Here's the ultimate redpill on myopia my dear anon.

        LASIK is like carving lenses on your cornea, it's like giving you permanent glasses. The problem is that myopia is due to an elongated eyeball. So LASIK does not address the root cause, and you will still have an elongated eyeball - which if high will carry the same risk of complications like retinal detachment. So not only with LASIK you're not addressing the root cause and carrying the same baseline risk, but you're adding another strata of risk in the form of LASIK complications which are VERY common (things that impair quality of vision like halos around lights at night, ...).

        Thankfully, myopia is reversible thanks to a method called the reduced lens method.
        - Wear close-up glasses (1.5-2 diopters less than your current prescription) for near work (anything involving a close screen)
        - Wear a slight undercorrection for distance vision (reduced distance glasses) with 0.25 diopter undercorrection from your current prescription (wear the prescription only for stuff like driving that requires high visual acuity). This will generate the necessary stimilus.
        - The hardest thing: Active Focus and doing it as a habit when you are engaged in distance vision
        - 4. Be sure to get distance vision in your life, preferably daily. At least 2 hours per day.
        https://wiki.reducedlens.org/wiki/Frequently_Asked_Questions/FFAQ#What_are_the_steps?

        Here are studies on animals' eyes showing reversal (why would it be any different with human eyes): https://wiki.reducedlens.org/wiki/Clinical_Studies

        Some examples of documented optician verified with the autorefractor machine improvements:

        You can find more if you search for them.

        You're welcome.

        and it includes autorefractor confirmed improvements.

        except it works for 99% of people

        As I explained doesn't address the root cause in that you still have an elongated eyeball - they just carved glasses in your cornea that's why you see well, but you still have the risks associated with having an elongated eyeball plus the additional risks associated with LASIK, from my post

        https://i.imgur.com/pmZHc5f.jpg

        Is Lasik worth it? Anyone here who have done it or know someone who has? Also there was some meme picture with Lasik surgeons that used glasses, I think they were from Indonesia or Malaysia pls post it

        :

        >you will still have an elongated eyeball - which if high will carry the same risk of complications like retinal detachment. So not only with LASIK you're not addressing the root cause and carrying the same baseline risk, but you're adding another strata of risk in the form of LASIK complications which are VERY common (things that impair quality of vision like halos around lights at night, ...).

  24. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I considered it until I heard about the starburst shit, and that's for the success cases. It's bad enough driving with LED headlights blasting you I'm not getting that turned up X100 from every light on the street.

  25. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >got it 3 summers ago
    >dry eyes for 6 months, needed drops
    >haven't used drops for 2 years
    >wake up every day able to see
    >never wake up hungover with contacts in anymore
    >no more eye fatigue from contacts
    >can open eyes underwater while swimming
    >no more headaches switching from contacts to glasses and back
    >no more drinking contacts out of glasses at hotels
    >no more taking out contact lenses with dirty fingers while camping
    >no more throwing away bottles of solution at TSA while flying
    >life is good and easy and comfy

    do it. it's the best thing I've ever done for myself. naturally, if you search for reviews on lasik, you're only going to get people outraged enough to post videos of bad surgeries or complications, not the 99% of people who have had their lives changed for the better

  26. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    ABSOLUTELY NOT.

    Here's the ultimate redpill on myopia my dear anon.

    LASIK is like carving lenses on your cornea, it's like giving you permanent glasses. The problem is that myopia is due to an elongated eyeball. So LASIK does not address the root cause, and you will still have an elongated eyeball - which if high will carry the same risk of complications like retinal detachment. So not only with LASIK you're not addressing the root cause and carrying the same baseline risk, but you're adding another strata of risk in the form of LASIK complications which are VERY common (things that impair quality of vision like halos around lights at night, ...).

    Thankfully, myopia is reversible thanks to a method called the reduced lens method.
    - Wear close-up glasses (1.5-2 diopters less than your current prescription) for near work (anything involving a close screen)
    - Wear a slight undercorrection for distance vision (reduced distance glasses) with 0.25 diopter undercorrection from your current prescription (wear the prescription only for stuff like driving that requires high visual acuity). This will generate the necessary stimilus.
    - The hardest thing: Active Focus and doing it as a habit when you are engaged in distance vision
    - 4. Be sure to get distance vision in your life, preferably daily. At least 2 hours per day.
    https://wiki.reducedlens.org/wiki/Frequently_Asked_Questions/FFAQ#What_are_the_steps?

    Here are studies on animals' eyes showing reversal (why would it be any different with human eyes): https://wiki.reducedlens.org/wiki/Clinical_Studies

    Some examples of documented optician verified with the autorefractor machine improvements:

    You can find more if you search for them.

    You're welcome.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I had a rapid eye degradation in my teen years and the doctors constantly gave me undercorrection glasses because the jumps would have been too big. It resulted in constant discomfort and made me vision worse. Don't do this.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The method is not "have undercorrected glasses", the method is composed of two things: 1. high undercorrection (1.5-2 diopters) *exclusively* for near work. 2. VERY slight undercorrection (merely 0.25 diopters) for distance vision - to just give you that right amount of stimulus.

        If you undercorrect too much you would get something called blur adaptation: https://wiki.reducedlens.org/wiki/Blur_adaptation

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Yes I had that because I got undercorrection glasses. Literally what you said and my vision got worse because of it.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Yes I had that because I got undercorrection glasses.
            Stop the cap. If you didn't have two different glasses at the same time, one for distance vision and one for close-up work then you're not following the method. You clearly were using slightly undercorrected glasses with close-up work which progressed your myopia. Again the method works, as confirmed by a machine - the autorefractor, which doesn't lie:

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            have a nice day

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >close-up work
            >at the age of 12
            >when there were no smartphones, barely any computers
            >most of my time spent outside
            israelite.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            There were TVs, books, ... Stop behaving like a fricking imbecile with your non sequitur.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      this literally doesn't work though, why propagandize something you haven't tried yourself?

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        He's a troll. Even if you don't have have surgery you still have the root cause risk but he's trying to gashlight people that somehow surgery is the antichrist.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        It works, refer to my post

        ABSOLUTELY NOT.

        Here's the ultimate redpill on myopia my dear anon.

        LASIK is like carving lenses on your cornea, it's like giving you permanent glasses. The problem is that myopia is due to an elongated eyeball. So LASIK does not address the root cause, and you will still have an elongated eyeball - which if high will carry the same risk of complications like retinal detachment. So not only with LASIK you're not addressing the root cause and carrying the same baseline risk, but you're adding another strata of risk in the form of LASIK complications which are VERY common (things that impair quality of vision like halos around lights at night, ...).

        Thankfully, myopia is reversible thanks to a method called the reduced lens method.
        - Wear close-up glasses (1.5-2 diopters less than your current prescription) for near work (anything involving a close screen)
        - Wear a slight undercorrection for distance vision (reduced distance glasses) with 0.25 diopter undercorrection from your current prescription (wear the prescription only for stuff like driving that requires high visual acuity). This will generate the necessary stimilus.
        - The hardest thing: Active Focus and doing it as a habit when you are engaged in distance vision
        - 4. Be sure to get distance vision in your life, preferably daily. At least 2 hours per day.
        https://wiki.reducedlens.org/wiki/Frequently_Asked_Questions/FFAQ#What_are_the_steps?

        Here are studies on animals' eyes showing reversal (why would it be any different with human eyes): https://wiki.reducedlens.org/wiki/Clinical_Studies

        Some examples of documented optician verified with the autorefractor machine improvements:

        You can find more if you search for them.

        You're welcome.

        It works in animal studies (why would it be any different with human eyes) AND it worked for humans (many people got improvements with this method and documented it).

        Some animal studies: https://wiki.reducedlens.org/wiki/Clinical_Studies

        Some examples of documented optician verified with the autorefractor machine improvements in humans:

        You can find more if you search for them.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          I have 3 pairs of glasses with 0.25 differences between them and it didn't do anything over 3 years
          kys Black person

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >myopia
      isnt a thing...
      the causes of myopia range from genetic, to degenerative, to hypertophy. guess which of those is the least common amongst permanent glasses wearers?

      you homosexuals are like cultists. you cant cure astigmatism with exercise. the cornea is LITERALLY DEFORMED its not a matter of muscle control.

      youre such a fricking skeezeball

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Claiming "Myopia is genetic" makes you the same as those those claiming that "obesity is genetic" and you need constant Ozempic injections. And also at the end of the day all that matters is the results:

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >equating vision with food eating habits
          >linking grifter clickbait videos
          smartest eye vision broscientist

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            So you have no scientific objection, got it.

            Dude, you're reaching so hard. Holy shit. I spent my time as a five year old running around, playing and having fun.

            And you were at school most of the time doing significant amounts of close-up work.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          You are literally spamming at this point. Nobody is going to watch moronic ececlebs.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >"show me evidence"
            >"Ok here are people who attempted the method and went to the optometrist to see if they got actual improvements or it was just their brain fooling them"
            >"Nobody is going to watch moronic ececlebs"

            KEK.

            It is purely genetic. Guess what happens when an increasing number of people with a specific genetic defect breed with a decreasing number of people without said genetic defect? It spreads! Shocking, right?

            Fricking idiot. How can it spread to 90% in some countries in just 2-3 generations when it confers a negative selection advantage? Why didn't it spread earlier?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            where are you getting 2-3 generations from?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >"Ok here are [not evidence]"

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >not practicing active distance vision
      people not doing this anymore is exactly why they need glasses

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        no it isnt

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          yes it is
          no animal on the planet needs glasses
          it's well documented that reading makes vision worse but active distance vision only improves vision

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Defective animals don't live long and don't procreate. Look at what people did with dog breeds that have serious health issues.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            It's clearly not genetic, you can't have a genetic disease that affects more than 90% of the population in some parts of the world in just 2-3 generations, where's the selection advantage?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >you cant have [made up bullshit]
            youre such a fricking homosexual

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Yes it's genetic, it's not like there's a specific genome that makes your eyes worse because reasons.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Disproof:
            https://wiki.reducedlens.org/wiki/Clinical_Studies
            >The majority of myopia in the world, despite whatever the mainstream and well-endowed optometry industry will tell you, is lens-induced through glasses. There is evidence to show that accommodation of the eye to clear up hyperopic blur is responsible for axial length change. This means, wearing distance vision glasses while sitting in front of screens is the primary reason why progressive myopia occurs.
            >https://wiki.reducedlens.org/wiki/Frequently_Asked_Questions/FFAQ#Is_myopia_genetic_or_hereditary?

            have a nice day

            Ad hominem.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >ad hominem
            uh... no? do you not know what an ad hominem is?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >ad hominem
            uh... no? do you not know what an ad hominem is?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Really good showcase in cherry picking and not actually knowing how research and consensus works.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Ok, go fry up your eyes with LASIK when people reverse their myopia by addressing the root cause:

            Also make sure to follow the consensus by getting your 7th booster shot and eating ze bugs.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            give me 1 (one) peer reviewed controlled study wherein one (1) individual was able to reverse their naturally occuring miopia of greater than -4 diopters using this methid.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >hey man you need to prove that your view is valid to me based on my own criteria and working within an arbitrary frame that I set up that a priori rules out your viewpoint hahah can't do it huh well looks like i win again

            For sincere people who don't suffer from lead toxicity this is enough:
            https://wiki.reducedlens.org/wiki/Clinical_Studies

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Yes, your fringe theory with zero studies backing it has the burden of proof.

            Not a single one of the links you just posted shows what I asked for, wanna try again?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >fringe theory
            Except that's what studies show:
            https://wiki.reducedlens.org/wiki/Lens-induced
            https://wiki.reducedlens.org/wiki/Clinical_Studies

            >Not a single one of the links you just posted shows what I asked for, wanna try again?
            They don't satisfy your high standard, but they satisfy a normal person's standard for what would amount to an example of someone improving their vision as measured at an optometrist's autorefractor:

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7P2e4kdIcWQ

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >high standard
            its literally your standard. i asked you for a single study that shows it correcting miopia. every single study youve provided only shows statistical spreads of progression variance.

            am i missing it? post the exact link that contains the case of this methos CORRECTING mipoia

            YOU say it corrects miopa, SHOW IT.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            My standard to prove that the method can work in some individuals is to see if there's at least one individual for whom the method worked and to have it confirmed by a professional using an autorefractor, which is what I did:

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >one individual
            >probably had like 1.25 glasses
            >meanwhile surgery works for everyone
            Good job anon.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >meanwhile surgery works for everyone
            Fricking imbecile. LASIK does not change your axial length whereas this method changes the axial length of the eye as measured by the autorefractor. LASIK is like carving glasses on your cornea.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            When are you loons going to have an example of this correcting -4 diopters?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            There are those who improved by -4 diopters, you can find them if you lookup on the facebook group or on youtube.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >you can find them
            Oh, so now you don't want to post links. Interesting...

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            oh okay, so now it can only correct miopia in some individuals. thats fine, show it...
            >linkrel
            not corrected, do you need a primer on what the frick correction means?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Fricking imbecile. “When a wise man points at the moon the imbecile examines the finger.” Ignores the improvement and doesn't see the overall trend. And yes, to reach full correction you need quiet a lot of time, improvements are typically 0.75 diopters per year, and no, you can't speed up this process.

            how does pseudomyopia last months, again with no change in lifestyle.

            Search the literature on https://scholar.google.com/ for "pseudomyopia", there are many papers on it, maybe you can find an answer there.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            okay so you have no example yet? how many years is it going to take for you to have one example of correction?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Dear god, that grammar. Calm down pajeet.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            he'll keep moving the goalpost anon. he either got scammed or he/his family makes money on that shit and he feels personally attacked by the veil getting ripped

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            stop encouraging him

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >he either got scammed or he/his family makes money on that shit

            LMAO. All the information is available FOR FREE, you don't need to pay anything to access any of the information which was collected by volunteers for whom the method worked: https://wiki.reducedlens.org/

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I was talking about optometrist defenders, not you anon

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            stop. enabling. him.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous
          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            So how does it start if it's caused by glasses?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            untrained eye muscles

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            It's explained here with references: https://wiki.reducedlens.org/wiki/Lens-induced

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >worsen
            So what causes it? You said it's because of glasses.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            you've conveniently ignored

            untrained eye muscles

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            what causes it

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            not training your eye muscles

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            so how does one develop miopia despite no change in lifestyle?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            by going to an optometrist and him telling you you have it. then you wear glasses which only exacarbate the issue and then they have a sucker customer for life. it's simple

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            how do you develop it in the first place with no change in lifestyle?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            by going to an optometrist and him telling you you have it. then you wear glasses which only exacarbate the issue and then they have a sucker customer for life. it's simple

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            NO. CHANGE. IN. LIFE. STYLE.

            ANSWER. THE. QUESTION.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Not changing your close-up work filled lifestyle will give you pseudomyopia everytime, yes.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Okay lets try this again. A lifestyle, wherein close-up work is not common. I lived in the country, I spent my days outside. I didn't start doing close-up work until after I eventually got glasses. Again, my vision tanked BEFORE I started doing close-up work. Explain.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            https://journals.healio.com/doi/full/10.3928/0191-3913-19700501-14
            https://www.mdpi.com/2411-5150/6/1/17

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            its funny because your own source doesnt agree with you

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            How?

            >myopia is reversible
            the earth is flat

            There's evidence of axial length reduction in some individuals following this method. Dismissing this is literally dismissing science.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >There's evidence of
            Oh? I thought you had proof of full correction, what happened?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >"People improve their vision with some from -7 to -1.75" https://youtu.be/eCIKQ-2MeHM
            >"Oh no no, they didn't reach full correction. That means the method is shit and doesn't work."
            Idiot.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >fake
            Try again.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Sadly reality is not fake. You can continue denying reality, or accept that you got duped by eye mutilation salesmen. I admit, I would too feel quiet bad if I was duped by an irreversible procedure like that.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            How can I deny something you have not presented? I can't help but notice you still have not provided a single study where this method corrects miopia.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >muh study
            Give me funding and I'll publish one of these people's improvement as a case report in a medical journal. Non-morons don't need something to be rubber stamped by a post-doc to logically deduce that the method works for at least some people and is not complete BS.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >muh study
            HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHA
            after you kept posting the same studies over and over again? come the frick on, at least try to be convincing.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >after you kept posting the same studies over and over again? come the frick on, at least try to be convincing.
            There are no human studies on reversal, there are animal studies though.

            [...]
            logical fallacy. it's fine if you operate on faith on what these guys tell you, but don't try to pretend this shit is scientific in any way

            Are you also suggesting that obesity is genetic by that same logic?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >there are animal studies though
            no there arent, there are animal studies on induction and cessation though.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >no there arent, there are animal studies on induction and cessation though.

            KEK.

            >“This study investigated whether adolescent guinea pigs can develop myopia induced by negative lenses, and whether they can recover from the induced myopia. Forty-nine pigmented guinea pigs (age of 3 weeks) were randomly assigned to 4 groups: 2-week defocus (n = 16), 4-week defocus (n = 9), 2-week control (n = 15) and 4-week control (n = 9). A −4.00 D lens was worn in the defocus groups and a plano lens worn in the control groups monocularly. Refractions in the defocused eyes developed towards myopia rapidly within 2 days of lens wear, followed by a slower development. The defocused eyes were at least 3.00 D more myopic with a greater increase in vitreous length by 0.08 mm compared to the fellow eyes at 14 days (p < 0.05). The estimated choroidal thickness of the defocused eyes decreased rapidly within 2 days of lens wear, followed by a slower decrease over the next 4 days. Relative myopia induced by 4 weeks of negative-lens treatment declined rapidly following lens removal.”
            >http://journals.lww.com/optvissci/Abstract/1991/05000/Inducing_Myopia,_Hyperopia,_and_Astigmatism_in.7.aspx

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >there's anecdotal evidence of it working for some people but i can't confirm if that's true or not
            ok, where is the science

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            https://wiki.reducedlens.org/wiki/Frequently_Asked_Questions/Myopia/Quotes
            https://wiki.reducedlens.org/wiki/Lens-induced
            https://wiki.reducedlens.org/wiki/Clinical_Studies

            [...]

            When the deniers stop denying.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Again, my vision tanked BEFORE I started doing close-up work. explain
            probably diet. then you consulted the snake oil salesman who convinced you the only way to fix your vision is to get glasses and you sealed the deal

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >couldnt see more then 10 feet in front of my face for months because diet
            No, try again.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            such sudden degradation was absolutely because of a diet or because you worked somewhere where you were supposed wear protective eyewear and you didn't. let's hear your theory though

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Or, maybe, it was genetic. It happened when I was young. Astigmatism cannot be corrected by fricking exercise. It's literally a physical deformation, not caused my muscles. The muscles literally cant make the cornea that shape. You have no idea what youre talking about, and you pseudo miopia bullshit is a stunning example of how midwits argue using science.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >genetic
            that's what the "doctor" told you didn't he. as I said - he's got a sucker for life

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Oh look, you can't refute it. It's funny how you start out with all these links and sound bites, but the further the discussion goes on the more and more the less and less you have.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            how can anyone refute an argument of
            >it happened... because it did
            the burden of proof is on you - let's see the gene that causes this and discuss further

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >the gene
            thats not how gene expression works and you know it

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            No it's just literally not how gene expression works. Fricking moron.

            logical fallacy. it's fine if you operate on faith on what these guys tell you, but don't try to pretend this shit is scientific in any way

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            how does gene expression work?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            So why did you conveniently forget that you said that myopia is caused by glasses?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            The eye's accommodation system responding to the new stimilus where images are being projected behind the retina due to overpowered corrections in close-up work:
            >“The homeostatic control of eye growth functions to keep images sharply focused on the retina. Therefore, if the eye length increases more slowly than does the focal length, the focal plane will be behind the retina, creating hyperopic defocus on the retina. The same occurs if one puts a negative lens over the eye (Figure 2A). To regain sharp focus, the retina needs to be displaced backward to where the image is. This is done in two ways: the eye is lengthened by increasing the rate of growth or of remodeling of the sclera at the posterior pole of the eye (Gentle and McBrien 1999 and Nickla et al. 1997),...
            >(A) A positive lens (blue, convex) causes the image to form in front of the retina (myopic defocus), whereas a negative lens (red, concave) pushes the image plane behind the retina (hyperopic defocus). With no lens (black rays), the image of a distant object is focused on the retina.
            >(B) The eye compensates for positive lenses by slowing its rate of elongation and by thickening the choroid, pushing the retina forward toward the image plane. It compensates for negative lenses by increasing the rate of elongation and thinning the choroid, pulling the retina back toward the image plane. The emmetropic eye is intermediate in length and in choroid thickness.
            >https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0896627304004933

            See: https://wiki.reducedlens.org/wiki/Frequently_Asked_Questions/Myopia/Quotes#Axial_elongation
            And: https://wiki.reducedlens.org/wiki/Frequently_Asked_Questions/Myopia/Quotes#Glasses_progressing_myopia_via_hyperopic_defocus

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            so then what causes it before someone gets glasses?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >so then what causes it before someone gets glasses?
            It's called pseudo-myopia:
            >Pseudomyopia is a temporary shift towards near-sightness and occurs when the ciliary muscle inside of your eye temporarily locks up due to extended periods of closeup focus, resulting in blurred distance vision. This is usually the condition people get before they go to the optometrist, and then go onto to develop lens-induced myopia.
            https://wiki.reducedlens.org/wiki/Pseudomyopia

            Also search on https://scholar.google.com/ for "pseudomyopia".

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            how does pseudomyopia last months, again with no change in lifestyle.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            there are literally rescue animals in zoos right now who were rescued because they had bad vision

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Wild animals don't have myopia. You can induce myopia in animals in the lab by giving them glasses and that can be reversed by giving them specific stimulus: https://wiki.reducedlens.org/wiki/Clinical_Studies

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            YES THEY DO!

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Source?

            I have 3 pairs of glasses with 0.25 differences between them and it didn't do anything over 3 years
            kys Black person

            You just proved that you didn't follow the method, congratulations.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Source?
            Me, a wildlife expert.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Can you link a paper on myopia prevalence for wild animals? Can you document cases of wild lions getting myopia and dying of starvation since he can't find food?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Wild animals don't have myopia.
            who says

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >artificially induced conditions can be reversed easily in a lab setting
            durrrrrrrr

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Wild animals don't have myopia.

            Yes they do. Eyes are a product of evolution.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >why would it be any different with human eyes
      most animals have those mirror like thingies in the back of the eyeball that reflects light and makes them look all shiny.
      Animal eyes and human eyes are very different.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Fundamentally they're the same and respond to the same stimuli.

        okay so you have no example yet? how many years is it going to take for you to have one example of correction?

        Jake Steiner went from -5 to 20/20. There are other examples if you look for them.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >literal snake oil salesman
          >and others i swear!
          come the frick on anon

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            His method is legit but he has a financial incentive, that's why an open-source version has sprung up at https://wiki.reducedlens.org/
            I'm not defending that guy, just giving him as an example of someone reaching full correction.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >just giving him as an example of someone reaching full correction.
            Wrong. Youre giving him as an example of someone who says they reached full correction. Still waiting for an example of someone reaching full correction.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Can we at least agree that the method results in significant improvements in vision from significant axial length reductions? If you deny this then there's no point in discussing further as you could as well deny that you're a homosexual or that the moon is real.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >significant
            No. Less than 2 diopters is not significant.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >and respond to the same stimuli.
          it literally doesn't dumbass. They respond completely different to light which is the one important think about eyes, how they respond to light.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            That's why I said that they're "fundamentally" the same, not that they're literally the same.

            The people who push your method are salesmen
            The people who say it doesn't work are doctors
            Do the math

            >The people who push your method are salesmen
            >The people who say it doesn't work are doctors
            Uhm, sweetie, you got it backwards. The method is completely free at wiki.reducedlens.org, the salesmen are the doctors pushing LASIK and other surgeries that don't address the root cause.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >root cause
            its like a mantra

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >treating symptoms is just kicking the can down the road, only by defeating the root cause can you fix the problem
            >y-you're mantring
            lmao what the frick are you doing moron

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            You can't treat the root cause of a genetic defect with anything short of gene therapy. But you keep trying your little method.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            let's see the gene that causes this

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            That's not how gene expression works and you know it

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            So you agree that there's an environmental stimulus that causes it?

            You're like the people saying that obesity is genetic. it's like ok moron, obesity is a genetic disease that has to be resolved with lifelong Ozempic injections.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            then that's circular reasoning and not a real argument and you know it as well

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            No it's just literally not how gene expression works. Fricking moron.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >myopia is reversible
      the earth is flat

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        whatever you say sucker. keep funding degredation of your own eyesight, lmao

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          The people who push your method are salesmen
          The people who say it doesn't work are doctors
          Do the math

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          you are unfathomably moronic, but that's what happens when your entire life is built on what you read on IQfy

  27. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    get a newer procedure like relex smile or femtolasik not deprecated procedures

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      They do not address the root cause and carry similar risks, see

      ABSOLUTELY NOT.

      Here's the ultimate redpill on myopia my dear anon.

      LASIK is like carving lenses on your cornea, it's like giving you permanent glasses. The problem is that myopia is due to an elongated eyeball. So LASIK does not address the root cause, and you will still have an elongated eyeball - which if high will carry the same risk of complications like retinal detachment. So not only with LASIK you're not addressing the root cause and carrying the same baseline risk, but you're adding another strata of risk in the form of LASIK complications which are VERY common (things that impair quality of vision like halos around lights at night, ...).

      Thankfully, myopia is reversible thanks to a method called the reduced lens method.
      - Wear close-up glasses (1.5-2 diopters less than your current prescription) for near work (anything involving a close screen)
      - Wear a slight undercorrection for distance vision (reduced distance glasses) with 0.25 diopter undercorrection from your current prescription (wear the prescription only for stuff like driving that requires high visual acuity). This will generate the necessary stimilus.
      - The hardest thing: Active Focus and doing it as a habit when you are engaged in distance vision
      - 4. Be sure to get distance vision in your life, preferably daily. At least 2 hours per day.
      https://wiki.reducedlens.org/wiki/Frequently_Asked_Questions/FFAQ#What_are_the_steps?

      Here are studies on animals' eyes showing reversal (why would it be any different with human eyes): https://wiki.reducedlens.org/wiki/Clinical_Studies

      Some examples of documented optician verified with the autorefractor machine improvements:

      You can find more if you search for them.

      You're welcome.

      .

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        except it works for 99% of people

  28. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    For ye average -3 diopter myopic nerd it seems an useless risk. If you are normiecore who can't be seen with glasses I can understand, but if so why are you here?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      My eyes are between -6 and -7, and it's not like it's worth it more. I have to wear glasses or contacts now just as I did when I had -3 D glasses.
      As long as your vision can be corrected with glasses or contacts, I see literally no reason to surgically frick with your eyes.
      Turbo normies who got the surgery be like
      >There are literally no side effects
      >What about night vision?
      >I only get some glow and halo effects when it's dark, but you get used to it
      >What about dry eyes?
      >Pff, literally no issues, everything went as expected. I only need eye drops 2 times a day now
      >When was you are surgery?
      >3 years ago

  29. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The only real alternative will be full-eye-replacement but that's not going to be market available for at least 100 years

  30. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >root cause
    >root cause
    >root cause
    >root cause
    >root cause

  31. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Enjoy your eternal dry eyes and pain.

    Yeah. I almost went for it myself and so glad I didn't.

  32. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Google famous neurosurgeon
    >Blind as a bat
    >Still wears glasses
    Every time

  33. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous
  34. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I was like 5 or 6 and I wouldn't be able to see right. When driving to the city the lights would be big blurry balls, and I had to look pretty close to read like, books. I never had TV or games or anything as a kid, just got born with bad eyesight.
    Then I got glasses and could see and I finally felt "normal".

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >just got born with bad eyesight.
      No, you were born with normal eyesight then you got pseudomyopia from close-up work which progressed to lens-induced myopia.
      https://wiki.reducedlens.org/wiki/Pseudomyopia

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        So how does using glasses correct this is it's caused by glasses? You said undercorrection can correct this.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          There are two things at work here:
          Close-up glasses with a BIG undercorrection (1.5-2) to stop myopia progression.
          Normalized glasses: They're just slightly undercorrected (0.25), they work by giving you a VERY slight stimilus from the undercorrection. Here's the science on that stimilus: https://wiki.reducedlens.org/wiki/Frequently_Asked_Questions/Myopia/Quotes

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >here's the science
            >faq
            cultists should be more self aware

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        No? I was maybe 5 years old. I didn't do any "close up work" my dude. I had bad eyesight before I got glasses lmao.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          What were you doing as a 5 year old? If you were playing with toys that's close-up work. If you were drawing that's close-up work. Do you even remember what you were doing as a 5 year old? I don't believe so.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Dude, you're reaching so hard. Holy shit. I spent my time as a five year old running around, playing and having fun.

  35. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Hella no, it would finna ruin my chudjak style drip with glasses ong frfr

  36. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The frick is this schizophrenic polshit here

  37. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >don't believe me? well, check out this goytube grifter that said the eye weight training method works
    >years of studies and research by actual doctors that have a passion for this field are saying the opposite? nah, don't trust them

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      of studies and research by actual doctors that have a passion for this field are saying the opposite? nah, don't trust them
      Fricking imbecile. The studies indicate that myopia is induced by glasses and can be reversed:
      https://wiki.reducedlens.org/wiki/Frequently_Asked_Questions/Myopia/Quotes
      https://wiki.reducedlens.org/wiki/Lens-induced
      https://wiki.reducedlens.org/wiki/Clinical_Studies

      Also the method is completely free, there's no financial incentive here, unlike that with eye mutilation salesmen.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >the studies that indicate it, indicate it
        wow no shit, thats why we dont use studies as evidence to a hypothesis. thats not how we do science...

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >thats why we dont use studies as evidence to a hypothesis
          moron. All that is empty talk when we have evidence of reversal as confirmed by autorefractors.

          >the "studies"
          >a fricking FAQ on a wiki page
          lol
          lmao

          It's a list of quotes from studies, you can double check them yourself.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >we have evidence of reversal
            Oh wait, for real? Okay post it.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >the "studies"
        >a fricking FAQ on a wiki page
        lol
        lmao

  38. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    There's a limit to how many times you can get it done, and it doesn't last forever. Your eyes degrade over time normally, so you could end up with shitty eyesight again but no option for Lasik. Also, it can cause chronic dry eyes and pain.

    It's best to get it when you're older when your useful life is coming to an end. E.g. around 35-ish.

  39. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    My vision was getting bad at 7 years old. I couldn't see the blackboard in class, so they put me in the front row. At 8 years old, I couldn't clearly read what the teacher was writing from even the front row, so I had to get glasses. This was all before I knew what a computer or video game were. I guess all of the time I spent playing outside and focusing my vision on distant objects still wasn't enough "eye training".

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Ignores all the close-up work done (reading textbooks in classes, doing homework, playing with toys, ...).
      Yes, you weren't doing enough distance vision and you had too much close-up work.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Frick, you're right. ~~*They*~~ planned this from the start all along! Vgh... the west has fallen.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          keep ruining your eyesight and paying for it golemoid

  40. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >https://wiki.reducedlens.org
    So I unironically opened this and browsed around and all I could find as "evidence" were meme images, references to rat experiments of dubious verification metrics, citation of IQfy posts, links to grifter videos, and conspiracy theories like this. Embarrassing.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It'a such a blatant strawman too. Literally nobody says myopia is purely genetic.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        yeah, except these guys:

        You can't treat the root cause of a genetic defect with anything short of gene therapy. But you keep trying your little method.

        Or, maybe, it was genetic. It happened when I was young. Astigmatism cannot be corrected by fricking exercise. It's literally a physical deformation, not caused my muscles. The muscles literally cant make the cornea that shape. You have no idea what youre talking about, and you pseudo miopia bullshit is a stunning example of how midwits argue using science.

        in this very thread, lmao

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Neither of those posts say that all myopia is genetic.

          Yeah no, you are moronic, these people are well beyond the developing age, if it's safe and effective they should be the first ones to do it.

          >they should
          Based on what? The one factor youre considering? Wow it's almost like there isnt only one factor.

          >never see the man eat the pizza he made, ever
          >y-you dont know, he might be allergic to it n shiet
          okay buddy

          Are you actually suggesting that there are no lasik surgeons who have had the surgery themselves? Do you really wanna try and pretend like that's true?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >neither say that ALL myopia is genetic
            you said
            >literally nobody says myopia is purely genetic.
            now I have to provide proof people think ALL myopia is genetic? nice moving the goalpost loser
            >there ARE NO lasik surgeons who had the surgery themselves
            again. you suck at this

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        It is purely genetic. Guess what happens when an increasing number of people with a specific genetic defect breed with a decreasing number of people without said genetic defect? It spreads! Shocking, right?

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >it's genetic
          can we see any proof
          >pfft, dont you know how gene expression works?
          so you dont have proof huh
          >the proof is the doctor told me it's genetic so it's genetic
          this is some cultist shit lmao

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      You must be blind to miss the pages that cite scientific studies:
      https://wiki.reducedlens.org/wiki/Frequently_Asked_Questions/Myopia/Quotes
      https://wiki.reducedlens.org/wiki/Lens-induced
      https://wiki.reducedlens.org/wiki/Clinical_Studies
      There are no rat experiments there, LASIK shill.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I don't support LASIK at all, schizoshill. You've spammed these three links several times this thread and you've convinced no one. You're not that good at your "job," I must say.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          I don't have to convince anyone, I already convinced myself and got 0.75 diopter improvements so far. I'll keep doing what works and you can shill for doctors because "muh consensus" while I reap for the benefits.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            you will plateu, you cant correct more than 1-1.5 diopters.

  41. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >laser corrective eye surgery
    enjoy your higher order aberrations

  42. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Myopia has little to do with close work or your ciliary muscle wearing out. The latest research shows that lack of bright light during childhood makes your eyes grow in one axis only (front to back), which makes them elongated and unable to focus. If you're already an adult, you're shit out of luck. Make your kids go outside every day for a few hours and they won't have this issue.

    Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6181186/

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Reminder that Myopia isn't a condition, it's a symptom of a number of conditions.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *