my myopia increased 2 diopters in the past 4 years and and -5 diopters which makes my life a living hell when I'm not wearing glasses or contacts. I do a lot of close up work and I think that I have being forcing my eyes and that might be the cause of it. Do you guys think that if I get bifocals it might help me not force my eyes as much when doing reading and wrking with the computer? What are your experiences with Bifocals? Im only 24, is it too young to began wearing it? Thank you for all your answers.

I'll generally support the above answer, except to say I've not yet seen definitive evidence for ortho-k producing permanent effects.  It may be the technique of the future but I don't think the verdict is in, on the data to date.



Given that you stress computer work, I'd be against bifocals, but suggest that if you want to try the reduced power route, you get a separate pair of glasses for prolonged reading and computer use.

This on two grounds: firstly, most computer screens are too high up to work well with bifocals, with the head having to be held artificially high to align the reading portion with the screen, not a good idea at all.

Secondly, with single vision lenses the convergence stress can be taken into consideration too, the balance between accommodation and convergence being maintained by including an appropriate prismatic element.



With young people in bifocals  this would frequently need "prism-control bifocal" lenses, a point which some advocates of myopia control stress heavily.  I'm not convinced by this technique either, but I can think of no serious risk outside of the cost of the glasses in making the attempt.

I'm 49 years old and I am quite nearsighted. I don't use bifocals. That's because I can still see quite well close up without assistance and it's easier to simply take my glasses off when I need to. If I'm wearing my contacts, I sometimes need to use reading glasses when I'm looking at fine details, especially in low light. I am not going to get bifocals unless the time comes when I absolutely need them.

there is no age thats "too young" to wear bifocals.  MOST people over 45 NEED them and FEW people UNDER 45 do, but there is no age thats considered "too young".



whether bifocal wear slows myopia progression or not is hotly debated in the profession, and there is no conclusive evidence either way.  so you wont find too much concrete information anywhere that either supports or refutes it, just varying opinions and anecdotal evidence.



the IDEA of bifocals possibly stemming the progression of myopia is not too bad: stop the accommodative (focusing) stimulus and therefore slow the progression of myopia by limiting the accommodative spasm.  and i might subscribe to that theory (i dont) if everyone were a cyclops.  the problem with it IMO is that while you're reducing the accommodative stimulus in a non-presbyope (someone under 45) with a bifocal, you're also totally jacking up (like my scientific terminology?) the CONVERGENCE stimulus.  so for a 24 year old reading with bifocals on, you HAVE a stimulus for convergence (distance to the page/computer/etc), but NO stimulus for accommodation.  so there's a serious, serious mismatch there, especially since most (all?) humans physically cannot converge without accommodation, nor can they accommodate without convergence (since thats all controlled by 1 nerve).



so: i have a problem with it.  i personally dont think it works, but some swear by it.



i think ortho-k is probably the only way we have right now of slowing myopia progression.  i could go into a diatribe about it,  but i'll spare you lol.  basically since ortho-k is the only way to approximate the asphericity of the human RETINA, then its probably the only way IMO to reduce the non-acuity based/non-central vision stimulus to accommodation.  whew.