tjoseph833:Hi tjoseph833. I have come across this article before. Thank you for sharing. However, this study was not aimed at investigating the control of myopia progression. First the sample age (25yo) show irrelevance in terms of childhood myopia. Secondly, the axial length change due to defocus found in the study (max 43 microns) is very close to normal human diurnal variation in axial length (15-40 microns) (Stone, 2004). Furthermore, the repeatability of the biometer the study used (Lenstar) is 50microns (Schulle, 2013; Zhao, 2013). Therefore the reported result may just be part of diurnal variation of axial length or variability of the Lenstar measurements.Mr Opto, I think the jury is still out when it comes to axial length changes. Look at this study - http://www.iovs.org/content/51/12/6262.full
Seems like it can be reversed and more research is needed. Ophthalmologists and optometrists contradict each other somehow. Alternative treatments from Leo Angart etc is meant to relax the eye muscles.
I think atropine helps with the eye muscle ... tiredness causes the eye ball to stretch. Scleral growth and choroidal weakness might be due to genetics ... so unfortunately with near work / less sunlight / outdoor time ... the human eye elongates more.
I agree that Atropine helps relax the eye muscles, but thinking about the extra amount of UV entering the eye just makes me feel uncomfortable unless the child is wearing cap and sunglasses all the time. Plus the mechanism of how it retards myopia progression remains unknown even to the ophthalmologists.
Here are some studies for your reference:
Stone, 2004 - http://goo.gl/vV9yYd
Schulle, 2013 - http://goo.gl/VG8X7D
Zhao, 2013 - http://goo.gl/RdKOYO
