Jump to content

Talk:Myopia

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There is mention of outdoor play

[edit]

Obviously outdoor play will increase Vitamin-D synthesis in children.

There are even more research papers that link Myopia to low serum levels of 25(OH)D due to inadequate Vitamin-D.

A search for "Myopia Vitamin-D" on Google scholar, Pub-Med or Google traditional will find many published papaers that support a mention here of the simple remedy of increasing serum levels to reduce the prevalence.

Idyllic press (talk) 19:04, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I do not see how prehormon/vitamin D3 can cause any problems with the eye, myopia is considered to be genetical. It is possible that it affects growth... Valery Zapolodov (talk) 00:07, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Non Scientific focus

[edit]

This article focuses far too much on causes of something that is inadequately described It is important for a physics textbook description to be more paramount. The third paragraph of the intro is woo. The fourth paragraph of the intro mistakes increased detection for increased incidence. The causes section is suspiciously eugenicist, and completely wrong.

sorry for the pun 104.247.228.73 (talk) 14:30, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 25 November 2023

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved to Myopia. Per consensus, WP:MEDTITLE applies here. (closed by non-admin page mover) – robertsky (talk) 18:57, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Near-sightedness → Nearsightedness – This term is used more often without that hyphen than with the hypen. See this ngram. Move per WP:COMMONNAME. – Treetoes023 (talk) 03:56, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well now. This article used to be entitled 'Myopia' until an editor decided to rename it 'Near-sightedness' after very little discussion - and certainly with no reference to this ngram. -- Jmc (talk) 17:57, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"Myopia" has multiple uses, that ngram isn't useful because it includes other uses for "myopia". See Myopia (disambiguation). – Treetoes023 (talk) 03:34, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree. The three Myopia (disambiguation)#Other uses are pretty obscure and after eliminating most of the 'Music' entries by going back to 1950 in the ngram, there's still a great majority in favour of 'myopia' as a refractive defect of the eye. Jmc (talk) 04:32, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed and from WP:MEDTITLE which can't be overidden by local consensus as far as I am aware, I would agree with Jmc CV9933 (talk) 11:51, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Treetoes023: for clarity in closing this discussion: would you be opposed to a move to "myopia"? Elli (talk | contribs) 04:31, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Elli: I am neutral. – Treetoes023 (talk) 16:53, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move to Myopia, per Jmc and CV9933's analysis. A dip into Google Scholar suggests that myopia is most common in a corpus that includes (but is not strictly limited to) high-quality sources. I included LASIK in the search terms to limit the results (loosely) to topics related to this article subject. I got:
    • 1,310 hits for [LASIK nearsightedness]
    • 300 hits for [LASIK near-sightedness], with the hyphen
    • 29,600 hits for [LASIK myopia]
    The Google test is imperfect (as is ngrams), but I'd say this is contributory evidence toward what is already a rock-solid MEDTITLE case. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 18:51, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I concur with Firefangledfeathers that a move back to Myopia is a rock-solid MEDTITLE case. For the record, the move to Near-sightedness was a unilateral action by Mast303 on 22 December 2022. -- Jmc (talk) 20:29, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add A Fact: "2 hours outside reduces myopia risk in kids"

[edit]

I found a fact that might belong in this article. See the quote below

Children should spend up to two hours a day outside to reduce their risk of myopia, or nearsightedness, according to a new consensus report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine.

The fact comes from the following source:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/wellness/2024/10/07/myopia-prevention-outdoor-time-children/

Here is a wikitext snippet to use as a reference: 

 {{Cite web |title=The Washington Post - Breaking news and latest headlines, U.S. news, world news, and video - The Washington Post |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wellness/2024/10/07/myopia-prevention-outdoor-time-children/ |website=Washington Post |access-date=2024-10-09 |language=en |first=Ian |date=2024-10-07|last=McMahan|quote=Children should spend up to two hours a day outside to reduce their risk of myopia, or nearsightedness, according to a new consensus report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine.}}

Additional comments from user: It looks like this new report could be good to add to the article. The "Society and culture" section mentions Taiwan's program to encourage 120 minutes of outdoor time, which is related to this new study.

This post was generated using the Add A Fact browser extension.

Cloud atlas (talk) 18:29, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Myopia&oldid=1251602186"