Talk:Nystagmus

Merge two types of nystagmus?

It appears that it could be useful to merge the two types of nystagmus into one article here. Some terms, such post rotational nystagmus, downbeat nystagmus, and upbeat nystagmus occur in both articles. Facts707 (talk) 18:08, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

I completely agree. As I said on the talk page, I'm prepared to wait a fortnight (in case anyone objects) then set about merging the two. TdwrighT 23:55, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Iris/Pupil

In the alcohol and nystagmus section. The wording should be changed from movementof the 'pupil' to movement of the 'iris' as the pupil never moves independently. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.12.66.148 (talk) 02:46, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

No, the iris does not move independant from the pupil any more than the pupil is independent from the iris and it is the pupil, through which we see, which is the relevent part here, not the iris, which is simply the pigmented light shield around the pupil. IceDragon64 (talk) 23:22, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Voluntary Nystagmus

Voluntary Nystagmus is the ability to shake the iris on demand. The ability is very rare and occurs in 1 in every 100 people (0.01% of population) making it as rare as the rarest of diseases.

Messed up definition

The basic definition of Nystagmus at the beginning of the article seems to be wrong here, I assume that was caused by the merging of the two articles. Nystagmus, is surely the movement, by whatever cause and should therefore not be described as if it were always an illness. At present is reads as if one might catch this illness as a young child or older and one might be affected for life. IceDragon64 (talk) 23:22, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

What it looks like on the inside etc.

As usual, Wikipedia is reading in a very technical way here, and not neccesarily serving the everyday people it was written for very well. Surely we need to say that Nystagmus, when it goes wrong, is what makes the world around us appear to move when nothing is actually moving except our eyes, involutarily flicking out of place, then dropping back into place again as our brains try to compensate for a percieved motion measured inside our heads... or something like that

IceDragon64 (talk) 23:28, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

I agree with IceDragon64. There's nothing about the effects of having nystagmus NOR is there anything about the varying levels of severity. Most people have very mild cases for which the brain easily compensates. They can be completely unaware of having it unless they happen to notice it in the mirror. Even people with a more severe degree of nystagmus can read without a problem and deny any problems with their vision. (I'm the guardian of a man with Arnold-Chiari malformation.) So many WP articles are all technicality without the needed human element. Thank you for your time and have a happy New Year, Wordreader (talk) 19:27, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Nystagmus and Alcohol

"The field sobriety test studies published by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration have never been peer reviewed..." Can we be confident of the word "never" when the cited work is old enough to vote? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.47.70.89 (talk) 08:27, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Is the working assumption behind nystagmus as a marker of DUI the idea that no one with congenital nystagmus drives? Is congenital nystagmus an automatic disqualifier from a license, so that *everyone* on the road can be assumed to *only* present with nystagmus if they're under the influence? Is that how it works? Inquiring minds... -96.231.112.101 (talk) 22:35, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

My understanding of the working assumption is that nystagmus will be one point of several points of evidence that a person is under the influence, and that a person who determines that they have congenital nystagmus will (hopefully) have that particular piece of evidence discarded in pre-trial if they were arrested and put to trial. ParticipantObserver (talk) 14:01, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

Binocular / Stereoscopic aspects ? Normal function ?

As a layman (who was once friends with an Orthoptist), I had equated 'nystagmus' with squint - unwanted movement of one eye with respect to the other eye.
This doesn't seem to occur to the writers of this article - am I simply wrong ? Confused with Strabismus ...
The article does mention 'When nystagmus occurs without fulfilling its normal function, it is pathologic'. Nowhere AFAICS does it say say what the 'normal function' is !

The image just looks like someone reading, at least a right-to-left script like Hebrew. --195.137.93.171 (talk) 17:28, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Effects of Acupuncture

Given that acupuncture has been well shown by high quality studies to have no effect beyond placebo, the statements regarding the effects of acupuncture on Nystagmus are somewhat questionable, and from a scientific point of view completely invalid. If this entry is to be considered a scientific description of the condition, then the references to acupuncture should be removed or at least re-written so that it does not "beg the question" over the reality of acupuncture's effectiveness. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.252.95.167 (talk) 06:53, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Mining

The article on Safety Lamps includes: "lack of good lighting was a prime cause of a painful eye affliction (nystagmus)". Can anyone confirm or deny this please, and a reference would be most appreciated. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 12:35, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Image

The prior image was more typical. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 23:45, 6 February 2018 (UTC)