Magic Glasses

      When I was a teenager I was intrigued by advertisements in the popular press for magic glasses, also known as ‘X-ray specs’, that apparently allowed one to see straight through the outer clothing and glimpse buxom ladies in their underwear. I resisted the temptation to buy a pair but later on at university I did wear tinted spectacles in an effort to look cool in spite of being severely shortsighted. I quite literally saw the world through rose-coloured glasses – but then it was the late sixties … What I did not realise at that time was that they might also have cured my dyslexia, had I been unfortunate enough to have been dyslexic. It would be just too good to be true, would it not, if we could cure dyslexia with magic glasses?

            The answer, sadly, is yes. But that does not stop thousands of parents whose children are struggling to learn to read paying large sums for tinted lenses of doubtful utility. Nor does the lack of convincing evidence for effectiveness seem to restrain the enthusiastic advocacy for coloured glasses by those who service this market. Let’s look at the facts.

            First, it does not make conceptual sense to attempt to address a disability by supposedly alleviating problems in a modality unrelated to the known cause of the difficulty. You would not recommend a hearing aid for someone with a poor sense of smell. But as we know, and as the vast majority of reading scientists now believe, dyslexia, and reading disability more generally, almost always results from difficulties in processing language; specifically it appears to be a phonological processing deficit. Children who struggle to learn to read do so not because they cannot see the letters or words clearly but rather because they find difficulty in breaking words up into their component sounds. So why would coloured glasses make any difference?

            Second, even if we were to accept that there might be a small number of apparently dyslexic children whose problems are visual in nature, is the proposed remedy a credible solution? The problem here is that the hypothesised disabling condition, known as the scotopic sensitivity syndrome or the Irlen syndrome, is so unreliable diagnostically that many experts in vision doubt its very existence. In other words, coloured lenses appear to be the cure for which there is no known disease.

            Third, and hence unsurprisingly, the evidence for the efficacy of coloured lenses in helping to redress reading disability is tenuous at best with some studies finding no effect and some others claiming significant effects. Unfortunately, the studies claiming to provide positive evidence for efficacy are seriously flawed methodologically and are not accepted by most reading scientists.

         Finally, you don’t have to take my word for this but perhaps you might take seriously a joint policy statement on ‘Learning Disabilities, Dyslexia and Vision’ (revised 2009) from the American Academy of Pediatrics (Section on Ophthalmology, Council on Children with Disabilities), the American Academy of Ophthalmology, the American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus and the American Association of Certified Orthoptists. Their conclusion is unequivocal:

“Currently, there is no adequate scientific evidence to support the view that subtle eye or visual problems cause learning disabilities. … Furthermore, the evidence does not support the concept that vision therapy or tinted lenses or filters are effective, directly or indirectly, in the treatment of learning disabilities.”

That this form of therapy simply does not work is plain to see, with or without tinted glasses.


August 28 2012 Note: A more recent review of LD, Dyslexia, and Vision is provided by the American Academy of Pediatrics: http://www.filedropper.com/visionanddylexiaamacadpaed