WARNING: 3D Video Hazardous to Your Health

[admin]

Nintendo unveils 3DS and quickly follows-up with a statement about dangers to children under 7 playing with the company’s new portable gamer. Samsung releases a line of 3D HDTVs then issues a warning about its potential health risk to certain viewers. What they haven’t told you is that these warnings come after years of industry spin and cover ups. The truth is that prolonged viewing of 3D video may be even more harmful than the consumer electronics industry wants you to know.

Discuss "WARNING: 3D Video Hazardous to Your Health" here. Read the article.

 

[ned]

This what we called LIABILITY.

In our very litigious society disclaimer has to be claimed in order to reduce liability. Incidence are rare and direct correlation to the product is inconclusive at best.

Obviously hyped by media.

 

[lsiberian]

I already have strabismus and can't see out of both eyes out of the same time. I guess that's why I don't get sick after these movies. It's also why I can't hit a baseball or catch a pass. Learning to drive was crazy hard. I basically use my ears to really get bearings. I have exceptional hearing which is why I'm crazy about this hobby. Sounds to me like 3d movies should ban children.

 

[Wayde Robson]

Hey Ned. Incidents of 'what' are rare?

 

[Patrick_Wolf]

Seems likely that many people wouldn't be affected at all from prolonged viewing. I don't recall any disorientation after a 2 hr. movie... I'll have to pay closer attention next time to see if I do feel something. Maybe it would be a different story after say 4-5 hrs of gaming.

 

[waffletower]

I am skeptical...

From my perspective providing this advisory to adults almost seems hysterical. But of course there may be adults that some how manage to consume 3D video more than half of their waking hours.

I have amblyopia in both eyes. I could not catch well in the outfield as a child but I believe my depth perception is quite normal as an adult. The article spoke of potential transition effects from consuming 3D imagery and then driving automobiles. If I read a book for the duration of a children's 3D film (90 minutes) and attempt to immediately transition to driving an automobile I have severe difficulty focusing my eyes. I really should'nt attempt it for at least 10 -15 minutes in between. I watched Avatar in 3D, loved the experience intensely and immediately jumped in my car and drove home in the dark without any issues. Avatar is 3 hours in duration. I think these folks are well meaning but they may not understand some fundamental issues with respect to optometry. The eye is very good at focusing at moderate distances, even safe television distance, for extended periods. It is quite possible that the focusing gymnastics required of 3d viewing is a healthy workout in moderation. 3D viewing is certainly better for my eyes than reading a book. But perhaps we should be concerned about adults reading books and operating vehicles without a cool down too. I know I should be regardless of how sacrosanct that medium is.

 

[Prune]

This is dangerous for adults as well!

The eye muscle training setups used to treat strabismus (and conversely, can induce it), which operate on the same effect that stereo 3D does (forcing convergence (stereo) different from what the default is for the subject's eyes for a given accommodation (focus)), are also effective in adults, even if somewhat less so than in children.

 

[eyexam]

3D- facts and fiction

First, I'm an optometrist.

There were several mis-representations in this article and they never really did devulge the actual study that they deemed "hazardous" to the eyes.

Strabisumus and "lazy eye" are two different conditions. Lazy eye is also known as "amblyopia"- an inability to see 20/20 out of the eye. It only happens in one eye (not two, like waffletower stated)- bilateral amblyopia is extremely rare. I've seen one case in my 35 years of practice.

Yes, viewing a 3-D image can be "tiring" and stressful for some, depending on their binocular viewing abilities. The worst I've heard about (from Avatar) is some nausea and headaches- nothing that we couldn't survive by stopping the action. OH, and "eye muscle exercises", when done appropriately does NOT induce strabismus. In fact, those "exercises" aren't really for eye muscle strength, they are for eye coordination, which takes place in the brain, not the muscle.

Normally, we see in 3D all the time! However, viewing an artifical 3D image "every day all day" as they imply in the article is ridiculous; and if someone was going to do that, they deserve what they get- an eyeful of hurt!

More than likely the companies offered those cautions as a preventive measure against any potential lawsuits. ANYONE with an eye problem can pretend that it was caused by viewing their system. Remember, the lawyers have to deal with this issue before the program goes public!

Jeffrey Anshel, OD, FAAO

 

[Prune]

Problems of stress on the visual system have been most obvious in HMDs. While poor engineering design or incorrect calibration for the user can be a source of visual stress, a problem less easy to avoid is the challenge to the accommodation-vergence cross-links. Current stereoscopic VR displays provide an illusion of depth by providing each eye with a separate 2D image on a fixed focal plane. The mechanisms of binocular vision fuse the images to give the 3D illusion. Because there is no image blur, the eyes must make a constant accommodative effort. But at the same time the images stimulate a changing vergence angle with changes in apparent depth, so that the normal cross-linked relationship between the systems is disrupted[Mon-Williams & Wann 1998]. The problem is not limited to HMDs as ANY stereoscopic display, from a stereoscopic desktop to immersive systems such as the CAVE, uses the same display method [Wann & Mon-Williams 1997]. Within certain limits the visual system can adapt, as shown by results of orthoptic exercises and of adaptation to different prisms placed in front of each eye. However, whether the changes are long term or whether there can be dual adaptation to both the real and virtual environments has not been established [Rushton & Riddell 1999].

What has been shown in SEVERAL STUDIES is that short-term exposure to VEs with stereoscopic displays has produced changes in heterophoria (latent squint), where the visual axes of the eyes deviate from their usual position. The resting vergence angle of the eyes may be altered either in the direction of exophoria (turning outwards of the eyes) or esophoria (turning inwards of the eyes). Some decrements in visual acuity have also been reported. These objective changes, which must be assessed using orthoptic instruments, are associated with reports of subjective symptoms such as blurred vision, headaches, eyestrain or momentary diplopia (double vision). The degree of objective change and the symptomatology also depended upon the VR system or VE being evaluated [Costello & Howarth 1996; Mon-Williams & Wann 1998; Mon-Williams et al. 1993]. The reported changes in heterophoria could account at least in part for the subjective symptoms as well as reduced visual acuity and reduced perception of depth when relying on stereopsis. These changes are similar to those reported with the use of NVGs and thought responsible for the reduced depth perception [Sheehy & Wilkinson 1989]....Certainly longer exposures in flight simulators result in greater severity of symptoms overall[Kennedy, Stanney, & Dunlap 2000].

Emphasis mine. Source: http://dspace.dsto.defence.gov.au/dspace/bitstream/1947/4079/1/DSTO-TR-1419 PR.pdf

 

[ned]

First, I'm an optometrist.

There were several mis-representations in this article and they never really did devulge the actual study that they deemed "hazardous" to the eyes.


Jeffrey Anshel, OD, FAAO

Thanks for your input. Unfortunately common sense is lost in this day and age. We have to blame somebody for our own short comings and there are professionals ready to gain from all of these.

 

[Prune]

Thanks for your input. Unfortunately common sense is lost in this day and age. We have to blame somebody for our own short comings and there are professionals ready to gain from all of these.

You are full of it
As this article states, other optometrists are saying the opposite, that this is indeed as serious danger: http://eetindia.co.in/ART_8800599662_1800010_NT_99c3f3b8.HTM

BTW, there is one error in the article, where someone is quoted as saying
"as you decrease the distance [to the display] the problems created by this conflict accelerate and it's non-linear so they accelerate quickly."
In fact, when this distance is decreased, so is the horizontal stereo separation in order to maintain the same 3D effect. Convergence is an angular measure and the distance doesn't matter for this as long as the same angle is maintained.

 

[Audioholics]

I thought it was sensationalist until I looked into it more. In fact, I poo-pooed the idea initially from Gene until he went and had Wayne look into it. Now, I've changed my tune and have two primary concerns:

1) the present focus on children (much of the content that comes out on 3D is aimed at kids); and

2) long term exposure. Since gaming seems to be the most pending form of practical 3-D we're going to see in the new future (anyone who thinks it's going to be movies is kidding themselves), you have a situation where kids (and of course adults, who I'm less concerned with) may be spending hours per day with their eyes misaligned while playing a 3D video game. Add to this the upcoming Nintendo 3DS and there is a real concern - or at least something that should be researched full.

Personally, I'm not letting my kids near any 3D that will be long term exposure. Movies in the theater are fine, but never a 3DS or a home gaming system. When they are older I'm less concerned, but younger impressionable eyes should likely avoid this stuff until we hear more conclusively.

PS. Hearing from ODs is awesome, but please make sure you can cite the applicable research and your reasons for dissenting.

 

[Wayde Robson]

I think an important disctinction is levels of exposure.

Going to the odd 3D movie probably won't hurt anyone. But some people sit around watching 6 or more hours of TV a day. What happens when that becomes 3D TV viewing?

Of course the headline is a bit sensational. Is there a way to casually suggest 3D video might pose a health hazard in a headline?

The opener to the story was channeling the style of the "Stuff they Don't Want You to Know" conspiracy blog/podcast. It's a bit tongue-in-cheek.

I was careful not to draw any connection between 3D video issues and any specific medical condition, it's just not known.

I find it interesting seeing the story called 'hype' and 'alarmist' as if it's a bad thing or some failing in the writing or research. Writing about something (that doesn't put the reader to sleep) probably makes it alarmist.

 

[3db]

Kids need to be monitored and maybe its a good idea to restric them from 3D. Its been proven that cell phone use by kids under the age of 16 is also very harmful for their brai development as the skull hasn't full developed allowing the raidation to penetrate the brain much deeper than adults.

I think its perverse that industry covers up stuff like this.

 

[HeXetic]

I remain skeptical of the claims that 3DTV & 3D Movies are, as this article title puts it, "Hazardous to Your Health", but one thing I can say for sure: after reading the article, I was completely in the dark as to why. Only Prune's quotation made the reason obvious: when we watch 3DTV, our eyes do not need to focus at different depths -- it's always the same depth, the distance from our eyes to the screen.

Since I walked away from the article without even knowing why 3DTV might be dangerous, I must comment that I found the article severely lacking. The bulk of the article is anecdote and sensationalist hyperbole, instead of useful discussion. After reading the comments, I think I understand the reasoning behind the alarm, though I'm unconvinced that there is true danger.

 

[son-yah-tive]

I thought I was going to like 3D. We went to the theater Saturday and saw Toy Story 3. I didn't see much difference when I lifted the glasses, compared to leaving them on. Beside the fact the glasses were anoying to wear. The main reason I kept lifting up the glasses.

 

[Prune]

Just a side note, as it came up in another forum: someone asked why people that wear eyeglasses (for say myopia or astigmatism) don't get related problems, given that the glasses would change the convergence given accommodation as well. The answer is that the eye is near enough to the lens of the glasses that the thickness of the glasses matter and there is a prism effect known in optometry as "induced prism by decentration" that counteracts the change in convergence glasses would otherwise imply.

BTW, I definitely agree with the post above that the factor of importance here is the nature of the exposure--we need to be concerned with prolonged intense exposure, such as during gaming binges, that are unfortunately too common among today's hardcore gamers.

 

[gmichael]

I already have strabismus and can't see out of both eyes out of the same time. I guess that's why I don't get sick after these movies. It's also why I can't hit a baseball or catch a pass. Learning to drive was crazy hard. I basically use my ears to really get bearings. I have exceptional hearing which is why I'm crazy about this hobby. Sounds to me like 3d movies should ban children.

You drive by your sense of sound?!

 

[gliz]

I am legally blind and have been from birth my sight in my left eye is 20/700 and in my right is 20/400. Don’t screw around with your eye sight, I would take this seriously. It is not hysteria. I would hate to see anyone suffer any vision loss for something as stupid as 3D. I work in IT and I have co workers who run their monitors at the highest rezalution and they are now starting to get headaches. Now he has backed off a little and the headaches have all but stopped. The point guys is take care of you sight, you don’t want to know how hard is is getting alone with little or none

 

[Wayde Robson]

BTW, I definitely agree with the post above that the factor of importance here is the nature of the exposure--we need to be concerned with prolonged intense exposure, such as during gaming binges, that are unfortunately too common among today's hardcore gamers.

Thanks for all you input into this thread, Prune.