Socially Compulsive, Biologically Unacceptable, Sustained Nearpoint Tasks. It was a phrase coined by Skeffington to account for a variety of visual conditions held to be secondary derivatives of nearpoint stress. One of these adaptive conditions may be functional myopia, and no doubt SCBUSNT will be revived now that screen time is becoming a socially compulsive ubiquity. Zuckerberg’s embrace of virtually reality and other immersive environments heralds the latest coming of SCBUNST.
But wait awhile, as my old mentor Nat Flax used to say. Can myopia actually be a very useful adaptation? And given the way societal demands are going, is there a purpose to trying to eradicate all myopia? Nat was of the strong opinion that developing a couple of diopters of myopia might actually be worth a thumb’s up. Is there virtue in myopia putting the fun in functional? This is worthwhile to consider more deeply in an age where myopia is drawing significant attention as a public health epidemic of sorts.
It was the late, great Elliott Forrest who brought to Optometry the work of Hans Selye regarding the concept of optimal levels of stress. As Selye pointed out, if we eliminate all stress, we die. One needs some level of arousal in order for bodily systems, including vision, to function – and that results in stress. The key is to effective performance and tranquil states is to operate within an optimal level of stress that Selye termed eustress. Exceeding that limit results in distress.
The classical notion of operating within a zone of clear, single, simultaneous binocular vision (ZCSBV) at all distances may be overrated, and what some patients may value is operating within that ZCSBV at near. It’s really no big deal to them to put on a distance Rx as needed.
Is -1.50 is the new plano?