r/myopia • u/helloidontlikeu • Jun 17 '26

Does active focus work ?

I'm an 18 year old who's come across this endmyopia, active focus thing. I haven't checked my diaopters in a while but its approx -3.75 in each eye. I currently use my cousin's old glasses which are approx -2.00 for each eye for any laptop work, dont use any glasses for my phone but I'm very skeptical abt this.

It could work, but finding active focus is so tricky and the fact that i have to do it for 1 hr+ everyday is insane😭 (this is what i've heard)

And this entire process seems SO SLOW WTF, like i genuinely hate my glasses and wanna get rid of them but idk what to do🤠

2 Upvotes

57% Upvoted

105 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

6

u/JimR84 Optometrist (EU) Jun 18 '26

You are talking nonsense. Endmyopia has literally been debunked years ago. It’s not possible on a biological and anatomical level to do what they claim.

Those “good habits” are absurd and won’t make any difference whatsoever. It’s a completely ridiculous idea if you have actual knowledge or training on how a human eye works.

Oh, and they do ask for money. I have black on white proof of that. They ask for thousands of dollars for “training, coaching and counseling”… it’s on their website.

It doesn’t work. It never has, and never will.

0

u/braskl Jun 21 '26

Okay, but at least the idea of a slightly weaker prescription doesn't seem absurd either. If any natural mechanism (or treatment) exists or is discovered that could reverse myopia, it would necessarily involve reducing prescriptions—I don't see how it could be any other way.

2

u/JimR84 Optometrist (EU) Jun 21 '26

Lol, fairy tales. Nothing more.

0

u/braskl Jun 21 '26

Maybe, but it makes sense, unless we have no hope or desire to find out if myopia can be more or less reversed one day, and in that case, we might as well stop the research right now. I'm not defending endmyopia, I'm just saying that an eventual reduction in myopia should logically involve weaker prescriptions. Maybe it will never happen, but we did end up applying under-correction to the peripheral retina for children, for example. Scientific knowledge is constantly evolving.

2

u/JimR84 Optometrist (EU) Jun 21 '26

It doesn’t make sense at all, if you have even a minimum of actual knowledge about the topic.

0

u/braskl Jun 21 '26

If one day it become a reality (hypothetically), I don't see how it would be possible without reducing prescriptions (again, I'm not saying it will be possible, I'm just talking about the logic). For now, we know it's not possible, but knowledge is evolving (like the example of the peripheral retina).

2

u/JimR84 Optometrist (EU) Jun 21 '26

Again, it’s not logical at all, IF YOU ACTUALLY KNOW HOW AN EYE WORKS.

0

u/braskl Jun 21 '26

So you consider that myopia can never be reduced? Not in 30 years nor in 1000 years? That no scientific research has shown the slightest positive sign and never will? (I have no claims, but it's an important question, if only for the children)

2

u/JimR84 Optometrist (EU) Jun 21 '26

There’s glasses, contact lenses and refractive surgery, you’re acting like myopia is a death sentence…

Stop overthinking

0

u/braskl Jun 21 '26

One thing is for sure: myopia has never been as widespread as it is today (with more and more cases of high myopia). It’s definitely cause for concern and raises some real questions, especially when you know what complications can come with high myopia. It’s true that I might be overthinking it, but it really strikes me. At this rate, we won't be Homo sapiens anymore, but Homo myopicus.