Then you need to read more on the matter.
Studies on chicks, tree shrews and rhesus monkeys show that simply increasing the amount of indoor light intensity has a protective effect on myopia. Scientists can induce more myopia in chicks simply by reducing light intensity. See https://iovs.arvojournals.org/article.aspx?articleid=2164963 and https://iovs.arvojournals.org/article.aspx?articleid=2355431
The leading hypothesis is that light stimulates the release of dopamine in the retina, and the dopamine blocks the elongation of the eye during development. One study showed that injecting a dopamine-inhbiting drug into the eyes of chicks abolished the protective effect of bright light, and myopia increased. See https://iovs.arvojournals.org/article.aspx?articleid=2126968
Your particular confidence on this ("strongly suspect") bothers me because it has an influence on others, yet it is totally ignorant of what current scientific findings suggest.
In a lab environment, wherein there is a lack of focus on far-field objects, myopia does not occur when there is sufficient light intensity. On the other hand, it occurs with insufficient light intensity.
If your hypothesis were correct, then myopia would occur regardless of light intensity, because all of the subjects have a lack of focus on far-field objects. But it doesn't. It only occurs with insufficient light intensity.
That's damning.
I can’t know the top science in every field, so that bars me from discussion, lest I be slammed for having a thought.
This isn’t just anti-science, it’s ignorant of social interactions, and the conversations that lead to greater understanding. You aren’t nearly as smart as you think you are.
On that note, I guess it's a little fun that you ending with "you aren’t nearly as smart as you think you are" seems to be participating in the same unnecessary meanness that you just called out. Ahhhh man, aren't we all so brutally human...
Is it ironic or just poetic that this is a myopic take on the meaning of the word "shortsighted"?
However 'myopic' is certainly used metaphorically. This is one of those cases where you just have to read the article.
This funny to read on a tech oriented website.
I agree that the quarter by quarter financial goals can be a "shortsighted", and I think the problem is even worse when it comes to the 4 year political cycle (2 years if you consider the fact the Houses can change hands).
But Wall Street is still filled to the brim with public companies espousing some future fantasy profits that may or may not ever come. We are as far away from shortsightedness there as we've ever been. One only has to looks at ARKK research to see this.
My first thought was about shortsightedness as the medical issue.
because that's what the term means
short-sightedness
noun: shortsightedness
the quality of being short-sighted; inability to see things clearly unless they are relatively close to the eyes.
AKA myopia
I thought it was obvious that short-sightedness (Exclusively Short term thinking) is an epidemic, nobody on Wall Street can see past the next Quarter's numbers. I don't need the economist to point that out.
Nearsightedness is what this article is about... a completely different thing. I've dealt with that my entire life... and just went through the knock-on effect of retina detachment, and surgery to correct the same. Having a bubble of C3F8 gas in your one good eye is pretty damned effective at taking you out of commission for about 4 months. Looking down hurts! I hope to be up and about, and able to drive again by the start of September, once the bubble has gone, my eye has stabilized, the surgeon has made a final check, and finally after I get new glasses.
I strongly suspect the amount of light outdoors is NOT really the issue. If you're always focused on things close at hand (as the above mentioned folks on wall street), you never allow the eyes to focus on the far horizon for an appreciable fraction of the time.
I'm surprised to learn that there's no consensus on how the eye actually focuses on objects at various distances[1]. It is also well know that the smaller an iris in a camera (or eye), the larger the range of distances that appear in focus. It seems reasonable to me that if you spend your time looking at only nearby objects (like above mentioned Wall Street residents), you'll lose the ability to see things further out that might be coming to get you.
[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accommodation_(eye)