When I get up to take care of brief business in the middle of the night, I close one eye before turning on the bathroom light, so as not to destroy my night vision. I don’t open that eye until turning off the bathroom light, so I can get back to my bed without bumping into or stepping on something.
If I always close the same eye for this purpose, year after year, will the other eye wear out sooner when I’m old?
In what sense do you think eyes “wear out”?
OH! Most definitely! :rolleyes:
No.
The only thing I can think of that could make an eye wear out (apart from age) is UV light. Even if your light is a CFL, the amount and frequency of UV would be so low compared to just a little daylight, I wouldn’t think it would have an effect.
A related question, if I may, is whether the prevalence of UV-rated sunglasses will have any effect long term on people’s eyesight, relative to, say, 100 years ago when no-one had them.
Sometimes vision deteriorates with age, doesn’t it? Not everyone who wears thick glasses, bifocals etc. has done so from youth, have they? In some cases, isn’t this due to the lens hardening over time?
That’s a function of age and (IIRC) UV exposure, not the process of seeing with the eye. Besides, cataract surgery is incredibly common and simple these days.
you know why pirates wore eye patches? because they wore that eye out using a telescope.
it wasn’t until binocular microscopes that scientists were saved from that same fate.
The real reason was to keep one eye adjusted to the dark, or so Cracked.com says.
That aside, I don’t see a reason for eyes wearing out either, unless, as already stated, harsh lighting like UV is involved. After all, if exposure to a minute or two of light was significant enough to have a noticeable effect over time, the much longer exposure (and often much more intense; daylight is far more intense than indoor lighting, as in 2-3 orders of magnitude, you just don’t realize due to your eye’s remarkable dynamic range) during waking hours would wear out your eyes in no time flat (a typical 16 hour waking day has 960 minutes).
A similar myth revolves around sitting too close to the TV, although in this case there may be some truth; the incidence of myopia has dramatically increased, possibly due to all of the close-up work we do nowadays (but not limited to watching TV or using computers).
Yes, with age, not with usage. An eye doesn’t “wear out,” just by seeing with it (unless there are other factors involved).
And both of your eyes are exactly the same age.
[ol]
[li]I think you mean the closed eye will last longer, not the unclosed eye wearing out sooner. Taking a break from work doesn’t shorten the lives of everyone who doesn’t take a break.[/li][li]Even if that had an effect, the action of closing and opening your eye may produce even more wear, causing the closed eye to wear out sooner. Think wearing out a hinge.[/li][/ol]
The pirate thing: Mythbusters did it. They said it works, but that is not enough proof to say that this is the reason that some pirates maybe wore patches.
The opposite effect of the OP exists: if you cover the eye of a young child/animal, the lack of input to that eye will lead to permanent deficits, if done long enough. Kind of a “use it or lose it” thing. This is done therapeutically in the case of amblyopia, where the good eye is patched to let the other one “catch up” and get stronger.
Not your OP exactly, but is this effect of protecting night vision a confirmation bias?
I believe, but definitely could be wrong, that the gain control of the retina is not matched eye-for-eye (:)) even if only one source is feeding.
I’ll try to look up a cite.
^See: consensual light reflex.
On a related note, I have noticed that many people myself very much included, rarely go outside without UV rated Sunglasses on.
I suspect that most elderly people of today did not wear Sunglasses nearly as often in days gone by. This makes me wonder if incidents of Cataracts will be noticeably lower when our generation reaches our twilight years.
There is an extent to which perception of brightness is based on both eyes - if you walk out of a dimly-lit room into bright daylight, it can painfully bright, but closing one eye helps
When I clobbered one eye I was nine, and they did many EEG-type things to see if any signals were coming in. I just made it under the wire, I was told.
What does “just made it under the wire” mean here?
Sorry. I saw after five minutes that that was a fairly meaningless metaphor without a lot of explanation…
Meaning: they were worried that I had not had enough time to use the eye for the brain to be stimulated even if massive repair could fix the eye itself.
Wait, that doesn’t make any sense. (I’m calling bullshit on my own post.
A GQ first?) I obviously used the eye for nine years.
Maybe they thought nine years was not enough for the brain then to undergo long absence of proper stimuli, and after that time be able to reboot? Is this even conceivable opthamologically?
Perhaps because I was simply scared out of my mind I’m making false memories now mixed with some science I’ve learned. But I’m almost sure this was an issue.
Sorry. I saw after five minutes that was a fairly meaningless metaphor without a lot of explanation…
Meaning: they were worried that I had not had enough time to use the eye for the brain to be stimulated even though massive repair fixed the eye itself.
Wait, that doesn’t make any sense. (I’m calling bullshit on my own post. A GQ first?) I obviously used the eye for nine years.
Maybe they thought nine years was not enough for the brain then to undergo long absence of proper stimuli, and after that time be able to reboot? Is this even conceivable opthamologically?
Perhaps because I was simply scared out of my mind I’m making false memories now mixed with some science I’ve learned. But I’m almost sure this was an issue.