TREATMENT FOR KIDS WITH 'LAZY EYE'
This might be useful information for some of you moms and dads with Moebius children; occasionally "lazy eye" can be a part of a mild case of Moebius, if I remember right:
"Treating "lazy eye" is more likely to be successful the younger the child, but even older kids can benefit more than was previously believed, according to a large new study.
Researchers reviewed data on nearly 1,000 children treated for amblyopia, or lazy eye — diminished vision in one eye that can stem from a number of causes. They found that kids between the ages of three and seven were much more responsive to treatment than kids between seven and 13, especially in moderate to severe cases.
Despite older kids achieving less dramatic improvements than the younger groups, however, they did get somewhat better and in a few cases saw significant vision gains.
"Earlier is still better, but you still can treat late," said study co-author Dr. Michael Repka, an ophthalmologist at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland.
A lazy eye is caused either by shortsightedness in one eye, or a misalignment of the eye that affects vision. If the condition is left untreated, the brain will eventually begin to ignore the images from the lazy eye, leading to permanent vision problems.
It is the leading cause of vision problems in children, affecting between two and four percent of all children.
Treatment begins by first addressing any underlying eye conditions that are responsible for the poor vision through surgery, eye exercises or eyeglasses. Next, the good eye is covered with a patch for two hours a day or given vision-blurring eye drops to force the weaker eye to work.
The treatment has no significant side effects and with it, "85 percent of children get to 20-30 vision or better," said Repka.
To see whether age makes a difference in how successful treatment will be, he and his colleagues in the multi-institution Pediatric Eye Disease Investigator Group reviewed the results of four previous studies that included 996 children.
The kids were divided into three groups: ages three to five, five to seven and seven to 13. They were also separated into two categories, moderate and severe, depending on the quality of vision in their affected eye.
Younger children showed a better response to treatment in both moderate and severe cases of lazy eye. Among moderate cases, children aged three to five improved their vision by 39 percent more than the oldest children and the kids between five and seven improved their vision 46 percent more.
Measuring vision improvements by a scale known as logMAR lines, which roughly reflects rows on a standard eye chart, kids between three and five gained an average of 2.29 lines, kids five to seven gained 2.41 lines and kids seven to 13 gained 1.65 lines.
More dramatic differences were observed in children with a severe lazy eye, although the authors caution that the study did not include many children with severe disease so the numbers may not be broadly representative.
In that category, children in the youngest age group improved their vision, on average, by 4.16 lines of visual acuity -- more than twice as much the oldest children who gained 1.99 lines.
The response to treatment for a lazy eye "is only important if they maintain that level" of vision, noted Dr. Norman Medow, director of Pediatric Ophthalmology at Montefiore Medical Center in the Bronx, New York, who was not involved in the study.
The new results are important, but the patient's age may not predict whether they are likely to see long-term benefits from the treatment, he told Reuters Health.
Despite the advantage of earlier treatment, Repka observed that the benefits of the treatment for older children were better than previously thought. "A group that we didn't think is treatable is moderately treatable," he said."

HAVING A DOG OR CAT IS GOOD FOR YOU
And not just if you are lonely or ill, either, reports the Washington Post:
"Lots of research has indicated that having a dog or a cat can help people live happier, healthier lives. But it’s been unclear whether there really is a cause-and-effect relationship between pet ownership and better physical and mental health. Now, new research indicates that the benefits of having a canine or feline companion are real and broad.
A team of psychologists from Miami University and St. Louis University conducted a series of studies aimed at trying to tease out the benefits of pet ownership.
“Although there is correlational evidence that pets may help individuals facing significant life stressors, little is known about the well-being benefits of patterns for everyday people,” they wrote in a paper published online this week by the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.
In the first part of the research, 217 people answered detailed questionnaires online designed to determine whether pet owners tend to be different from people who do not own pets. The survey assessed variables such as depression, loneliness, self-esteem, illness, activity level and their relationships with other people. The researchers found that, in fact, there were lots of differences, with pet owners faring much better overall. For example, pet owners tended to be less lonely, have higher self-esteem, get more exercise, be more extroverted and were less fearful about getting close to other people.
In the second part of the research, the researchers studied 56 dog owners. In addition to filling out the same questionnaire used in the first part of the study, the researchers also gathered detailed information about how they related to their dogs, and to other people. The owners tended to get the most benefit from having a canine companion when their dogs “complemented rather than competed” with humans in their lives, the researchers found.
“In fact ... we repeatedly observed evidence that people who enjoyed greater benefits from their pets also were closer to other important people in their lives and received more support from them, not less,” the researchers wrote.
Dogs that were less fearful, more active and less aggressive toward people and other animals seemed to fulfill their owners’ needs the best, the researchers found.
In the last experiment, the researchers brought 97 undergraduates into the laboratory and asked them to write about a time when they felt socially excluded and then write about a favorite pet or a favorite friend. Writing about pets was just as effective as writing about a friend in terms of minimizing feelings of rejection, the researchers found.
“In summary, pets can serve as important sources of social support, providing many positive psychological and physical benefits for their owners,” the researchers wrote."

This doesn't surprise me a bit.  Think of how many of you out there with Moebius or with other physical differences have a pet of your own.  Think of the satisfaction it gives you, no matter what else is going on in your life.  No; this study doesn't surprise us at all.

"Most of the important things in the world have been accomplished by people who have kept on trying when there seemed to be no hope at all." -Dale Carnegie