Is it bad for your eyes to stare at an iPad for hours and hours?

The state of the universe.
March 31 2010 5:52 PM

Apple on Your Eyes

Can staring at an iPad hurt your vision?

Also in Slate, Michael Agger takes a close look at Apple's guided iPad tours, and Magnum Photos fondly remembers reading on paper.

Eyestrain?
Eyestrain?

Whether Apple's new tablet computer marks a revolution in personal computing or misses that mark entirely, one thing is clear: Whoever buys the iPad, which lands on April 3, will spend more time than ever in front of a screen. The rest of us aren't far behind. Smaller and faster microchips continue to consolidate the movie theater, the television, and the book onto a single viewing plane, and one that's getting progressively closer to our eyes. As our viewing technology evolves—from the desktop to the laptop, the smartphone, and now the tablet—we're being sucked ever closer, and for increasing periods of time, to the flickering glow of our screens.

Manufacturers, in response, have tried to make our intimate relationships with their devices less physically demanding. In the realm of electronic reading, the iPad will compete with Amazon's Kindle, Barnes & Noble's Nook, and the Sony Reader—each of which displays text in E Ink, a technology that mimics certain aspects of the printed page. Those companies argue that E Ink makes reading more ergonomic than it would be on self-illuminated screens like the iPad or your personal computer. They boast of having displays that "go easy on your eyes," "with the same appearance and readability" of regular paper. There's no doubt that a long session of computer-based reading can leave your eyes irritated and your brain woolly. But are self-illuminated screens really to blame? And will long days and nights curled up with the iPad only make things worse?

Advertisement

Let's tackle the gravest concern: that reading off a computer might give us something worse than tired eyes. For years, doctors have wondered if monitors might cause permanent vision damage. It's a tempting charge. Consider that the prevalence of myopia has risen by two-thirds in the United States since the 1970s and that the shocking spread of nearsightedness coincides almost exactly with the perfusion of computers in our workplaces and homes. Several studies from the 1980s and early '90s found specific correlations between myopia and computer use or sitting close to the television. There's also evidence from extremely late adopters: Myopia among Alaskan Inuits, for instance, reportedly skyrocketed after they were introduced to television.

The most recent and rigorous research, however, has refuted the early studies: Screens don't cause myopia. A 1996 review concluded that "there is no compelling evidence" of computer use producing or aggravating myopia any more than other forms of "nearwork"—like reading, data entry, and embroidery. So working in front of a monitor could make you shortsighted, but so might staring at an old-fashioned book. To figure out how any form of reading might affect the eyes, doctors needed to track subjects over several years and compare their rates of myopia to the number of hours they spent reading, watching TV, using the computer, or playing video games.

Researchers in one study, published in 2007, followed 514 non-myopic California third-graders for five years. By eighth grade, just over 20 percent of the children had become nearsighted. The most important factor distinguishing those children from others was genetic: Children were five times as likely to develop myopia if they had two myopic parents instead of none, and twice as likely if just one parent was nearsighted. The amount of time they spent doing "nearwork" was irrelevant. Those findings largely confirm a similar study, published in 2006, of nearly 1,000 Singaporean children. In that case, children who developed myopia read just as many books as the others. Though genetics were less powerful in the Singapore study, parents' eyesight still predicted whether a child would develop myopia better than any other factor. (Among adults, the story is the same.)

But the root causes of myopia are still a mystery, and some researchers haven't let go of the idea that reading—on a printed page or a computer monitor—can damage your vision. Most prominently, Norwegian ophthalmologists found myopia was more likely to develop among undergraduates who spent the most time studying. Even so, they found no link between television or computer use and myopia. And a limitation of almost all these myopia studies is their heavy reliance on surveys, rather than direct observation, to measure time spent reading or sitting at the keyboard.

There's plenty of evidence, however, that books, computers, and televisions can give us what ophthalmologists call "transient myopia"—that bleary-eyed, slow-to-focus feeling you get after a long stretch of reading. To focus on anything close, our eyeballs rotate toward each other, so that their sight lines converge at the point of interest. Then, a ring of muscle behind each iris contracts, allowing each lens to bulge into a more spherical shape. In their resting state, our eyes tend to focus about 2 feet ahead of us and cross paths about 2 feet farther, though those distances can vary greatly. Just an hour of reading (from a page or a screen) at 20 centimeters' distance shifts these resting states several inches closer to our nose, causing a temporary lack of focus on distant objects. Transient myopia won't cause permanent nearsightedness, but it's a major inconvenience—and not one to be taken lightly, given how much time we spend reading and staring at screens.

TODAY IN SLATE

Culturebox

The Ebola Story

How our minds build narratives out of disaster.

The Budget Disaster That Completely Sabotaged the WHO’s Response to Ebola

PowerPoint Is the Worst, and Now It’s the Latest Way to Hack Into Your Computer

The Shooting Tragedies That Forged Canada’s Gun Politics

A Highly Unscientific Ranking of Crazy-Old German Beers

Education

Welcome to 13th Grade!

Some high schools are offering a fifth year. That’s a great idea.

Culturebox

The Actual World

“Mount Thoreau” and the naming of things in the wilderness.

Want Kids to Delay Sex? Let Planned Parenthood Teach Them Sex Ed.

Would You Trust Walmart to Provide Your Health Care? (You Should.)

  News & Politics
Politics
Oct. 22 2014 9:42 PM Landslide Landrieu Can the Louisiana Democrat use the powers of incumbency to save herself one more time?
  Business
Continuously Operating
Oct. 22 2014 2:38 PM Crack Open an Old One A highly unscientific evaluation of Germany’s oldest breweries.
  Life
Dear Prudence
Oct. 23 2014 6:00 AM Monster Kids from poorer neighborhoods keep coming to trick-or-treat in mine. Do I have to give them candy?
  Double X
The XX Factor
Oct. 22 2014 4:27 PM Three Ways Your Text Messages Change After You Get Married
  Slate Plus
Tv Club
Oct. 22 2014 5:27 PM The Slate Walking Dead Podcast A spoiler-filled discussion of Episodes 1 and 2.
  Arts
Culturebox
Oct. 22 2014 11:54 PM The Actual World “Mount Thoreau” and the naming of things in the wilderness.
  Technology
Future Tense
Oct. 22 2014 5:33 PM One More Reason Not to Use PowerPoint: It’s The Gateway for a Serious Windows Vulnerability
  Health & Science
Wild Things
Oct. 22 2014 2:42 PM Orcas, Via Drone, for the First Time Ever
  Sports
Sports Nut
Oct. 20 2014 5:09 PM Keepaway, on Three. Ready—Break! On his record-breaking touchdown pass, Peyton Manning couldn’t even leave the celebration to chance.