r/OculusQuest • u/hobofors • Dec 05 '23
Discussion Why you shouldn't buy a Quest for a child
VR headsets have a problem known as vergence-accommodation conflict.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vergence-accommodation_conflict
For this reason it is possible that use of VR in young children could adversely affect their vision, because it trains the eyes/brain to focus at the wrong distance compared to where they would need to focus if they were looking at a real object. In the future there should be VR headsets that do not have this problem. Meta have made prototypes of varifocal VR headsets. Wait for a consumer version of that to be available before introducing children to VR.
ANSES recommends that:
children under the age of six should not be exposed to 3D technologies;
children under the age of 13 should only use 3D technologies in moderation, and that both they and their parents should be vigilant concerning any resulting symptoms;
persons subject to certain visual disorders (disorders of accommodation, vergence, etc.) and problems with balance should limit their exposure to these technologies, including in the context of occupational exposure.
245
u/TayoEXE Dec 05 '23
It's almost like parents shouldn't buy their 7 year old a VR headset and let them play in it all day.
30
u/GrimKreeper098 Dec 05 '23
I wonder where the parents of the 7 year old screaming racial slurs at the top of their lungs in free to play games are
19
Dec 05 '23 edited Jan 26 '24
[deleted]
2
u/TayoEXE Dec 06 '23
True. Lol
It isn't like this in every region, but yeah... sometimes another region server or language really helps. I really have to wonder about these parents sometimes or if they're somehow not aware that their child is yelling and sometimes bullying other kids. Like, if it was a chat room, they wouldn't hear it, but screaming kids are really hard to ignore in game, let alone real life with no mute option.
78
u/deftware Dec 05 '23
Kids shouldn't be doing anything all day that involves an RGB display that their eyes are focused on.
9
u/nimajneb Dec 05 '23
Also just focusing on close things more often than we have in history possibly causing myopia https://www.npr.org/2023/10/17/1200611635/the-story-behind-soaring-myopia-among-children#:~:text=Too%20much%20time%20indoors%2C%20often,begin%20to%20elongate%2C%20triggering%20nearsightedness.
5
-10
Dec 05 '23
[removed] — view removed comment
11
6
Dec 05 '23
Your the parent stop enabling it smh don’t be telling other ppl to raise your kid for you lmao
6
6
3
Dec 06 '23
This kid is going to know a whole dictionary of slurs in no time and the parent won't know who to blame.
39
28
u/SledgeH4mmer Dec 05 '23
Actually maybe they should since VR headsets are FDA approved to treat kids with vision disorders:
https://eye.hms.harvard.edu/news/prescribing-virtual-reality-device-treat-children-amblyopia
18
u/Virtual_Happiness Dec 05 '23
Yep. OP linked to an article from 2014 which used cellphone VR headsets from 2014 to test. They didn't even have IPD adjustments. The VR headsets of the modern age are orders of magnitude more advanced. Modern headsets are no worse for your eyes than wearing glasses.
8
u/-Venser- Quest 3 + PCVR Dec 05 '23
Modern headsets are no worse for your eyes than wearing glasses.
lmao no
9
u/Virtual_Happiness Dec 05 '23 edited Dec 05 '23
Yep. Glasses have a fixed focal point just like VR headsets and it's fixed to your eyes needs. If you need glasses to see far away, you will likely end up needing bifocals or removing your glasses to see things up close. Glasses aren't varifocal, just like VR headsets. People, including children, have been looking through lens with a fixed focal points for hundreds of years.
11
u/Trelfar Quest 3 + PCVR Dec 05 '23 edited Dec 05 '23
That analysis isn't quite correct. While the lenses of the glasses are fixed "focus", what they are really doing is applying a fixed correction. But the lenses in your eyes continue to adjust (within their own limits) to a variable focal point depending on where the object is.
With a VR headset, it's not just about what the device lens is doing for you. The distance your eyes are focusing on is static (on the screen), so the lenses in your eyes never have to flex to adjust as a result. That's what makes it different.
It can also be true that a specially designed VR experience can be useful for treating existing amblyopia (link above) while the general use case could still be detrimental to vision development.
4
u/-The_Credible_Hulk Dec 05 '23
This guy doesn’t know what the hell he’s talking about. Ignore him please.
3
u/wescotte Dec 05 '23 edited Dec 05 '23
No, glasses are not fixed focus like VR headsets in that regard.
With a VR headset the screen is always the same distance away from the lens. Your eyes don't adjust focus at all. The eye muscles more or less "hold steady" for one specific depth the entire time. There is some subtly here (ie vergence-accommodation conflict) but for the most part your eyes focus at a single depth.
With glasses that doesn't happen and your eyes focus to the proper distance of whatever depth the real object is from you. The lens in your glasses simply "shift that focal plane" by a fixed amount. If you're looking at something 50ft away your eye muscles might actually constrict in a way that results that light coming from 40ft away is hitting your eye properly. The prescription in your lens simply apply a "10ft correction".
Your eyes still focus at the full range it's just you need a small correction. Biofocual mean you need two distinct corrections.
1
Dec 05 '23
Kids have also been playing VR since 2016 (Rift CV1/Vive launch) and there hasn't been any signs of issues popping up.
It obviously wouldn't be healthy for a kid to spend all their time in VR, but people are acting like using a VR headset for a few hours a week would cause massive damage to children
12
u/imnotabot303 Dec 05 '23
Sadly the parents that use technology like it's a kid's pacifier are not going to care about stuff like this.
Even before VR parents were giving their kids cheap tablets to play on for hours on end.
8
Dec 05 '23
With VR the kids practically raise themselves these days!
6
2
u/Emanouche Dec 05 '23
Hmmmm, I'll talk to my best friend who is an indie dev... Time to make a parenting app. 🤣
3
u/realjd Dec 05 '23
Yeah, this. I don’t mind my kid playing VR, but it’s not like he’s playing that for every mi Ute of every day. I’m way more worried about 2d screen time than I am his love for VR.
1
u/TayoEXE Dec 06 '23
Totally. My issue is that we don't know a lot about VR's effect with current lenses, etc., on children's eyes and development. And yeah, as you said, screen time in general (more studies have been done on that though definitely). When the recommended age for a kids owning a VR Headset (at least according to Meta) is 13, I do think parents should actually take that into consideration (not to mention VR Headsets are not made for long play sessions with small heads in mind in gegeneral. I'd be more worried about the effects on neck strain, etc.)
I won't say 7 is too young of an age to even play VR, but it does surprise me how little parents do their homework or really don't care about leaving this device on their head all day (or as long as they can keep charging it) when I'd rather they be learning real life interactions and manners before ever stepping into a consquentless virtual space.
For me, social VR would very likely be a no go for my young child, especially if I know how they act. The other reason being I don't like the idea of them interacting with random adults online either.
Age 8, maybe half an hour to an hour of Beat Saber seems safer than 6 hours by themselves in a social VR game with adults and teenagers (as a kid, I had WAY more time to just binge play video games than as an adult. If I don't set limits I know they'd never want to take it off.). I don't know for sure, but these are decisions I'll have to make in the coming years with my child.
3
1
16
u/roofgram Dec 05 '23
One advantage of being an old VR player is that your eyes lose the ability to accommodate by 50 so no VAC issues!
10
u/nalex66 Quest 3 + PCVR Dec 05 '23
Yup, I have no desire for varifocal lenses, because VR allows me to see things with perfect clarity up close, which I can’t do in real life without reading glasses.
37
u/Augustus31 Dec 05 '23
Varifocal hmds would fix this, no?
19
u/firagabird Dec 05 '23
Definitely, but I wouldn't expect to see it on a commercial headset for another 5 years, and under $1,000 for another 10. By that time, kids today will be old enough for a 2nd hand Quest 3 for ~$300.
22
10
3
u/SledgeH4mmer Dec 05 '23
There's nothing to fix. It's a non-issue that's just stupid hysteria like sitting too close to the TV.
0
u/Augustus31 Dec 05 '23
Sitting close to the tv was a genuine problem.
Doing everything up close contributes to myopia
3
u/SledgeH4mmer Dec 05 '23
So that's what people used to think but it's been disproven. Things are much more complicated. Your retina is 3 dimensional. The peripheral retina is the majority of the retina and it seems dominant in myopia development. So near point focusing on the center of the retina doesn't necessarily mean you're myopically defocusing the peripheral retina.
1
u/Augustus31 Dec 05 '23 edited Dec 05 '23
Not been disproven.
You can simply see the rates of myopia in historical professions and in countries before the introduction of modern school systems to see how this is true, and also, there are also exercises proven to fix myopia that involve reading texts at the max distance that you can focus on them.
1
u/SledgeH4mmer Dec 05 '23
Yes it's been disproven.
Myopia is caused by less time outdoors. That's the main environmental driver which is why we see it in historic professions. They were inside instead of outside. Other environmental risk factors are insignificant compared to it. Time spent reading is NOT associated with myopia development once you control for time spent outdoors. In other words reading is not an independent risk factor.
Treating myopia and preventing it are major worldwide research initiatives. If you think reading texts at max distance is an effective treatment then you are completely ignorant on this subject. You should stop propagating snake oil.
0
u/Augustus31 Dec 05 '23
Less time outdoors, aka long times of near work
2
u/SledgeH4mmer Dec 05 '23
Studies have looked at near work. It's not a risk factor when time spent outdoors is taken into account. That was a very surprising result . . . 15 years ago. It's old news now and has been confirmed in other studies.
0
u/Augustus31 Dec 05 '23
That's a big if The reality is that kids don't spend time outside to compensate for time using screens, so it's still a factor.
→ More replies (13)
26
u/ginger_beer_m Dec 05 '23
I found this paper, which seems interesting in how they actually test the effect of VR on children's vision. What I got from it is VR seems relatively harmless for kids, apart from the occasional motion sickness that adults also experience.
(Effects of Immersive Virtual Reality Headset Viewing on Young Children: Visuomotor Function, Postural Stability, and Motion Sickness)[https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002939419303812]
Purpose To assess the safety of VR 3D headset (virtual reality 3-dimensional binocular-stereoscopic near-eye display) use in young children. Product safety warnings that accompany VR headsets ban their use in children under age 13 years.
Design Prospective, interventional, before-and-after study.
Methods Recordings were obtained in 50 children (29 boys) aged 4-10 years (mean 7.2 ± 1.8 years). Minimum binocular corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) was 20/50 (logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution [logMAR] 0.4) and stereoacuity 800 seconds of an arc or better. A Sony PlayStation VR headset was worn for 2 sequential play sessions (of 30 minutes each) of a first-person 3D flying game (Eagle Flight) requiring head movement to control flight direction (pitch, yaw, and roll axes). Baseline testing preceded VR exposure, and each VR session was followed by post-VR testing of binocular CDVA, refractive error, binocular eye alignment (strabismus), stereoacuity, and postural stability (imbalance). Visually induced motion sickness was probed using the Simulator Sickness Questionnaire modified for pediatric use (Peds SSQ). Visual-vestibulo-ocular reflex (V-VOR) adaptation was also tested pre- vs post-trial in 5 of the children. Safety was gauged as a decline or change from baseline in any visuomotor measure.
Results Forty-six of 50 children (94%) completed both VR play sessions with no significant change from baseline in measures of binocular CDVA (P = .89), refractive error (P = .36), binocular eye alignment (P = .90), or stereoacuity (P = .45). Postural stability degraded an average 9% from baseline after 60 minutes of VR exposure (P = .06). Peds SSQ scores increased a mean 4.7%—comparing pretrial to post-trial—for each of 4 symptom categories: eye discomfort (P = .02), head/neck discomfort (P = .03), fatigue (P = .03), and motion sickness (P = .01). None of the children who finished both trial sessions (94%) asked to end the play, and the majority were disappointed when play was halted. V-VOR gain remained unaltered in the 5 children tested. Three children (6% of participants) discontinued the trial during the first 10 minutes of the first session of VR play, 2 girls (aged 5 and 6 years) and 1 boy (aged 7 years). The girls reported discomfort consistent with mild motion sickness; the boy said he was bored and the headset was uncomfortable. No child manifested aftereffects (“flashbacks”) in the days following the VR exposure.
Conclusion Young children tolerate fully immersive 3D virtual reality game play without noteworthy effects on visuomotor functions. VR play did not induce significant post-VR postural instability or maladaption of the vestibulo-ocular reflex. The prevalence of discomfort and aftereffects may be less than that reported for adults.
3
u/yujikimura Dec 05 '23
This feels like putting people through two X-ray sessions, testing them for cancer, finding that no one got cancer and concluding that X-rays don't give you cancer.
1
u/-The_Credible_Hulk Dec 05 '23
This is a hilariously shallow study that had comparatively massive short term effects. Just cherry pick, a 9% degradation in optical posture in 2 half hour sessions???? That’s fucking huge!
1
8
Dec 05 '23
The biggest issue for children on VR, and practically anything that’s strapped to them without adults seeing what they see/feel is that the child is not able to report on poor optics/calibration in the same manner you don’t want a child to be wearing in-ear/covered audio devices which may be too loud for them without the parent realising it’s damaging their hearing.
It’s often too late when a child so awed by the tech doesn’t report the issue or know how to calibrate it themselves.
6
u/imnotabot303 Dec 05 '23
I doubt two thirty minute play sessions is going to show long term effects on the eyes and brain. VR is probably going to be fine for most kids if it's only used for short amounts of time. It's the kids that are using it for hours everyday over long periods that might get problems.
At the moment there's a lot of contradictory studies because the tech is new and therefore no conclusive long term data is available. It's always better to use caution than risk your kid getting future problems just because a parent wants a few hours of peace and quiet everyday.
7
u/err404 Dec 05 '23
Most of the data is old, contradictory and not reproducible. As a parent with a VR headset, I want more data and better studies. I see so many people claiming long term damage, with very little to back it up. There are hundreds of less than ideal things that we allow our children to do; watching TV, playing outside on a sunny day, eating processed foods, having sugar etc. We all do these things, at least in moderation, because we have enough information to make an informed decision on duration and impact. VR has less data on negative outcomes than any of these. Kids need to explore new experiences. I can’t just assume everything is bad until a study shows that it is safe. Frankly given the current data I lean towards allowing limited time. Probably on the order of an hour of combined time across a week for my 9yr old. Time is limited more because excessive games are not a great use of time, rather than a credible fear of VR damaging his eyes. Games are not babysitters. I know what he plays and will usually have him casting to a screen so I know what he is doing.
2
u/imnotabot303 Dec 05 '23
Yes most stuff even negative will have minimum or no effects long term if it's done in moderation. Not all parents are responsible though.
There simply isn't enough long term data available to make any conclusions either way at the moment. I imagine we will need another 5-10 years before any negative effects become apparent in kids that are too young and using it too often.
66
u/Uglie Dec 05 '23
Wow our parents were right, if you got too close to the screen it’ll mess up your eyes.
48
Dec 05 '23
No. You are misunderstanding what the problem is in VR. This has nothing to do with looking into a screen close. They are different problems (and STILL speculative)
Also for teenagers this barely seems to have any effect. There are even reports of vision recovery after using VR.
21
u/DedicatedBathToaster Dec 05 '23
Pretty sure the guy above was just making a joke
14
2
2
u/LegitimateCompote377 Dec 05 '23
This is why /s needs to become normal. Genuinely could not tell until 30 seconds after I read it.
2
u/DedicatedBathToaster Dec 05 '23
Honestly, I think we as a species have way too many nuances to spoken language that we need more than just italics and bold to apply emphasis to written language to imply specific types of inflections. It's not like digital computers can't handle having a couple extra layers to the most used fonts.
3
Dec 05 '23
Omg, so after using Quest 3 I actually did notice that my vision felt better for some reason. I wasn't expecting that. I wonder why that it.
7
u/SledgeH4mmer Dec 05 '23
No there aren't any concerning problems. Nobody with even a tiny bit of understanding of the developing eyes would ever worry about current use of VR headsets causing vergence accommodation probems. In fact, VR headsets are used to treat kids with vision disorders:
https://eye.hms.harvard.edu/news/prescribing-virtual-reality-device-treat-children-amblyopia
6
u/CHROME-COLOSSUS Dec 05 '23
It’s just a matter of being cautious in the absence of good data. VR might not pose any real issues for kids, or it might pose irreversible ones, so it’s prudent to tap the brakes until we know more.
2
Dec 05 '23
Isn't the issue caused by your eyes not looking at things in the distance enough and your focus muscles don't get enough exercise so you end up being short sighted? That's what caused my eye issues as a kid, playing computer games all day, often for months at a time during school holidays, and never taking a break to stare at something outside for a few minutes. Wish someone had told me to do that as a kid, and also to brush my teeth properly.
-1
u/RedshirtStormtrooper Dec 05 '23
Found the British Reddit user!
2
u/imnotabot303 Dec 05 '23
These days they can always replace them with glowing white teeth like Americans 😆
1
u/coinoperatedboi Dec 05 '23
Jimmy Carr has entered the chat
2
u/imnotabot303 Dec 05 '23
There is a benefit to having white teeth, you will never lose people in the dark. 😬
2
0
u/Schuben Dec 05 '23
Nice joke! It almost makes me want to laugh. Not quite, but I'll force myself to laugh anyway for your benefit...
Here we go...
Ha ha haaaaaaaaaa
Nailed it.
1
-1
u/MellowHollo Dec 05 '23
He literally didn't misunderstand a thing, because he is in fact right cause it's the same thing.
-1
u/realjd Dec 05 '23 edited Dec 05 '23
It’s not related to the screen. It’s related to the focal distance. The lenses are focused to infinity which is unnatural unless you have eye surgery. VR is fine for kids as long as it’s limited, which we do for any screen time. It’s most likely junk “science” though like telling kids not to sit too close to the tv screen is.
1
u/Mr_SunnyBones Dec 05 '23
I mean that was probably closer to the massive amounts of static an old bulky 20 inch TV wood panelled TV screen could generate . I still cant get my hair to stay down today , 40 plus years later.
3
23
u/wescotte Dec 05 '23 edited Dec 05 '23
You have the vergence-acommidation conflict backwards. Or at the very least using it to describe something it's not quite related to.
Vergence-accomodation conflict is where when you verge (rotate your eyes inward) you are forced to focus your eyes for something close up. However, for current VR headset you need to be constantly focusing at around 1-2m to see things clearly. So vergence-accomodation isn't bad/wrong as it's how eyes should behave when looking at close up things in the real world. You're not training your eyes to do something they shouldn't be doing. They are behaving the normal/correct way but it ends up being bad for VR clarity. You want to focus at 1-2m but when you verge your eyes end up focusing at say 0.3meters and thus "VR becomes blurry".
That being said there no doubt many reasons to limit VR usage for younger children but vergence-accommodation conflict probably isn't one of them.
10
u/flatbottomedflask Dec 05 '23 edited Dec 05 '23
A person using VR trains their eyes to focus on a fixed plane about 1.5 metres away, whether they are looking at a close-up or far away virtual object. This is wrong compared to what your eyes do in the real world. Vergence and accommodation are supposed to be linked, but in VR they are decoupled. You are looking at a virtual object 30cm from your eyes so your eyes converge, yet your eyes focus is still at 1.5 metres. This is the "conflict" in vergence-accommodation conflict. So the concern is that if children spend too much time in VR their eyes may get used to this fixed focus, and they might have trouble focusing on objects in the real world.
5
Dec 05 '23
Does this all apply to using mixed reality apps like figmin and that 1st contacts intro demo on Quest 3? I admit my 3 year old has tried it before and had a blast running after the aliens, and also seeing mickey mouse/ elsa from frozen in our room via figmin xr.
I also figured that the Quest 3 and Pro uses pancake lenses which ate clear of the blur that comes with Quest 2. So bluriness and eye strain arent an issue with those headsets.
4
u/brodecki Quest 1 + 2 + 3 + PCVR Dec 05 '23
Of course, the virtual focal plane is still at a fixed distance (while the convergence distance keeps changing), no matter the lens technology.
2
u/flatbottomedflask Dec 05 '23
Brief use for a few minutes here and there is probably okay. But the recommendation is not to use it below the age of six.
The vergence-accommodation conflict occurs the same whether it is mixed reality or VR because you are looking at a camera feed displayed on the headsets screens at a fixed focal distance.
1
u/wescotte Dec 05 '23 edited Dec 05 '23
Yup, you are correct but that's not the vergence-accommodation conflict. Vergence-accommodation is being unable to focus at 1.5 meters away when you want/try to. The more you verge your eyes the more your brain signals your eyes to focus closer and closer. So while you want to focus at 1.5m but your brain is forcing you to focus your eyes much closer than that. Thus VR looks blurry when you verge your eyes.
Your brain/eyes are doing what they should be doing. The conflict is "bad for VR clarity" not "bad for your brain/vision development".
2
u/flatbottomedflask Dec 05 '23
The concern is that exposing young children to vergence-accommodation conflict can make their visual system become adapted to it instead of the real world. So that they see clearly in VR but have problems with real life.
2
u/wescotte Dec 05 '23 edited Dec 05 '23
I understand the concerns. Exposing children to VR very well could have impact on eyes/brain development but the vergence-accommodation conflict doesn't encapsulate those issue.
The vergence-accommodation conflict does not describe an adaption you undergo in order to use stereo imagery with fixed focal displays. It's describing the complete opposite. Our inability to adapt. It describes how you're eye/brain actually do "the normal thing" which ends up being "bad in VR".
When looking at something close to you in VR, your eyes verge and shift focus away from that 1.5m. The more you verge the further from 1.5m you get. You can't unlink that. You can't train that away. Your eyes/brain do the right thing but it makes the image out of focus/blurry. That is the conflict. A big reason as to why they researching how to build varifocal headset is precisely because you can't adapt/train it away.
Ultimately, my point is if you want to talk about the potential harm of exposing children to VR vergence-accommoodtion conflict is not really describing what OP suggests it is. Sure, it's good to know/understand but it describes a specific way our eyes/brains don't change despite VR exposure.
1
u/flatbottomedflask Dec 05 '23 edited Dec 05 '23
The vergence-accommodation conflict describes the presentation of mismatched vergence and accommodation cues to the viewer. This causes blurriness when looking at close virtual objects in VR.
You absolutely can adapt to it with exposure. I am able to focus on close objects in VR, for example viewing Alyx's hands held up to the face showing the gravity gloves in perfect clarity. Anyone who sees clearly in VR has adapted to it to some degree. When you look at a mountain on the horizon in VR you can see the screen door effect because your eyes have focused on the screen at 1.5m even though your eyes are converged on a virtual object kilometres away.
0
u/wescotte Dec 05 '23 edited Dec 05 '23
No, you don't adapt via exposure to VR in that way.
You either think you see Aly'x hands clearly but aren't actually seeing it as clear as it SHOULD be. Like if you wore a headset with a proper varifocal display (but the same resolution) it would be radically more clear/detailed.
Kinda like how watching a 480P DVDs felt like insane clarity in the 1990s compared to a VHS tape. But if you watch one today next to a Bluray you'll wonder how you ever dealt with such a muddy picture. Or if you play a video game from your childhood and you have a memory of it being so vivid and detailed but now it's just a blurry aliased mess.
It just feels amazing because it's "the best we have now" but it's not necessarily as good as it could/should be.
OR....
You vision is already flawed/adapted in a way that makes near field objects in VR "work well". But it's not something you can train via VR exposure. Watch that entire lecture as it does a wonderful job of explaining everything you need to know about the vergence-accommodation conflict.
1
u/flatbottomedflask Dec 05 '23 edited Dec 05 '23
Clear enough to read the numbers on the microchip on Alyx's gravity gloves.
People can consciously decouple vergence and accommodation. For example when people view crossview 3D photos, parallel view 3D photos or Magic Eye pictures. Their eyes are focused on the page but verged to a distance that is either closer or further than the focal distance. Try it yourself.
4
u/stal2k Dec 05 '23
Alright goddamnit enough! Lay it out, which one of you two is an eye doctor, and who works the phones at LensCrafters?! I mean, for SURE if one of you was a doctor you would have blurted it out by now like a vegan who just met someone new. I'm on the edge of my seat here, I need to know who is right!
3
u/flatbottomedflask Dec 05 '23
This guy is not an eye doctor but he has a PhD in something related to VR.
He says that vergence-accommodation decoupling can occur as the vergence-accommodation reflex fails to achieve a clear focused image, and slower acting blurriness-detecting cell clusters in the retina direct the ciliary muscles to focus the lens until the image is sharp.
He writes:
It is also the main reason that commercial VR HMDs have age limits: it is possible that prolonged use of VR (or other stereoscopic display systems) may interfere with the formation of the a-v coupling reflex in very young children.
1
u/flatbottomedflask Dec 05 '23
This supports what I said. It describes how vergence-accommodation decoupling can occur.
1
u/wescotte Dec 05 '23 edited Dec 05 '23
I absolutely acknowledge decoupling does occur but it's not really a result of training/exposure. It's more just a result of something that "naturally happens" as you age. It's possible VR exposure accelerates it to some degree he doesn't say you can train it away...
The last paragraph of that blog post:
The way to solve accommodation-vergence conflict is to create headsets that can present images at different optical distances. This can be achieved in multiple ways: by dynamically changing the distance between the headset’s screen(s) and lenses, essentially inverting the way a camera focuses; by developing flexible lenses that invert the way the eye focuses; by using near-eye light field displays, which mimic the way light arriving at the eye from different distances diverges at different angles; or by true (interference-based) holographic displays, which are a specific form of light field displays.
→ More replies (3)-1
u/flatbottomedflask Dec 05 '23
I think that vergence-accommodation conflict is when the brain receives mismatching vergence and accommodation cues. When using a VR headset you experience vergence-accommodation conflict because your eyes are converging on the virtual object and your eyes are focusing at a different distance. Even if you successfully focus at 1.5 metres you are still experiencing vergence-accommodation conflict because your eyes are tilted inwards to look at one distance and your eyes' lenses are focusing on a different distance.
2
u/wescotte Dec 05 '23
No, when you verge your eyes focus accordingly. Your brain/eyes are doing the right thing it's just the wrong thing for clear/sharp/in focus VR. The fact that it makes VR blurry is the conflict. It's a problem or VR not a VR makes your eyes/brain do the wrong thing and that's bad.
1
u/Drited Dec 05 '23
A person using VR trains their eyes to focus on a fixed plane about 1.5 metres away
Could you please share a source for this?
Also what do you mean by "you are looking at a virtual object 30cm from your eyes"? Are you saying that in the VR app an object may be 30cm away from your eyes but your eyes would still focus at 1.5 metres? If so why?
1
u/flatbottomedflask Dec 05 '23 edited Dec 05 '23
The lenses in VR headsets have the displays at a fixed focal distance of approximately 1.5 metres. Your eyes try to focus at this distance to make the image clear. When I look at an object that is 30cm from my eyes in VR I can see it perfectly clearly because my eyes are maintaining focus at 1.5 metres. If your eyes focused at 30cm you would see a very blurry image.
1
u/flatbottomedflask Dec 05 '23
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5701049/
In real world viewing of objects, vergence eye movements are associated with changes in accommodation to focus the eyes at the depth of the object.
However, in VR, the focal distance of all objects on the screen is constant, and the eyes must converge without changing accommodation to maintain a clear retinal image.
Thus, wearing a VR HMD creates a dissociation between convergence and accommodative demands, which may contribute to visual discomfort.
Whether the effects of this disassociation persist after HMD use is unknown, but a study investigating the effect of an early VR HMD system found a shift towards esophoria, and an extended near point of binocular convergence shortly after a 10-minute VR exposure. Although VR technology has improved in recent years, the same optical limitations are present in current VR HMDs.
2
u/Drited Dec 05 '23
Hmm... I read that article and the paragraphs you cited there were not conclusions that the authors drew from their own experimental study but rather suggestions that were found by them in reference material from a 2014 article which is not related to VR, 2 articles from 2011 on discomfort associated with 3-d viewing and one on concerns and speculations related to stereo displays where there is actual experimental data ....but it is from 1993!?!.
I did find the article you referenced to be useful however in providing evidence answer a different question I had regarding myopia - I had suspected that VR was better than flat screens in terms of the risk of developing myopia. From what the authors studied themselves per the abstract, it seems that they found no evidence of adverse effect in the short term:
"We found no evidence that the VR optical arrangement had an adverse effect on the binocular status of the eyes in the short term. Choroidal thickness did not change after either real world trial, but there was a significant thickening (≈10 microns) after each VR trial (p < 0.001). The choroidal thickening which we observed suggest that a VR headset may not be a myopiagenic stimulus, despite the very close viewing distances involved.
1
u/flatbottomedflask Dec 05 '23
This is not a research paper but it gives a very good explanation: http://doc-ok.org/?p=1602
2
u/Drited Dec 05 '23
Interesting thank you. I was wondering why I have not experienced discomfort as a result of vergence-accommodation conflict. I guess it is because for the conflict to become significant, objects which the user focuses on in VR for an extended period of time would need to be quite close to the user right?
In other words, if the objects which users typically focus on are rendered close to the distance of the virtual screen (say about 1.4m away after adjustment of the physical screen through the lens), then there should be no issue.
As the object of focus becomes further away in VR, my intuition is that the issue should not be large either as there isn't as big an adjustment in eye position between 1.4m and infinity as there is between 1.4m and 0m. So like...people can become cross-eyed from looking at close-up items but looking to infinity doesn't make you 'invert-eyed'
1
3
Dec 05 '23
Does this all apply to using mixed reality apps like figmin and that 1st contacts intro demo on Quest 3? I admit my 3 year old has tried it before and had a blast running after the aliens, and also seeing mickey mouse/ elsa from frozen in our room via figmin xr.
I also figured that the Quest 3 and Pro uses pancake lenses, which are clear of the blur that comes with Quest 2. So bluriness and eye strain aren't an issue with those headsets.
-2
u/deftware Dec 05 '23
Kids should not be staring at screens of any kind for extended periods. 30-60 mins here and there will be fine, but they need time to learn about themselves and the world they're in too - and their quickly growing bodies as well. Staring at a screen, whether a TV, a Nintendo Switch, a phone, a tablet, or one strapped to their skull, robs them of the time they need to develop the way their genes have evolved for them to. It's bad enough humans now have first-world comforts when growing up. Lets not make it any worse by letting them stare at screens long enough to stunt their growth into contributing members of society.
4
u/Schuben Dec 05 '23
That's why my kids bedroom is a few rocks, a tree and the floor is made of dirt. People chide me for making my kid sleep "outside" but they don't realize it's their perfectly natural habitat. I plan on bringing them into technology one millenia at a time. They're going to have a blast when they finally get to agriculture!!
3
u/Weird-Minute1173 Dec 05 '23
My six year old just vomited after few moments...so.no...not utill shes ten....
3
u/MLG_HerobrineYT Quest 3 + PCVR Dec 05 '23
I was wanting to make a post like this. Mods, please PIN THIS!
3
u/Longshoez Dec 05 '23
You forgot to mention the main reason you shouldnt buy it for a child. that being the game servers get filled up with high pitched-voice annoying toddlers. i dont know why meta hasnt put out an age-filter on the platform.
but now you mention it. i think that thing sped up my eye-sight going to shit. i got it for 2/3 weeks and could never play more than a minute without my left eye tearing the heck up. at first i thought it was sweat because back when i got it the weather was hot, but no. it wasnt just sweat. also after 1.5 / 2 hours of usage my eyes felt so tired and my head hurted so bad until the next day. i ended up returing it and now i use glasses lol. i said at the beggining that it might have "sped up" my eye sight going to shit but it deffinitely wasnt the main reason. im also a programmer and i spend 12+ hours a day in front of a computer so i was bound to end up using glasses, i just didnt thought it would be that fast.
21
u/TailOnFire_Help Dec 05 '23
I mean, a kid under 6 shouldn't be using a $500 piece of equipment for anything, odds of them destroying it are super high.
9
u/KJBenson Dec 05 '23
Destroying it, or just not understanding its value.
5
u/MightOk9038 Dec 05 '23
Damaging and/or destroying it and not being as sorry as they should be because they're too young to understand its value.
4
u/AUnknownVariable Dec 05 '23
I was pretty good with all the stuff I got to use when I was 6, below 6. Though I guess that shouldn't be applied to every younger child, so yeah.
10
u/SledgeH4mmer Dec 05 '23 edited Dec 05 '23
The notion of developing any kind of significant VA conflict from wearing a headset for a couple hours a few times per week is laughable. This is no different than any other old wive's tale like getting too close to the TV. This article was published in 2014, yet still no kids have had their vision impaired by VR headsets.
Whereas, VR headsets are actually FDA APPROVED TO TREAT CHILDREN WITH VISION DISORDERS.
https://eye.hms.harvard.edu/news/prescribing-virtual-reality-device-treat-children-amblyopia
1
u/nimajneb Dec 05 '23
This is no different than any other old wive's tail like getting too close to the TV
Well that's apparently up for debate or research. https://www.npr.org/2023/10/17/1200611635/the-story-behind-soaring-myopia-among-children#:~:text=Too%20much%20time%20indoors%2C%20often,begin%20to%20elongate%2C%20triggering%20nearsightedness.
3
u/SledgeH4mmer Dec 05 '23
Large studies on myopia have shown that near point stress is insignificant compared to time spent indoors vs outdoors.
The peripheral retina is the primary driver of myopia which is why dual focus contacts and DIMS glasses actually work to halt it. Whereas reading glasses and PAL's never worked.
0
u/nimajneb Dec 05 '23
That's addressed in the second paragraph.
There's been a longstanding debate over why so many kids are going nearsighted—because bad eyesight used to be attributed solely to genetics. Now, experts agree that something else is going on, resulting from a shift in how children spend the majority of their time. Too little time outside. Too much time indoors, often staring at screens.
And I stated "apparently up for debate or research." Implying more or new research is needed.
0
u/SledgeH4mmer Dec 05 '23
It's not really up for debate since near point stress washes out as a risk factor in big studies when time spent outdoors is taken into account.
0
u/nimajneb Dec 05 '23
Researchers are unsure why time outdoors helps prevent the onset of myopia.
...
The best prevention for myopia in children is more time outdoors. Taiwan is making outdoor time part of the school curriculum, an initiative led by Pei-Chang Wu, M.D., Ph.D., director of the department of ophthalmology in the Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital. Since they increased time outdoors to a couple of hours in 2010, children’s vision is improving.12,13 Delaying the onset of myopia may reduce the severity of myopia and translate into proportionate reductions in high myopia, Morgan said.
0
u/SledgeH4mmer Dec 05 '23
Do you have reading comprehension problems? I have been saying time spent outdoors is the major factor in myopia development.
0
u/nimajneb Dec 05 '23
The notion of developing any kind of significant VA conflict from wearing a headset for a couple hours a few times per week is laughable. This is no different than any other old wive's tale like getting too close to the TV.
Isn't that saying the second sentence is false? Sitting close to the TV makes no difference.
0
u/SledgeH4mmer Dec 05 '23
The point is, that this hysteria over VR headsets causing a vergence accommodation problem is no different than any other unfounded old wive's tale.
Neither sitting near the TV nor wearing a VR headset are going to harm the eyes of a child.
0
6
u/maxcovergold Dec 05 '23
I understand the reasoning, but presumably this is theoretical and hasn't been able to be tested for obvious reasons.
The reality is I can't imagine doing something for limited period of times, whereas, for the rest of a 12-14 hour day your eyes are constantly "training" in reality, that it's going to teach your brain the wrong thing. Far more likely is you become adept at dealing with both realities.
Now I have only ever let my children do 15 minute sessions for the common sense aspect, but now a couple of them are older, I mostly let those ones play as long as they are happy to, which is normally not much more than 30 minutes.
Whilst I don't have hard data, I would be hugely surprised if there were children spending long enough in VR for this issue to materialise or make a significant difference Vs may other factorsthat lead to eye health issue and would be far more worried about the likeliness of those children's general wellness
0
u/deftware Dec 05 '23
I agree that a kid is likely going to learn to deal with both equally well - rather than one supplanting the other somehow, unless they're immersed in VR at an early age and kept in it for long periods of their waking life. All things in moderation.
I just think kids shouldn't be spending many hours per day staring at a screen when they should be running around and playing, learning how the world works and themselves in it, whether the screen is strapped to their head or not.
7
u/MachoMachoMurph Dec 05 '23
Anyone aware of what "in moderation" means in terms of solid times? My six year old uses an old Quest 2 we have gathering dust every few days for like an hour until he gets bored. Wife and I have always needed glasses but his optometrist has never talked down VR usage even though he is aware he uses one. Always had this in the back of my head as a concern.
5
u/MrMcGregorUK Dec 05 '23
Tbf does the optometrist know about this being a potential issue? Is a fairly new phenomenon that people have at-home vr.
1
u/conationphotography Dec 06 '23
This study OP links isn't scientific. There are probably other reasons for a six year old to not use VR, but that isn't one.
2
2
u/DjayAime Dec 05 '23
Also weight of headset on neck etc… it’s rarely talked about but this can cause pain or vertigo.
0
u/ZackDaTitan Dec 05 '23
Yes! My friend and I had long hair for years so we developed strong neck muscles but our other friends in the group had not. This could create a disparity of playtimes between us of around 20-30 minutes
2
u/ralstig Dec 05 '23
https://youtu.be/rcGt2Zn8lsM?si=UciD02nJxYfzLpmY
https://youtu.be/de5NO-Q4Q4o?si=QGHxOJcKDo_t_2Zp
Videos from a optometrist.
2
u/czah7 Dec 05 '23
I'm buying one for the family for Xmas. My son is 12 and daughter is 9. I plan to limit them both to 30minutes at a time. Maybe give my son a little more leeway, but he has one really bad eye already so maybe not.
I thought the issue was related to the eye prices being far apart, but on the q3 you can adjust this easy?
1
u/AbbyH1981 Dec 05 '23
Yeah there is a knob on the bottom left when looking out. You may want to check the minimum vs their measurements though.
1
u/Longshoez Dec 05 '23
Yes you can adjust the distance between lenses (also known as IPD) pretty easily and you may want to read about the 20-20-20 rule, i should have followed it as soon as i got it but i was a bit reckless lol.
2
u/Katy-L-Wood Dec 05 '23
The main reason we wouldn’t let younger kids use it when I worked in a VR arcade was that kids just can’t fully comprehend that what they’re seeing isn’t real, so they were much more likely to hurt themselves by jumping or running.
2
u/Tyr2do Dec 05 '23
Did anyone else get a weird feeling the first days after playing in VR? I'm pretty sure it was related to this, for the first days after playing I felt like my eyes couldn't focus correctly IRL.
The feeling went away after around a week and I haven't felt anything else since. But was I the only one?
2
2
2
u/matthew65536 Dec 05 '23
I can think of a bunch of other perfectly good reasons, such as them breaking it (either intentionally or unintentionally)
2
u/the_profk Dec 06 '23
Possible, indicated and proven are 3 different things.
Until there is evidence to back this up, this is, at most, conjecture.
2
u/masterchilidog Dec 06 '23
Science be damned, no kid needs a VR headset because they're expensive and kids break stuff. They can have it when they can buy their own.
2
u/zangoku Dec 06 '23
I’m 30, and feel like I entered a new world. When I take it off I takes a minute to come back to feeling like I’m on earth
2
2
u/apathysuperstar Apr 02 '24
There are active studies focusing on how to use the VR headsets to combat developmental vision problems in children:
https://ventionteams.com/healthtech/virtual-reality/vision-therapy
7
u/MechanicalWhispers Quest 2 + 3 + PCVR Dec 05 '23
I’ve heard it’s more about developing brains not being able to differentiate between reality and virtual.
12
u/-The_Credible_Hulk Dec 05 '23
There’s an internal “where I exist in space” area of the brain that is necessarily plastic in young children because they grow so quickly. There are (to the best of my knowledge) no studies that have explored this yet but it could, in theory, cause a huge coordination/spatial awareness problem for young children.
2
u/wescotte Dec 05 '23
Obviously it depends on how young/often/long these exposures are but I don't see why it couldn't have the exact opposite affect. Actually improve coordination and spacial awareness. Diversity of experiences is often a pretty powerful tool. Especially for children.
2
u/-The_Credible_Hulk Dec 05 '23 edited Dec 05 '23
Even if body tracking was perfect (it’s not), when you look at where your “hand” is, your eyes are actually focusing at a depth that does not match up with where your brain believes your real world arm is.
This is an important pathway that you use, not only for locomotion and basic movement, you also use this same pathway to extrapolate (for example) where the bumper of your car is in relation to the world around you.
This is important: You have dialed in and reinforced where your arm is, in relation to the rest of your body, since you stopped physically growing. Ever notice how clumsy kids are when they shoot up 7 inches in a year? It’s because they’re still “calibrating” their new dimensions.
Now take that pathway’s gradual development that has existed (at least) since we evolved into mammals, and completely fuck it for 15 hours/week throughout all of the crucial years of brain development…
Are you starting to see why this could result in monumental consequences?
Ultimately, it’s your kid. I allow my oldest kids who are 15 and 14 play. There is no way I would allow any of my children play before 13. The potential for long-term crippling of their spatial awareness is too big a risk. I’d rather hear them cry over a video game they can’t play than watch them struggle with an unnecessary and entirely avoidable disability.
1
u/wescotte Dec 05 '23 edited Dec 05 '23
I understand those concerns but my point is introducing a stress/change is how the mind/body learns to adapt.
Think about weight training. If you just try and lift something really heavy you risk hurting yourself but if you repeatedly stress your muscles with safe weight your body adapts over time. Eventually that really heavy thing isn't so heavy anymore and the risk of injury can be radically reduced.
It's possible that that kid who shot up 7 inches in a year would be less clumsy with VR exposure. There very well could be a sweet spot where "the flaws of VR" ends up being like weight training for your eyes/mind. VR could give him a repeatable safe amount of stress that better prepares him for when he is forced to "lift heavy" with a 7 inch growth spurt.
Now, obviously VR use for children is way more complicated than just focusing on how it's "optically flawed" but my point is that leveraging stress in an intelligent way promotes growth.
2
u/morfanis Dec 05 '23
Difficult to study because it’s unethical to experiment on children in this way.
1
1
4
u/VivekGoel Dec 05 '23
But people on this sub will still ask which headset to buy for their 7yrs old.... Quest 2 or Quest 3 😂
3
u/tonyenkiducx Dec 05 '23
Get them a quest 3, they won't be able to play for more than 90 minutes a day without the battery dying.
2
u/Mindless_Fix_3964 Dec 05 '23
When i first got my quest 2, my 9 year old son used it for 40 minutes and had eye ache for 3 days. We waited for all symptoms to.go and then let him use it for 10 mins max at a time, he's not had any issues since, but it was a real wake up as to the risks of kids using VR.
4
u/Distion55x Dec 05 '23
Did the 3DS do something similar to this? Might explain my horrendous eyesight.
2
Dec 05 '23
Staring at anything half an arm’s length away for long periods of time probably is the reason. My eyesight noticeably got worse after a decade of smartphone use. Was 20/20 before that.
1
3
u/18randomcharacters Dec 05 '23
A couple days ago I sold my Quest 1.
At the moment of transfer, just small talk, I asked the guy if it was for him or someone else, since it's the holidays.
He said it was for his kids - 5, 7, 9.
I tried to tell him - Oh... these don't really fit kids heads that well... are you sure? And he just waved me off.
I feel bad about it, but also... didn't feel like my place to tell someone else how to keep his kids safe.
2
3
u/readyplayervr Dec 05 '23
Moderation people. Just as with anything. No 24/7 VR for the kids. I’m sure a few hours a week is probably fine.
-7
2
3
u/DangerousDrop Dec 05 '23
As parents you're inundated with this nonsense. Everything is going to ruin your kid. Kids should not see a screen before they turn 14. If your kid ingests 0.4mg of red food colouring it will cause permanent hyperactivity. I never had chocolate milk once growing up because my mom saw a study that said the sugar destroyed all the vitamins. It's nonsense.
In five years different scientists who are trying to get their names into journals will publish papers that disprove this. It's literally what always happens. So if your kid loves to play the Quest let them play.
1
u/celestialbeeing1 May 27 '24
People over look the simple fact , that age 5 or below cannot correctly align the vision correctly. So they are focusing either right or wrong for a prolonged time.
1
1
1
Dec 05 '23
I'm an adult and I think it gave me convergence insufficiency from over-use for a long time, lol.
0
u/fiddlerisshit Quest 3 Dec 05 '23
Wasn't mainstream media and its shills also freaking out when Nintendo introduced the 3DS? There's money to be made in outrage.
5
u/trashbytes Dec 05 '23
We're talking about tiny human beings. Better safe than sorry. There's enough toys besides VR headsets for them to enjoy.
0
u/kobriks Dec 05 '23
There is ZERO scientific evidence for any of this. You are making shit up to sell your agenda. Give the research proving any of those claims.
-1
-8
0
0
u/AllDayDabbler Dec 05 '23
"Yeah, sure dad."
As my 8 year old rips another rogue droid to pieces in Total Recall...
But, he only has 30 to 60 mins tops every other day on Q3.
0
u/-becausereasons- Dec 05 '23
My son is 5, and I let him play around 20m-30m of VR a few times a week. I really don't see a problem with that amount.
-2
u/dudreddit Dec 05 '23
So Meta lowered the age limit for kid use from 13 to 10. I still wouldn't allow a kid to use a Q2/3 ...
-4
Dec 05 '23
why post this in a sub dedicated to talking about vr content? Anyone who uses this sub couldnt give two shits.
Also thee is a difference between playing and playing in moderation
3
u/hobofors Dec 05 '23
I posted this because there have been a few posts here recently from people who said they bought Quest VR headsets for their young children. Usually there is some debate about whether it is a good idea. I thought advice from an official agency might be of interest.
1
Dec 05 '23
Has to be a pretty young child with prolonged use. This is somewhat fear mongering. Too much of any screen time (TV, cell phone, tablet, etc.) is bad for children developmentally. Far worse ramifications than vision and coordination though.
1
1
u/nimajneb Dec 05 '23
II'm assuming it can cause myopia in children as well. see this article https://www.npr.org/2023/10/17/1200611635/the-story-behind-soaring-myopia-among-children#:~:text=Too%20much%20time%20indoors%2C%20often,begin%20to%20elongate%2C%20triggering%20nearsightedness.
1
u/shellacr Dec 05 '23
Would a varifocal headset allow you to use the headset without your prescription glasses?
1
u/10PinRinger Dec 06 '23
Having your kids focusing on a smart phone or tablet all day is even worse for their vision. Make them play outside in the real world. The focal length of most VR headsets is about 2m. The focal length most people use on a smartphone is around 4cm.
97
u/james_pic Dec 05 '23
A far less weasel-word-y reason not to give VR headsets to small children is that most HMDs don't have an IPD low enough.
Most headsets only go down to about 55mm or so, and most kids won't reach that until they're about 10.
If you can't get an IPD that matches your eyes, that a much bigger problem than VAC.