New Issue: Science’s Impossible Questions. Read Now

More Time Outside Tied to Less Nearsightedness in Children

By Kathryn Doyle (Reuters Health) - For primary school children in China, spending an extra 45 minutes per day outside in a school activity class may reduce the risk of myopia, according to a new study.

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

By Kathryn Doyle

(Reuters Health) - For primary school children in China, spending an extra 45 minutes per day outside in a school activity class may reduce the risk of myopia, according to a new study.

In some parts of China, 90% of high school graduates have nearsightedness, and rates are lower but increasing in Europe and the Middle East, the authors write.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


"There were some studies suggesting the protective effect of outdoor time in the development of myopia, but most of this evidence is from cross-sectional studies (survey) data that suggest 'association' instead of causality," said lead author Dr. Mingguang He of Sun Yat-sen University in Guangzhou. "Our study, as a randomized trial, is able to prove causality and also provide the high level of evidence to inform public policy."

Intense levels of schooling and little time spent outdoors may have contributed to the epidemic rise of nearsightedness in China, he told Reuters Health by email.

The researchers divided 12 primary schools in China into two groups: six schools continued their existing class schedule, while six were assigned to include an additional 40 minutes of outdoor activity at the end of each school day. Parents of children in the second group were also encouraged to engage their children in outdoor activities on the weekends.

In total, almost 2,000 first-graders, with an average age of almost seven years old, were included.

After three years, 30% of the outdoor activity group had developed myopia, compared to almost 40% of kids in the control group, according to the results in JAMA September 15.

That means kids who spent more time outside were 23% less likely to develop myopia, the authors write.

The study doesn't investigate why time outdoors might protect eyesight, but He said that some experimental work suggests brighter outside light affects eye growth in a way that inhibits myopia.

To maximize the benefit, schools in China should increase outdoor time further, including recesses, and encourage parents to bring children outdoors over the weekend, the researcher said.

"One issue that needs to be addressed is the potential skin and eye damage from UV exposures, but these can be managed by standard UV protection measures," He added.

"Future studies should include information about the content of the additional outdoor activity, if the activity could be standardized, and how it differs from other studies," Dr. Michael Repka of the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine in Baltimore writes in an accompanying editorial.

"Establishing the long-term effect of additional outdoor activities on the development and progression of myopia is particularly important because the intervention is essentially free and may have other health benefits," but parents should understand that the magnitude of the effect may be small and may not be permanent, Repka writes.

Spending time outside also involves focusing on more distant objects, one assumes, which may play a role in addition to sunlight exposure, Repka told Reuters Health by email.

"The effect is very modest and should not be overstated," he said.

SOURCE: http://bit.ly/1Lw9F5U and http://bit.ly/1US8fgD

JAMA 2015.

 

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe