Guest guest Posted March 5, 2004 Report Share Posted March 5, 2004 hey - so there's two things i'm wondering about in relation to nutrition: first, eye problems like myopia or hyperopia and astigmatism - these are because the eye isn't shaped the way it expected to be, and they're also blisteringly common. but the thing is, i just don't see how they were nearly as common a few hundred years ago...so either people just livd with the near/far sightedness or they didn't have it. any thoughts? also, while we're talking about skin and stuff...my brother has dematigraphism - my brother had this quite severely as a child, but now that he's an adult, it's not nearly as bad. it's certainly still there but he's much more tolerant of the things that cause a break out (like inadvertent fabric softener, for example). i can't remember *when* it started, but i'm betting it started after he started getting food. any thoughts? -katja Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 5, 2004 Report Share Posted March 5, 2004 In a message dated 3/5/04 9:22:18 AM Eastern Standard Time, katja@... writes: > hey - so there's two things i'm wondering about in relation to nutrition: > first, eye problems like myopia or hyperopia and astigmatism - these are > because the eye isn't shaped the way it expected to be, and they're also > blisteringly common. but the thing is, i just don't see how they were > nearly as common a few hundred years ago...so either people just livd with > the near/far sightedness or they didn't have it. any thoughts? Mercola posted some info once that seemed to link myopia to grains. He suggested insulin resistance, though it could have been immune as well. The evidence was essentially that hunter-gatherers don't have myopia, which is commonly recognized but usually attributed to lack of reading, but that hunter-gatherers who become civilized and have compulory schooling but don't adopt grain-rich diets don't have myopia. But also, genetics may play a role, as previously someone with poor eyesight may have just been much more likely to die young in an accident. Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 5, 2004 Report Share Posted March 5, 2004 >> > hey - so there's two things i'm wondering about in >> relation to nutrition: >> > first, eye problems like myopia or hyperopia and >> astigmatism - these are >> > because the eye isn't shaped the way it expected >> to be, and they're also >> > blisteringly common. but the thing is, i just >> don't see how they were >> > nearly as common a few hundred years ago...so >> either people just livd with >> > the near/far sightedness or they didn't have it. >> any thoughts? What's always intrigued me is that the issues of: 1. Myopia 2. Crowded teeth 3. " crowded " sinuses 4. " Thin " faces are all related to connective tissue disorders (like Marfans) as well as " the diseases of modern commerce " that Price mentioned. Marfan's is clearly hereditary, yet must have an environmental component because the gene isn't rare, and it is dominant. Marfan's also causes weak arteries ... anyway, I think there is a common cause to all of the above. Whatever it is, our ancestors didn't get it. Bad eyesight is decidedly a deadly disease in a world where panthers and bears might be hunting you and your ability to fetch prey decide whether you go hungry or not.... it's highly unlikely many folk had bad eyesight in those days. It's a modern disease. -- Heidi Jean Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 6, 2004 Report Share Posted March 6, 2004 In a message dated 3/5/04 7:29:39 PM Eastern Standard Time, jopollack2001@... writes: > I have read a couple of articles in New Scientist > which link refined starch consumption to myopia. > however it is ONLY myopia it is linked to, not > astigmatism or hyperopia (does that mean long > sighted?) In myopia, the picture is focused slightly before the retina, and in hyperopia the picture is focused slightly behind the retina-- so in each, the retina receives an unfocused " picture. " Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 7, 2004 Report Share Posted March 7, 2004 In a message dated 3/6/04 6:36:56 PM Eastern Standard Time, jopollack2001@... writes: > Atigmatism > though is different - it's 2 focal points in the eye I > believe. It is more to do with the retina than the > lens (an optician can tell by looking at the retina > whether a person is astigmatic). Astigmatism is an irregular curvature of the cornea or lens. It really doesn't have anything to do with the retina, except indirectly. Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.