BoyNear-sighted controlLet's start with theseBottom logicGot it
Many parents are confused by the fact that they are chasing their children every day to learn less about their mobile phones, to go outside, to spend a lot of money, to try a lot of things, to lose sight and even to increase the number. In fact, many times it's not a child's problem, it's not a method that's useless, it's a low-level logic that hasn't been seen from the beginning, it's a very bad power, it's a lot of useless work。
** why don't the kids listen and take the initiative?**
The child is not afraid of nearsightedness because he can't feel pain. It's like having been burned with a hot soup once and you're avoiding it, without being warned repeatedly by adults, but with short-sightedness there's no instant “ache” and a little sour at the moment for a long time, and a ten-minute break seems to be okay again, a weak feedback that makes the child feel “no big deal”. The first step in close vision control is not to buy expensive products, or to watch the kids talk, but to make them feel the burden of their eyes first. For example, if you let your child wear a mist-inspired spectroscopy for a few minutes, or if you do a simple little pen-tip experiment, so that he can see how hard his eyes are going to be for a long time, turning the distant effect of “near-sightedness” into a feeling that he can feel now, he will move from “i want to protect his eyes” to “i want to protect my eyes” to “i want to protect my eyes”, which is more than 10,000 words for parents。
** precautionary close-sightedness is just to give your eyes more rest? Wrong**
Many parents think that prevention is to make their eyes less useful and more restful, but the near-sighted is more like a tug-up: the lashes have been pulling between the “near-looking” and “near-looking” directions, and the “near-looking” direction has continued to stretch over long distances, reading books, writing homework and viewing electronic screens, and the “near-looking direction” is continuing to pull; and the “near-looking direction” is being pulled back. Rest is simply a pause for “near-sightedness”, but parts of the past that have been pulled will not come back on their own, and “no pull” alone will not win. The nature of the controls is not to let the eyes rest, but to give extra time to “not looking near”: it takes three minutes for every 45 minutes to stop and look away, to spend more than two hours a day in the open, to look further in the light, to place more people on the side of the river, and to balance the power of the two sides so that the eyes are as close as possible。
** two hours a day, why is it not working?**
Many parents are strictly bound by the “outdoor two hours a day” standard, which results in a problem with the child's vision, the central reason being that you may be doing “ineffective outdoors”. The key to outdoor control is not to stay long, but to be “effective” — it must simultaneously meet the two conditions of sufficient light and as far away as possible. If you go out all the way down to play with toys, to watch your mobile phone, or to walk in the middle of the night when the light is weak, both the central elements of light and distance fall short, the effect will naturally be much less. The real and effective outdoors, with no deliberate effort to spend the whole time, have 10 minutes to look at the outer top of the top of the top of the tree, look at the distance on the way to school, tan 5-10 minutes on the morning or afternoon of school, and add up the fragmentation time, which is far more useful than the long “ineffective exit”。
** choosing control products, how do you judge it? **
There are now a wide variety of concepts of control on the market, and parents are vulnerable to new and strange terminology. The first is whether the principles can be tested with simple optical tests and whether there are publicly available data for real use; and the second is whether the bottoms of the information can be checked by consumers and be transparent. After all, the effect of containment is better than what the merchants say, and the real use of feedback and verifiable data is much more reliable than smallpox advertising. It is also important to remind you that children must be screened by a properly qualified photologist, that blind pupils are not recommended, and that the instructions clearly indicate that children are vulnerable to all forms of malfeasance, that they need to be fully observed and carefully used, and that parents can ask for instructions on their own initiative and not be confused。
Finally, i would like to say to the parents that close-vision control is not something that can be done once and for all by a "god" but is the result of everyday habits, awareness-building and scientific programmes. What's the confusion about your kids on the eyeguard? Have you tried anything useful? Welcome to the comment area。
