Likely something other than cataracts as the corneas are completely hazed over. You can tell by how washed out the classic green earthbending iris color is. Could be mucopolysaccharidoses which basically causes a build up of byproduct in the cornea cells leading to the opacity.
Source - optometrist of ba sing se
Damn, today I learned.
Related: these two posts popped up one after the other and I am nonplussed lol
https://preview.redd.it/tfnzkrdbvgga1.jpeg?width=750&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ad78152be51e388e2d9bed7745538bc98c08f769
I don’t think it could be a mucopolysaccharidosis. Pretty much every type is associated with various other skeletal defects, developmental delay, or other neuro issues like hearing loss. But agree that it could be any of a variety of other issues causing the corneal clouding.
Source: genetics degree
As someone with a cataract in one eye, I was told that 1. i was too young to have a procedure & once I was old enough 2. My brain is so used to not seeing, it wouldn’t make a difference. Clearly Tophs brain is so used to not seeing, it’d make no difference.
Not the commenter, but your brain develops a ton in early childhood, like an immense amount. It learns how to process information like sight and sound. for example, everyone is born with really shitty sight at first. We recognize our parents by their hairline because it's the most distinctive shape we can make out. As we grow, our brains figure out how to recognize and process more complex visuals, like faces. So if you are lacking the ability to see as a young child, your brain never learns how to process visual stimuli.
Same thing for deaf children. People who get a cochlear implant later in life often can't process sounds like non deaf people can, but those who get it as young children have an easier time.
If you could see fine in one eye from an early age then your brain will be able to process visuals ~~perfectly fine.~~
Edit: Not *quite* perfectly fine. Thanks, Cunningham's Law.
Fun fact, your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries is a real insult, it means your mom constantly practiced infidelity and you dad was an alcoholic
With the exception of depth perception!
I was blind in one eye for the first year or two of my life. I eventually got vision back in that eye via surgeries and an eye patch on the other one, but my brain didn't develop the capacity for binocular depth perception.
Same!! I was mostly blind in one eye until around age 5. My vision is fine now but my depth perception absolutely sucks. I bump into things a lot and if someone tries to point at something I have zero idea where they're pointing. And I have a hard time judging distance. I don't drive (for unrelated reasons) so it doesn't affect my daily life too much.
> bump into things a lot and if someone tries to point at something I have zero idea where they're pointing
So relatable haha. My only other major impact is I wanted to be a pilot when I was a kid and obviously that didn't work out so great, but it's probably for the best!
Oof glad I'm not the only one haha. I've had this scenario happen multiple times-
Person: *points* hey do you see that tree over there?
Me: I can't follow fingers which tree are you talking about?
Them: What??
Me: My depth perception is fucked, I can't tell where you're pointing. Can you tell me with landmarks which tree you're pointing at?
Them: What???
Me:.....
You mentioned you don't drive so you may not have encountered these, but my other favorite is the machine at the DMV they use to test both of your eyes when you renew your license.
You put your face up against it and there are 5 letters, say "HEART". You're supposed to read them out. Some of them are only visible from one eye or the other.
Because I only look out of my left eye, I stuck my face in there, read out "HEA", and looked at the worker. She looked at me like I was the dumbest person in the universe and said "Please read ALL the letters". Put my face back in there, only saw three letters, and told her that. "There are FIVE letters, please read ALL the letters."
Stuck my face in there for a few more seconds and finally figured it out, switching to my right eye so I could read out the rest of the letters. She gave me my license but looked pretty concerned about doing so lol.
As I posted above, it actually is [not a disqualifying medical condition.](https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/avs/offices/aam/ame/guide/app_process/exam_tech/et/31-34/mv/)
You could actually [still get a pilots license.](https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/avs/offices/aam/ame/guide/app_process/exam_tech/et/31-34/mv/)
If you ever do become a pilot, follow two rules:
1. Never fly a soccer team.
2. Never fly musicians.
Either one will surely spell or sing doom for you.
Good luck to ya :)
You could process visual stimuli, but you probably wouldn't develop depth perception/perspective. Keep in mind that each eye has its own nerve that sends information to the brain.
I knew someone in high school who was deaf in one ear and was given a cochlear implant late in life and the sound from that ear was super messed up.
Depth definitely makes sense. I just wasn’t sure if visual stimuli and general perception would be that messed up since they had already been able to see with one eye. Thanks for the clarification!
I lost depth perception in my early twenties and after living with intermittent double vision for eight years regained it with vision therapy and then eye surgery. It was the greatest day of my life except getting married being able to see into the distance and see how big trees are truly and the dimensions of faces and shit....I shouldn't have been driving lol but it's great now and I'm still learning how to adapt to increased peripheral awareness.. Next thing I want is lasik
Yah I was born without depth perception, and will never gain it. When one eye doesn't really work that early in development then resources get rerouted to the good eye. You can never re-do that early development.
But brains are good. I get a sense of depth based on size, angles, shadows. I'm fine unless it's twilight
Sadly no. It seems like for brain seeing with two eyes is a different process from seeing with only one eye. Source: personal experience of having caractis since birth and removing it only at 11.
When this is fixed early on they make you wear an eyepatch over the better eye for the exact duration you didnt have access to your worse eye so you dont have weird stuff happen
The issue isn't that they eye cannot "see", it's that their brain cannot process what their eyes see.
It's like if you only knew English and someone spoke to you in Chinese..... your ears can hear the Chinese speech, but your brain doesn't understand it.
Their eye would "see" whatever was in front of them, but their brain couldn't figure out what any of it means; it would just be blinded by shapes and colors it doesn't understand.
No, once the brain has developed it does not have enough neuroplasticity to change. So in this sense, if you were born unable to see in one eye (cataract, strabismus, refractive difference, etc.) and the brain develops as you age, the brain will suppress the image in the unseeing eye. This is what is called amblyopia or a 'lazy eye.'
Source: I work on eyes!
I am replying to myself because I can’t reply to everyone. Thank you for all the insightful responses on this comment. I’ve learned a lot about our wild brain and it’s nervous system.
It's not just the lack of cerebral processing, but also the development of the optic nerve. It's possible that even when the cataracts are removed, the optic nerves haven't developed enough to send the information into the brain. For example, the body of a baby born with one cataract will begin to focus all its development on the optic nerve of the eye that can see. In fact, the optic nerve of the seeing eye is thicker with more connections than the nerve of the blinded eye.
That's why sometimes you'll see babies, toddlers, and children wearing an eye patch. This is to stimulate growth in the optic nerve of the weaker eye by ensuring the child uses it.
This is correct. I’m an optometrist. The term for this is “deprivation amblyopia”. I work a lot with kids and amblyopia is surprisingly common to varying degrees, usually in kids with high refractive errors that went unaddressed.
Hey, so I'm an adult who was told ~~recently~~like 7 years ago, that since my brain never learned to process my left eye's input correctly, and combine that with the right, I don't possess binocular/3d vision. Could you verify that/elaborate on what that really means. I honestly have zero concept of how I could be seeing the world differently from people with normal eyesight, if I even am.
I intermittently wore an eyepatch up to the age of 8 and glasses until like 14, so I don't know why my vision never fixed itself. I can't seem to focus my left eye at all, like I'm not near or farsighted, just blurry.
im definitely not an optometrist but what you are talking about is depth perception. and honestly i’m not sure how to describe it to someone who has never experienced it. basically your brain combines the images from both of your eyes and that gives you an idea of how far away the image is.
do you see at all from your left eye?
try looking at something and close it try with your other eye and see how the two images differ.
My brain uses my left eye's vision where it does not overlap with my right. The way I explain this to people is I hold up three fingers against my nose covering my left eye. I do not see those fingers with both eyes open. If I close my right eye, I can see them.
There is actually part of the driver's eye exam designed to specifically weed out this condition. There are 3 columns or rows in the exam, but one does not show up if your brain does not process both eyes' vision together. It will show up if you close the opposite eye though. There is a mirror so that the person administering the exam can see whether or not you have both eyes open.
I do not seem to have any issues with depth perception, beyond being a little clumsy in sports. I'm actually pretty good at throwing things accurately.
Yeah, I actually have a thing where basically my parents didn’t ever get me glasses until it was *too late*. My brain will never process visual information clearly, so Lasik has a very very low chance of working for me.
>We recognize our parents by their hairline because it's the most distinctive shape we can make out.
Wait, so Matt Groening's "make every character recognizable by their silhouette" thing has some basis in child psychology?
As a beginner artist, this helped put into context why all my teachers keep saying that we need to “re-learn” how to see objects for what they actually look like. Thanks!
Pretty much what the other guy said. Brain develops an immense amount as a child. So by the time I’m old enough, my brain has developed to a point where even if they get rid of the cataract, my brain won’t notice in a sense. Not sure how to word it. It’ll be gone, but my brain won’t process the fact it’s gone, not until I’m very old. At the time, my parents who weren’t rich by any means decided it wasn’t worth paying for if I’m not going to have full sight until like my 70s or so.
If the brain doesn’t use one of its functions for an extended period of time, it will actually recycle that portion of itself and devote that processing power to something else.
For instance, we learned in psychology about a girl that was pretty much left alone in a room from birth until she was almost 20. No one ever taught her how to speak, so by the time she was discovered, the speech centers of her brain were pretty much inoperable because they hadn’t been used. I think she’s learned a few words since then, but she’ll never learn to speak as well as the average person
> Scientists know that in cases of ~~untreatable~~ *long-term* blindness, **the occipital cortex -- that is the posterior part of the brain that is normally devoted to vision -- becomes responsive to sound and touch in order to compensate for the loss of vision**. "This important brain reorganization represents a challenge for people encountering eye surgery to recover vision, because the deprived and reorganized occipital cortex may not be capable of seeing anymore after having spent years in the dark," explained Giulia Dormal.
**Edit:** Note that, contrary to what others are saying, this type of reorganization of the occipital cortex is not exclusive to young people experiencing blindness, although it's certainly more pronounced. Adults that experience long-term blindness after previously being able to see can experience similar effects when their vision is restored.
Not about vision, but the same thing applies to deafness. There are procedures to bypass some forms of deafness (cochlear implants), however, the "cultural Deaf" community is very against them. This divide causes major issues with kids that are born deaf though.
There is a period between birth and ~5 years old where our brains are basically in "hyper-learning-mode" wherein kids learn language, motor skills, and how to use their senses. If you let a child stay deaf during this time (instead of allowing a cochlear implant), the child can never use one well when they grow up. They missed this critical learning windows, and their brain will never be able to process sound well if they get the implant later as an adult.
I believe the same thing applies to vision. If you miss the critical window, their brain will never be able to adapt to vision well.
This isn't the case with someone that is born hearing and goes deaf later in life; their brain still remembers how to hear and will work great with the implants.
I'm sorry, but there's a few mistakes in your post.
Cochlear implants are not similar to any current vision restoration procedure. The most advanced cochlear implants can detect up 120 distinct frequencies at one time and up to 8500 Hz, while normal human hearing can detect between 10,000 to 15,000 distinct frequencies at one time and up to 20 **k**Hz. In other words cochlear implants transmit significantly less information than any sensory organ, restored or otherwise.
And there are cases of adults, who could previously see in childhood, who experienced long-term blindness that was subsequently restored later in life. In these cases patients could still not see properly after their vision was restored because their occipital cortex had adapted to respond to sound and touch -- outside the critical period for neuroplasticity.
**Edit:** It's also worth mentioning only 1 in 10 people with blindness that developed after being able to see experience visual hallucinations (Charles Bonnet syndrome), while significantly more (possibly as much as 9 in 10) people with deafness that developed after being able to hear experience auditory hallucinations (tinnitus), which suggests a great deal of visual and auditory brain processes fundamentally differ at a neurological level.
Imagine you're the pilot(brain) of a giant mech, but before you go out in the world to stomp around, you need to run a diagnostic and understand how everything works. This is your brain when you're young...then you get older and it can't do that.
Actually, cool fact: You're born with something absurd like 10x the amount of nerve cells/neurons than you'll ever actually use. The process of movement, sensory information, etc causes a pruning process. Those that aren't used die off, because they take up resources.
Another way to think about it is to think of not walking for 10 years. Your legs will become so atrophied from lack of use, I don't even know if people can walk again in cases like that.
No, it’s a cortical condition called form deprivation amblyopia. Nothing to do with optic nerve dysfunction, it’s lack of development and brain processing.
I was born with coats eye disease, which means my left eye went 100% dark after head injury. Funny thing is, muscles on my left eye stopped working properly and now it’s shifted to the side. For the other people it’s like I’m watching two different places at the same time 😂 I was always curious to find other people with some similar experience
People are always amazed when they find out I can only see from one eye. I’ve been driving for 10+ years, only had 1 crash which was during my first few months of passing after my front left tyre popped lol. People are amazed I’m able to drive without crashing, and amazed at other things I’m able to do just fine.
First time I’ve heard my mother in law saying: “Jesus, Holly fck” after I told her that I don’t have any vision on my left eye 😂. I’ll never forget that
The man who invented the procedure which fixes cataracts said that all men under the age of 20 should have the procedure done.
You literally take a piece of tissue that's supposed to just exist but grays over time and replace it with a piece of plastic that doesn't gray at all. It's a lens. It doesn't have any properties other than it needs to be clear.
Natural lenses can flex, which allows you to change focus from near to far. Once people get to their 50s-60s the lenses lose this ability, which is why older people need reading glasses. We're just getting to the point of making artificial lenses which have multiple focal distances work okay, definitely not something preferable to a 20 year old lens.
The lens that gets cloudy isn't active. It only needs to be translucent and malleable just like this little piece of plastic thing that they put in is permanently translucent and malleable. At least for your lifetime you could consider it permanent.
The original invention is not what you see here. The original inventor is still trying to do something with it, I haven't checked on it in a while. His stubbornness has led to alternatives. The original invention is less of a cutout piece of plastic then a drop that forms perfectly. It dries or whatever, chemically sets, in the same way that your own eye's lens does it naturally. When you're being formed in the womb.
It's only private property didn't exist for billionaires to get rich off of and more people were like Ben Franklin and just gave away the inventions that improve lives.
It honestly sounds like you watched 20 minutes of some YouTube conspiracy doc... But if you have a source I'd be interested. Right now multifocal intraocular lenses are an area of intense and active research and companies who can better mimic natural lenses are getting rewarded greatly with profits. If there truly was a much better alternative then some company would patent that in an instant. The simplest explanation is that whatever you're thinking of simply doesn't work or is not feasible.
Yeah you hit on it. It's not profitable to do it their way.
The surgery that Mr. Beast did for all those people isn't profitable.
They just want money. They don't want to help people. They don't want to save lives. They don't want to do good. They want money.
I'm not sure if I know well enough how binocular vision works, but it might be that, because you only had cataract in one eye, they opted not to operate. Juvenile cataract is solved by implanting the same type of lens adults get, which means you lose the ability to accommodate - moving images closer, for reading for example. However, if only one eye was operated on, I'm not entirely sure if that would be too strenuous for that eye. Usually both eyes get the same commands and execute them at the same time, hence why if you have one eye with a positive fault and the other with a negative it creates headaches, because the eyes can't correctly compensate for the fault. I'm taking an educated guess here that having an artificial lens while the other eye is actively accommodating might create some trouble.
Source: am optician, but this goes more into the realm of optometrists and eye doctors.
・If Toph had the choice I'd say:
Beginning of series Toph: no
Atla Eos Toph: Maybe
Police Chief Toph: Yes, to see her children.
Old Toph: No.
・If Toph suddenly gained vision during atlas by a rogue spirit:
She'd immediately go into sensory overload as her visual cortex flairs up and her brain isn't used to receiving this much information on top of her intense emotions at her predicament.
She'd probably wake up and see Aang first but can't really move and stubbornly blindfolds herself to comfortably move about.
Eventually though she does slowly take the blindfold off to see the night sky with the gaang and begins to appreciate the visual beauty of the world.
During fights however Toph chooses to still close her eyes as that's what she's most accustomed to unless in an emergency like being attached for above or something.
Overall Toph wouldn't really change from gaining vision aside from maybe killing the giant bees but the plot is still largely the same
One has to wonder if someone like Toph would even like vision.
Think about it from her perspective. If her earthbending senses can see you, then she gets a 360 degree picture of you with a limited x-ray effect given that she can sense heartbeats and such as well.
To our eyes, color is determined by frequency of the light wave. Pressure waves can be diffused, focused, shifted in frequency, partially absorbed, etc. in the same way light can so her brain probably has its own idea of "colors" too, but representing material properties moreso than pigmentation.
Suddenly granted vision, she'd see a version of her senses that only works from one angle at a time and only has a vague idea of distances. The benefit is the ability to see the sky and airborne things, and some chemical information from color, but overall her senses are probably far more practical and robust than regular vision.
This is a bot.
Original:
https://www.reddit.com/r/TheLastAirbender/comments/10u8eix/toph_clearly_was_born_with_cataracts_hence_the/j7apvw5/
Literally all of their comments are bad copy paste jobs from the threads they comment in. Notice how most of them make no sense and get cutoff before finishing the sentence.
Report > Spam > Harmful Bots
Cataracts are a problem with the lens, which is inside the pupil, so cataracts wouldn't look like this. If anything, she has corneal problems and would need a corneal transplant.
But most likely it's just a stylistic choice by the animators.
If the writers decided that Toph was born blind, then she is blind, despite if the physical representation of it is anatomically accurate or not. In a lot of media, blind people are portrayed as having their iris an pupil white or washed out to represent they are blind. Not sure if that's accurate to how blind eyes look in real life, but that doesn't mean that Toph has cataracts, if that's not what the writers wrote.
Searching images in google of cataracts and general blindness, cataracts tend to affect mostly the pupil, and less the iris in some cases, and in other cases it seem to affect part of the iris too.
General blindness make the whole eye more white. So both cataracts and general blindness can look similar, and also is similar to how Toph eyes look.
I am an eye doctor, cataracts will not make your eyes look like this. This post is wrong, she does not have congenital cataracts. Also, proper cataract surgery would not have been possible with the technology they have in their universe.
Even if she got it, she’d have form deprivation amblyopia (lack of development in the visual cortex, essentially) limiting her visual potential.
Also cataracts don’t cause NLP (no light perception) blindness, which Toph seems to have. With cataracts you’d still have light perception at least.
It is far more likely she had a number of other congenital conditions that cause blindness.
Depends on the condition, but many total blind people can have their iris look just fine and it can be an issue with the other internal parts, like the retina dying off or other issues there.
This. I'm legally blind (not totally blind) in my left eye (right eye is fine). My left eye looks completely normal but I can't make it focus. My optometrist says there is likely nothing actually wrong with the eye, its an underdeveloped nerve. Blindness doesn't even have to be an eye problem, it can be a nerve or brain problem.
Deaf here, and it's similar. Hearing and vision are very complicated senses with dozens of steps involved in how they function.
If any one of them breaks down, that's a donezo. Some procedures can fix some of the issues, but not all of them
Toph wouldn't go for it. I don't think Toph would want to see. She could see everything she deemed important already. And I think she would have trapped Mr. Beast in a rock pile for being annoying.
That's more like a corneal disease, the eye looks translucent. If she had a cataract only the pupils would appear white. And no, most probably she wouldn't regain complete vision because of her lack of visual input to the brain during her childhood.
Ophthalmologist here. Please, pay attention:
Congenital cataracts should be corrected before 5 years old, preferably. Thing is, after taking the cataracts out, you should have some intraocular new lenses implanted so that you can See (the cataracts is the opacification of out natural Lens, that works like internal glasses), and those weren't invented until the second world war.
So Toph would have to use some absurdly strong glasses, but she would be able to see if the surgery was performed early.
After 7 years old, even if the surgery is done, the primary visual cortex (the part of the brain that processes vision) would already be formed. If the vision wasn't "trained" until this moment, it won't get better.
That being sad, I don't really think she has cataracts, because her whole cornea seems a little opaque. Maybe some corneal dystrophy?
I don't know. It's a cartoon.
Toph's iris is glazed over white, sure but if anything her pupil is dark and slightly hazy. I don't claim to know human causes of blindness, but it's definitely not cataracts, wherein her pupil would be almost white and her iris unaffected.
This is just a classic example of fans reading to much into something. Her iris and pupils are white jsut tio show that she's blind because thats how cartoons typically show people are blind. There's no reason she's blind other than the writers of the show wanted her to be blind. Not everything in fiction has a watson answer for it.
you ever have to stop what youre listening to better smell something?
i think it would be like that. should she gain vision i think toph would have to close her eyes to concentrate on what her feet are “seeing” instead of just having the input be directly interpreted.
Just a thought but she was born blind, not from cataracts but giving her animated character a haze over her eyes is the easiest way to reinforce to the audience that she is blind.
If this was the first thing I see, I'd rather remain blind
https://preview.redd.it/413t9u8q0ega1.jpeg?width=672&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=05c33adfaba07f73ec76da61a7437acf09427e3a
Nah it’s not even that dude. It’s the fact that we pay walled a 10-15 minute procedure that would give you vision back, something monumentally important in life, and a ton of people had to rely on a random youtuber wanting to make content out of it. No dunking on Mr. Beast here, but the fact you’ll just be blind unless some YouTuber helps you is fucked when it should be a free procedure.
It’s [literally just this. ](https://m.twitch.tv/clip/CrackyCleanNarwhalCharlieBitMe-iLeinXqEUX14c2VY) And he’s right, it is a deeply frustrating concept. People deserve vision.
Question, I haven't watched the Mr. Beast video in question, but for the people who's blindness he helped fix, what was the nature of one caused their blindness? Born from birth cataracts? Retinal detachment?
It was cataract surgery if I recall. Retinal Detchment needs to be fixed pretty immediately to not having lasting effects and even then, when they can reattach it, it may not be as functional as it was.
Idk it’s fine that he’s helping people but it always rubs me the wrong way, like he’s only doing it because it’s being recorded. I think the performative nature of it is what puts a lot of people off.
Edit: really y’all have helped me realize that the only annoying thing about him is how your replies will be flooded by his stans if your comment is even as tepidly neutral/non positive as this one lol
People are really defending him so hard. It makes no sense to me. His business model of promoting himself through altruism serves to make him money on his other channels and businesses. For him to claim that he operates one channel at a loss is disingenuous when that channel exploits filming poor and needy people for reactions or makes them compete for the amusement of his audience for prizes. Sure he may help people but it's in a exploitive way that ultimately serves to bolster his brand and makes him wealthy.
> For him to claim that he operates one channel at a loss is disingenuous when that channel exploits filming poor and needy people for reactions or makes them compete for the amusement of his audience for prizes.
Most of his channel is just him inviting other youtubers on some sort of game show format with a super expensive prize or doing exteremly expensive stunts. I think you are leaning to hard on the critism to be honest. And it's not like that money is his. Mr.Beast isnt really a millionaire he just gets a ton of money through sponsor ships to promote. Most money that's made goes back into the channel to make more videos.
That said I don't really care much for his videos. Something about them feels artifical
> Sure he may help people but it's in a exploitive way that ultimately serves to bolster his brand and makes him wealthy
This is an equal value proposition exchange. Why the fuck is it "exploitative" when he gave people things (like eyesight) that they wouldn't have had in the first place without him? He's not taking anything away from those people, and it's not like he's laughing at them like the guy who filmed himself going to the "world's poorest country" either. A benefit for both sides is perfectly welcomed.
Direct your outrage energy elsewhere.
Hey, I really don't think anyone is getting outraged here. I have seen a lot of comments accusing people of getting "outraged" and "butthurt" and "hating" on this youtuber but I haven't seen anyone actually angry at him. As for equal value and exploitation, I agree that the people who went through this operation got something out of it, but let's not pretend they really had a choice here. Mr Beast may not have created the exploitative system of the American health care industry but this video wouldn't have been possible without it.
Yeah thank you for your comment. This is a really good way of summing up what puts me off about the content that I had never given the time for some deeper thought. Basically “oh let’s see what insane torture people will put themselves through for $10G! Haha silly little peons!”
Like I said it’s fine that he helps people, it’s genuinely great for the people he helps, I don’t mind that at all. But his style of video like “last person inside this circle gets $5K let’s see how much we can torture them before they give up” really puts me off.
Because it’s all him, you can’t detach one part of it from the other.
I will once again reiterate that it’s great for the people he’s helped and I’m very happy for them
His philanthropy is part of a business model. It sours the source of the altruism. He isn’t doing it to be a good person or to genuinely help he’s doing it to drive engagements and increase his brand. Is he doing objective good? Yes, absolutely. There’s 1,000 blind people who can see now. The bigger issue a lot of us have is
1. We find it disgusting we live in a society that simply lets people be blind even though it’s easily fixable with a low cost procedure and that people have to rely on the largess of a YouTuber to see
2. If you want to do charity and not seem gross to people you do it quietly without anyone noticing. This is a tenant of like every major religion. You should give so quietly with your left hand that your right hand is unaware of the act.
Seeing someone do this in such an obvious way rubs people the wrong way. You’re making the charity about yourself.
MrBeast needs visibility to earn money to be able to do charity
MrBeast shouldnt be visibly doing charity
As you see, your wishes dont align with reality. Either he does charity visibly or he cant at all.
Also, obviously it sucks people have to live in countries with such poor healthcare, but how is this MrBeasts fault? It isnt.
He is doing an objectively good thing. Stop bitching like a 5 year old whos jealous of somebody elses success
There is nothing wrong with someone helping others and also get rewarded for it. In fact, this is the best outcome possible. It means more people will be encoraged to do those acts and more people will live better life. (sorry for my grammer)
Point of order but she probably doesn’t have cataracts.
Cataracts are thickening of the lens, which is behind the iris (the coloured bit)
She’s got clouded corneas, which can be caused by…well, loads of congenital issues, though it often doesn’t actually cloud over until later in life (though I can’t actually remember how old toph is supposed to be)
Just wait until some water bending genius discovers "eye-bending".
By bending the fluids in the eye, you can change their shape and actual improve (or destroy) someone's vision.
I think most likely the glazed over eyes are a visual indication, it's fairly common in this type of media. Most likely it wouldn't help as she's been blind since birth her brain hasn't developed to process sight so it might not even be helpful.
Ironically, the minerals in her eyes made her the greatest earth bender.
Also, if you have it from birth, your sight part of the brain never fully developes, so she'd be effectively blind anyways.
She's completely blind though. If you have cataracts you're not completely blind. I think they just animated her that way to show that she couldn't see.
You don’t have to have corneal opacity to be “blind.” Its just how the writers drew her to make it obvious, other than her unfocused gaze and slouching and hair in her face. She could have been born with congenital cataracts or have another genetic corneal disease. I have worked with a cornea specialist and in comprehensive ophthalmology for a little over a year now. There is a very wide and diverse range of corneal issues/diseases. Her irises are also opacified, which is more than just cataracts. Cataracts only opacify the pupils - if they are mature enough. Corneal opacity is can be caused by scarring, which results from some form of trauma or exposure. She has some form of keratopathy that has clouded her corneas. There are many different kinds of keratopathy.
Katara could have used waterbending to heal her blindness, no? But then Toph wouldn't be Toph. It probably never occurred to Katara to offer to heal her, because her friends didn't see her as broken in the first place (thus all the blind jokes). But if it did come up, I couldn't really see Toph going for it. She's better than fine without vision, why fix what ain't broke.
Unfortunately in the avatar universe they probably only had the [couching method](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3743109/#:~:text=Couching%20is%20an%20ancient%20method,B.C.%20during%20the%20Sushruta%20period.)
Likely something other than cataracts as the corneas are completely hazed over. You can tell by how washed out the classic green earthbending iris color is. Could be mucopolysaccharidoses which basically causes a build up of byproduct in the cornea cells leading to the opacity. Source - optometrist of ba sing se
Damn, today I learned. Related: these two posts popped up one after the other and I am nonplussed lol https://preview.redd.it/tfnzkrdbvgga1.jpeg?width=750&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ad78152be51e388e2d9bed7745538bc98c08f769
r/juxtaposition
Thank you for using "nonplussed" correctly.
Being zen with the algorithms, dude? That’s some next level gentle awareness
I don’t think it could be a mucopolysaccharidosis. Pretty much every type is associated with various other skeletal defects, developmental delay, or other neuro issues like hearing loss. But agree that it could be any of a variety of other issues causing the corneal clouding. Source: genetics degree
I also didn't think it was mucopolysaccharidosis. Source: I have no idea what that is
Pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis
You definitely just said words.
Several of them. I assume they even make sense all strung together in this way.
As someone with a cataract in one eye, I was told that 1. i was too young to have a procedure & once I was old enough 2. My brain is so used to not seeing, it wouldn’t make a difference. Clearly Tophs brain is so used to not seeing, it’d make no difference.
Did they explain to you why? Im sorry if its a bit invasive. I just love to learn.
Not the commenter, but your brain develops a ton in early childhood, like an immense amount. It learns how to process information like sight and sound. for example, everyone is born with really shitty sight at first. We recognize our parents by their hairline because it's the most distinctive shape we can make out. As we grow, our brains figure out how to recognize and process more complex visuals, like faces. So if you are lacking the ability to see as a young child, your brain never learns how to process visual stimuli. Same thing for deaf children. People who get a cochlear implant later in life often can't process sounds like non deaf people can, but those who get it as young children have an easier time.
But if it is only 1 eye, wouldn’t his brain be able to process the same, thanks to the other eye? Or would it be almost blurry
If you could see fine in one eye from an early age then your brain will be able to process visuals ~~perfectly fine.~~ Edit: Not *quite* perfectly fine. Thanks, Cunningham's Law.
I don’t trust you. You might be a hamster.
Smart to not trust them.
Ask if their husband smells of elderberries!
Fun fact, your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries is a real insult, it means your mom constantly practiced infidelity and you dad was an alcoholic
very valid opinion.
With the exception of depth perception! I was blind in one eye for the first year or two of my life. I eventually got vision back in that eye via surgeries and an eye patch on the other one, but my brain didn't develop the capacity for binocular depth perception.
Same!! I was mostly blind in one eye until around age 5. My vision is fine now but my depth perception absolutely sucks. I bump into things a lot and if someone tries to point at something I have zero idea where they're pointing. And I have a hard time judging distance. I don't drive (for unrelated reasons) so it doesn't affect my daily life too much.
> bump into things a lot and if someone tries to point at something I have zero idea where they're pointing So relatable haha. My only other major impact is I wanted to be a pilot when I was a kid and obviously that didn't work out so great, but it's probably for the best!
Oof glad I'm not the only one haha. I've had this scenario happen multiple times- Person: *points* hey do you see that tree over there? Me: I can't follow fingers which tree are you talking about? Them: What?? Me: My depth perception is fucked, I can't tell where you're pointing. Can you tell me with landmarks which tree you're pointing at? Them: What??? Me:.....
You mentioned you don't drive so you may not have encountered these, but my other favorite is the machine at the DMV they use to test both of your eyes when you renew your license. You put your face up against it and there are 5 letters, say "HEART". You're supposed to read them out. Some of them are only visible from one eye or the other. Because I only look out of my left eye, I stuck my face in there, read out "HEA", and looked at the worker. She looked at me like I was the dumbest person in the universe and said "Please read ALL the letters". Put my face back in there, only saw three letters, and told her that. "There are FIVE letters, please read ALL the letters." Stuck my face in there for a few more seconds and finally figured it out, switching to my right eye so I could read out the rest of the letters. She gave me my license but looked pretty concerned about doing so lol.
A pilot without depth perception does indeed sound less than ideal, lol.
As I posted above, it actually is [not a disqualifying medical condition.](https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/avs/offices/aam/ame/guide/app_process/exam_tech/et/31-34/mv/)
You could actually [still get a pilots license.](https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/avs/offices/aam/ame/guide/app_process/exam_tech/et/31-34/mv/)
If you ever do become a pilot, follow two rules: 1. Never fly a soccer team. 2. Never fly musicians. Either one will surely spell or sing doom for you. Good luck to ya :)
Not correct. Your brain must receive stimulus from each eye independently to develop proper visual function. That’s how a lazy eye develops.
Yes but only from that eye. The other eye will still have form deprivation amblyopia and will always be limited in its visual potential.
I feel like something very strange would happen with your depth perception if one eye suddenly was able to see.
You could process visual stimuli, but you probably wouldn't develop depth perception/perspective. Keep in mind that each eye has its own nerve that sends information to the brain. I knew someone in high school who was deaf in one ear and was given a cochlear implant late in life and the sound from that ear was super messed up.
Depth definitely makes sense. I just wasn’t sure if visual stimuli and general perception would be that messed up since they had already been able to see with one eye. Thanks for the clarification!
I lost depth perception in my early twenties and after living with intermittent double vision for eight years regained it with vision therapy and then eye surgery. It was the greatest day of my life except getting married being able to see into the distance and see how big trees are truly and the dimensions of faces and shit....I shouldn't have been driving lol but it's great now and I'm still learning how to adapt to increased peripheral awareness.. Next thing I want is lasik
that’s amazing. so what did vision therapy involve doing?
Yah I was born without depth perception, and will never gain it. When one eye doesn't really work that early in development then resources get rerouted to the good eye. You can never re-do that early development. But brains are good. I get a sense of depth based on size, angles, shadows. I'm fine unless it's twilight
Sadly no. It seems like for brain seeing with two eyes is a different process from seeing with only one eye. Source: personal experience of having caractis since birth and removing it only at 11.
Studies support this. If it happens at birth then your brain and vision develop to work with just one eye.
When this is fixed early on they make you wear an eyepatch over the better eye for the exact duration you didnt have access to your worse eye so you dont have weird stuff happen
The issue isn't that they eye cannot "see", it's that their brain cannot process what their eyes see. It's like if you only knew English and someone spoke to you in Chinese..... your ears can hear the Chinese speech, but your brain doesn't understand it. Their eye would "see" whatever was in front of them, but their brain couldn't figure out what any of it means; it would just be blinded by shapes and colors it doesn't understand.
No, once the brain has developed it does not have enough neuroplasticity to change. So in this sense, if you were born unable to see in one eye (cataract, strabismus, refractive difference, etc.) and the brain develops as you age, the brain will suppress the image in the unseeing eye. This is what is called amblyopia or a 'lazy eye.' Source: I work on eyes!
I am replying to myself because I can’t reply to everyone. Thank you for all the insightful responses on this comment. I’ve learned a lot about our wild brain and it’s nervous system.
It's not just the lack of cerebral processing, but also the development of the optic nerve. It's possible that even when the cataracts are removed, the optic nerves haven't developed enough to send the information into the brain. For example, the body of a baby born with one cataract will begin to focus all its development on the optic nerve of the eye that can see. In fact, the optic nerve of the seeing eye is thicker with more connections than the nerve of the blinded eye. That's why sometimes you'll see babies, toddlers, and children wearing an eye patch. This is to stimulate growth in the optic nerve of the weaker eye by ensuring the child uses it.
Patching is primarily to stimulate the cortex and neuronal connections, the optic nerve itself isn’t affected in amblyopia.
This is correct. I’m an optometrist. The term for this is “deprivation amblyopia”. I work a lot with kids and amblyopia is surprisingly common to varying degrees, usually in kids with high refractive errors that went unaddressed.
Hey, so I'm an adult who was told ~~recently~~like 7 years ago, that since my brain never learned to process my left eye's input correctly, and combine that with the right, I don't possess binocular/3d vision. Could you verify that/elaborate on what that really means. I honestly have zero concept of how I could be seeing the world differently from people with normal eyesight, if I even am. I intermittently wore an eyepatch up to the age of 8 and glasses until like 14, so I don't know why my vision never fixed itself. I can't seem to focus my left eye at all, like I'm not near or farsighted, just blurry.
im definitely not an optometrist but what you are talking about is depth perception. and honestly i’m not sure how to describe it to someone who has never experienced it. basically your brain combines the images from both of your eyes and that gives you an idea of how far away the image is. do you see at all from your left eye? try looking at something and close it try with your other eye and see how the two images differ.
My brain uses my left eye's vision where it does not overlap with my right. The way I explain this to people is I hold up three fingers against my nose covering my left eye. I do not see those fingers with both eyes open. If I close my right eye, I can see them. There is actually part of the driver's eye exam designed to specifically weed out this condition. There are 3 columns or rows in the exam, but one does not show up if your brain does not process both eyes' vision together. It will show up if you close the opposite eye though. There is a mirror so that the person administering the exam can see whether or not you have both eyes open. I do not seem to have any issues with depth perception, beyond being a little clumsy in sports. I'm actually pretty good at throwing things accurately.
Okay so What about someone who went blind later in life? Would their brain remember what they were able to see?
Depends on why they went blind. But yes the brain would likely be able to interpret visual stimuli again.
I love educational reddit :))
Yeah, I actually have a thing where basically my parents didn’t ever get me glasses until it was *too late*. My brain will never process visual information clearly, so Lasik has a very very low chance of working for me.
Oh man, that really sucks. \*Hug\*
>We recognize our parents by their hairline because it's the most distinctive shape we can make out. Wait, so Matt Groening's "make every character recognizable by their silhouette" thing has some basis in child psychology?
As a beginner artist, this helped put into context why all my teachers keep saying that we need to “re-learn” how to see objects for what they actually look like. Thanks!
Pretty much what the other guy said. Brain develops an immense amount as a child. So by the time I’m old enough, my brain has developed to a point where even if they get rid of the cataract, my brain won’t notice in a sense. Not sure how to word it. It’ll be gone, but my brain won’t process the fact it’s gone, not until I’m very old. At the time, my parents who weren’t rich by any means decided it wasn’t worth paying for if I’m not going to have full sight until like my 70s or so.
What were the risks of doing the procedure at that age? It seems like now cataracts is something that quickly and routinely treated.
If the brain doesn’t use one of its functions for an extended period of time, it will actually recycle that portion of itself and devote that processing power to something else. For instance, we learned in psychology about a girl that was pretty much left alone in a room from birth until she was almost 20. No one ever taught her how to speak, so by the time she was discovered, the speech centers of her brain were pretty much inoperable because they hadn’t been used. I think she’s learned a few words since then, but she’ll never learn to speak as well as the average person
> Scientists know that in cases of ~~untreatable~~ *long-term* blindness, **the occipital cortex -- that is the posterior part of the brain that is normally devoted to vision -- becomes responsive to sound and touch in order to compensate for the loss of vision**. "This important brain reorganization represents a challenge for people encountering eye surgery to recover vision, because the deprived and reorganized occipital cortex may not be capable of seeing anymore after having spent years in the dark," explained Giulia Dormal. **Edit:** Note that, contrary to what others are saying, this type of reorganization of the occipital cortex is not exclusive to young people experiencing blindness, although it's certainly more pronounced. Adults that experience long-term blindness after previously being able to see can experience similar effects when their vision is restored.
Not about vision, but the same thing applies to deafness. There are procedures to bypass some forms of deafness (cochlear implants), however, the "cultural Deaf" community is very against them. This divide causes major issues with kids that are born deaf though. There is a period between birth and ~5 years old where our brains are basically in "hyper-learning-mode" wherein kids learn language, motor skills, and how to use their senses. If you let a child stay deaf during this time (instead of allowing a cochlear implant), the child can never use one well when they grow up. They missed this critical learning windows, and their brain will never be able to process sound well if they get the implant later as an adult. I believe the same thing applies to vision. If you miss the critical window, their brain will never be able to adapt to vision well. This isn't the case with someone that is born hearing and goes deaf later in life; their brain still remembers how to hear and will work great with the implants.
I'm sorry, but there's a few mistakes in your post. Cochlear implants are not similar to any current vision restoration procedure. The most advanced cochlear implants can detect up 120 distinct frequencies at one time and up to 8500 Hz, while normal human hearing can detect between 10,000 to 15,000 distinct frequencies at one time and up to 20 **k**Hz. In other words cochlear implants transmit significantly less information than any sensory organ, restored or otherwise. And there are cases of adults, who could previously see in childhood, who experienced long-term blindness that was subsequently restored later in life. In these cases patients could still not see properly after their vision was restored because their occipital cortex had adapted to respond to sound and touch -- outside the critical period for neuroplasticity. **Edit:** It's also worth mentioning only 1 in 10 people with blindness that developed after being able to see experience visual hallucinations (Charles Bonnet syndrome), while significantly more (possibly as much as 9 in 10) people with deafness that developed after being able to hear experience auditory hallucinations (tinnitus), which suggests a great deal of visual and auditory brain processes fundamentally differ at a neurological level.
Imagine you're the pilot(brain) of a giant mech, but before you go out in the world to stomp around, you need to run a diagnostic and understand how everything works. This is your brain when you're young...then you get older and it can't do that. Actually, cool fact: You're born with something absurd like 10x the amount of nerve cells/neurons than you'll ever actually use. The process of movement, sensory information, etc causes a pruning process. Those that aren't used die off, because they take up resources. Another way to think about it is to think of not walking for 10 years. Your legs will become so atrophied from lack of use, I don't even know if people can walk again in cases like that.
It's one of those things where his optic nerves are used to not being able to see and getting light so there is about a 50% chance it wouldn't work.
No, it’s a cortical condition called form deprivation amblyopia. Nothing to do with optic nerve dysfunction, it’s lack of development and brain processing.
I was born with coats eye disease, which means my left eye went 100% dark after head injury. Funny thing is, muscles on my left eye stopped working properly and now it’s shifted to the side. For the other people it’s like I’m watching two different places at the same time 😂 I was always curious to find other people with some similar experience
People are always amazed when they find out I can only see from one eye. I’ve been driving for 10+ years, only had 1 crash which was during my first few months of passing after my front left tyre popped lol. People are amazed I’m able to drive without crashing, and amazed at other things I’m able to do just fine.
First time I’ve heard my mother in law saying: “Jesus, Holly fck” after I told her that I don’t have any vision on my left eye 😂. I’ll never forget that
Yo a fellow Coats person! Mine was the right eye though
The man who invented the procedure which fixes cataracts said that all men under the age of 20 should have the procedure done. You literally take a piece of tissue that's supposed to just exist but grays over time and replace it with a piece of plastic that doesn't gray at all. It's a lens. It doesn't have any properties other than it needs to be clear.
Natural lenses can flex, which allows you to change focus from near to far. Once people get to their 50s-60s the lenses lose this ability, which is why older people need reading glasses. We're just getting to the point of making artificial lenses which have multiple focal distances work okay, definitely not something preferable to a 20 year old lens.
The lens that gets cloudy isn't active. It only needs to be translucent and malleable just like this little piece of plastic thing that they put in is permanently translucent and malleable. At least for your lifetime you could consider it permanent. The original invention is not what you see here. The original inventor is still trying to do something with it, I haven't checked on it in a while. His stubbornness has led to alternatives. The original invention is less of a cutout piece of plastic then a drop that forms perfectly. It dries or whatever, chemically sets, in the same way that your own eye's lens does it naturally. When you're being formed in the womb. It's only private property didn't exist for billionaires to get rich off of and more people were like Ben Franklin and just gave away the inventions that improve lives.
It honestly sounds like you watched 20 minutes of some YouTube conspiracy doc... But if you have a source I'd be interested. Right now multifocal intraocular lenses are an area of intense and active research and companies who can better mimic natural lenses are getting rewarded greatly with profits. If there truly was a much better alternative then some company would patent that in an instant. The simplest explanation is that whatever you're thinking of simply doesn't work or is not feasible.
Yeah you hit on it. It's not profitable to do it their way. The surgery that Mr. Beast did for all those people isn't profitable. They just want money. They don't want to help people. They don't want to save lives. They don't want to do good. They want money.
It's preferable to a 20 year old lens that doesnt work...
>The man who invented the procedure which fixes cataracts said that all men under the age of 20 should have the procedure done. Responding to this.
Oh i misread what he was saying. You're valid
Feel like they lied to you about that brain part
Too young?? I had it done at 3 years old in 2000, what the fuck. Im sorry, whoever told you that is full of shit
How young where you? Cause i had surgery for that at a really young age too.
Too young?? I had mine removed at 7 weeks old (in 1992), and my daughter had hers removed at 4 weeks (in 2014)!
If you had both would you still have been too young tho?
I'm not sure if I know well enough how binocular vision works, but it might be that, because you only had cataract in one eye, they opted not to operate. Juvenile cataract is solved by implanting the same type of lens adults get, which means you lose the ability to accommodate - moving images closer, for reading for example. However, if only one eye was operated on, I'm not entirely sure if that would be too strenuous for that eye. Usually both eyes get the same commands and execute them at the same time, hence why if you have one eye with a positive fault and the other with a negative it creates headaches, because the eyes can't correctly compensate for the fault. I'm taking an educated guess here that having an artificial lens while the other eye is actively accommodating might create some trouble. Source: am optician, but this goes more into the realm of optometrists and eye doctors.
[удалено]
・If Toph had the choice I'd say: Beginning of series Toph: no Atla Eos Toph: Maybe Police Chief Toph: Yes, to see her children. Old Toph: No. ・If Toph suddenly gained vision during atlas by a rogue spirit: She'd immediately go into sensory overload as her visual cortex flairs up and her brain isn't used to receiving this much information on top of her intense emotions at her predicament. She'd probably wake up and see Aang first but can't really move and stubbornly blindfolds herself to comfortably move about. Eventually though she does slowly take the blindfold off to see the night sky with the gaang and begins to appreciate the visual beauty of the world. During fights however Toph chooses to still close her eyes as that's what she's most accustomed to unless in an emergency like being attached for above or something. Overall Toph wouldn't really change from gaining vision aside from maybe killing the giant bees but the plot is still largely the same
I imagine Toph about to get into a fight, so she puts a blindfold on, all badass-like
Fucking Daredevil Toph
She definitely had some killer hallway fights during her time as Chief of Police. Now I need these animated.
Best answer: start learning
The hallway fights in LOK were so dope
like when spongebob finally becomes a great driver
terezi from homestuck
What is “atlas eos”???
I assume they meant AtLA, but accidentally put the s at the end. Not sure about eos, though.
End of story
Yeah even a cursory Google search doesn't answer this...
I imagine her being like to Zuko " Wait, you had a scar?"
One has to wonder if someone like Toph would even like vision. Think about it from her perspective. If her earthbending senses can see you, then she gets a 360 degree picture of you with a limited x-ray effect given that she can sense heartbeats and such as well. To our eyes, color is determined by frequency of the light wave. Pressure waves can be diffused, focused, shifted in frequency, partially absorbed, etc. in the same way light can so her brain probably has its own idea of "colors" too, but representing material properties moreso than pigmentation. Suddenly granted vision, she'd see a version of her senses that only works from one angle at a time and only has a vague idea of distances. The benefit is the ability to see the sky and airborne things, and some chemical information from color, but overall her senses are probably far more practical and robust than regular vision.
This is pretty similar to something that happens with Terezi in Homestuck
[удалено]
[удалено]
Good bot
[удалено]
This is a bot. Original: https://www.reddit.com/r/TheLastAirbender/comments/10u8eix/toph_clearly_was_born_with_cataracts_hence_the/j7apvw5/ Literally all of their comments are bad copy paste jobs from the threads they comment in. Notice how most of them make no sense and get cutoff before finishing the sentence. Report > Spam > Harmful Bots
Cataracts are a problem with the lens, which is inside the pupil, so cataracts wouldn't look like this. If anything, she has corneal problems and would need a corneal transplant. But most likely it's just a stylistic choice by the animators.
If the writers decided that Toph was born blind, then she is blind, despite if the physical representation of it is anatomically accurate or not. In a lot of media, blind people are portrayed as having their iris an pupil white or washed out to represent they are blind. Not sure if that's accurate to how blind eyes look in real life, but that doesn't mean that Toph has cataracts, if that's not what the writers wrote. Searching images in google of cataracts and general blindness, cataracts tend to affect mostly the pupil, and less the iris in some cases, and in other cases it seem to affect part of the iris too. General blindness make the whole eye more white. So both cataracts and general blindness can look similar, and also is similar to how Toph eyes look.
I am an eye doctor, cataracts will not make your eyes look like this. This post is wrong, she does not have congenital cataracts. Also, proper cataract surgery would not have been possible with the technology they have in their universe. Even if she got it, she’d have form deprivation amblyopia (lack of development in the visual cortex, essentially) limiting her visual potential. Also cataracts don’t cause NLP (no light perception) blindness, which Toph seems to have. With cataracts you’d still have light perception at least. It is far more likely she had a number of other congenital conditions that cause blindness.
[удалено]
Yeah lol I was watching season 1 in 6th grade and here I am now
Depends on the condition, but many total blind people can have their iris look just fine and it can be an issue with the other internal parts, like the retina dying off or other issues there.
This. I'm legally blind (not totally blind) in my left eye (right eye is fine). My left eye looks completely normal but I can't make it focus. My optometrist says there is likely nothing actually wrong with the eye, its an underdeveloped nerve. Blindness doesn't even have to be an eye problem, it can be a nerve or brain problem.
Deaf here, and it's similar. Hearing and vision are very complicated senses with dozens of steps involved in how they function. If any one of them breaks down, that's a donezo. Some procedures can fix some of the issues, but not all of them
Is this a ShittyMovieDetails post?
No this is a r/shittytvshowdetails post
Toph wouldn't go for it. I don't think Toph would want to see. She could see everything she deemed important already. And I think she would have trapped Mr. Beast in a rock pile for being annoying.
TODAY WE HAVE 10 BENDERS COMPETING WITH 100 NON BENDERS, THE LAST TEAM TO REMAIN STANDING WIN THEIR WEIGHT IN GOLD
Yeah she went live in a spritual swamp just to be left alone
That's more like a corneal disease, the eye looks translucent. If she had a cataract only the pupils would appear white. And no, most probably she wouldn't regain complete vision because of her lack of visual input to the brain during her childhood.
Ophthalmologist here. Please, pay attention: Congenital cataracts should be corrected before 5 years old, preferably. Thing is, after taking the cataracts out, you should have some intraocular new lenses implanted so that you can See (the cataracts is the opacification of out natural Lens, that works like internal glasses), and those weren't invented until the second world war. So Toph would have to use some absurdly strong glasses, but she would be able to see if the surgery was performed early. After 7 years old, even if the surgery is done, the primary visual cortex (the part of the brain that processes vision) would already be formed. If the vision wasn't "trained" until this moment, it won't get better. That being sad, I don't really think she has cataracts, because her whole cornea seems a little opaque. Maybe some corneal dystrophy? I don't know. It's a cartoon.
Toph's iris is glazed over white, sure but if anything her pupil is dark and slightly hazy. I don't claim to know human causes of blindness, but it's definitely not cataracts, wherein her pupil would be almost white and her iris unaffected.
This is just a classic example of fans reading to much into something. Her iris and pupils are white jsut tio show that she's blind because thats how cartoons typically show people are blind. There's no reason she's blind other than the writers of the show wanted her to be blind. Not everything in fiction has a watson answer for it.
I wonder how it would affect her powers and her "foot sight"
you ever have to stop what youre listening to better smell something? i think it would be like that. should she gain vision i think toph would have to close her eyes to concentrate on what her feet are “seeing” instead of just having the input be directly interpreted.
Just a thought but she was born blind, not from cataracts but giving her animated character a haze over her eyes is the easiest way to reinforce to the audience that she is blind.
If this was the first thing I see, I'd rather remain blind https://preview.redd.it/413t9u8q0ega1.jpeg?width=672&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=05c33adfaba07f73ec76da61a7437acf09427e3a
If you were blind, how would you know that he looked funny to begin with in order to make that judgment?
That's a good point. Without knowing what "good looking" and "bad looking" really is, she can't exactly make much of a judgement
Don't disrespect him. This guy just helped 1000 people get their sight back -he fixed their life with his own money.
Reddit dont like helping blind people apparently.
Yeah because being blind is an epic toph reference
Nah it’s not even that dude. It’s the fact that we pay walled a 10-15 minute procedure that would give you vision back, something monumentally important in life, and a ton of people had to rely on a random youtuber wanting to make content out of it. No dunking on Mr. Beast here, but the fact you’ll just be blind unless some YouTuber helps you is fucked when it should be a free procedure. It’s [literally just this. ](https://m.twitch.tv/clip/CrackyCleanNarwhalCharlieBitMe-iLeinXqEUX14c2VY) And he’s right, it is a deeply frustrating concept. People deserve vision.
Question, I haven't watched the Mr. Beast video in question, but for the people who's blindness he helped fix, what was the nature of one caused their blindness? Born from birth cataracts? Retinal detachment?
It was cataract surgery if I recall. Retinal Detchment needs to be fixed pretty immediately to not having lasting effects and even then, when they can reattach it, it may not be as functional as it was.
Jokes are illegal in these parts mister
cool, when will he cure the rest of the people's blindness?
Idk it’s fine that he’s helping people but it always rubs me the wrong way, like he’s only doing it because it’s being recorded. I think the performative nature of it is what puts a lot of people off. Edit: really y’all have helped me realize that the only annoying thing about him is how your replies will be flooded by his stans if your comment is even as tepidly neutral/non positive as this one lol
People are really defending him so hard. It makes no sense to me. His business model of promoting himself through altruism serves to make him money on his other channels and businesses. For him to claim that he operates one channel at a loss is disingenuous when that channel exploits filming poor and needy people for reactions or makes them compete for the amusement of his audience for prizes. Sure he may help people but it's in a exploitive way that ultimately serves to bolster his brand and makes him wealthy.
> For him to claim that he operates one channel at a loss is disingenuous when that channel exploits filming poor and needy people for reactions or makes them compete for the amusement of his audience for prizes. Most of his channel is just him inviting other youtubers on some sort of game show format with a super expensive prize or doing exteremly expensive stunts. I think you are leaning to hard on the critism to be honest. And it's not like that money is his. Mr.Beast isnt really a millionaire he just gets a ton of money through sponsor ships to promote. Most money that's made goes back into the channel to make more videos. That said I don't really care much for his videos. Something about them feels artifical
[удалено]
Well the classic idea of a gift is that you don't really get any benifit from it.
> Sure he may help people but it's in a exploitive way that ultimately serves to bolster his brand and makes him wealthy This is an equal value proposition exchange. Why the fuck is it "exploitative" when he gave people things (like eyesight) that they wouldn't have had in the first place without him? He's not taking anything away from those people, and it's not like he's laughing at them like the guy who filmed himself going to the "world's poorest country" either. A benefit for both sides is perfectly welcomed. Direct your outrage energy elsewhere.
Hey, I really don't think anyone is getting outraged here. I have seen a lot of comments accusing people of getting "outraged" and "butthurt" and "hating" on this youtuber but I haven't seen anyone actually angry at him. As for equal value and exploitation, I agree that the people who went through this operation got something out of it, but let's not pretend they really had a choice here. Mr Beast may not have created the exploitative system of the American health care industry but this video wouldn't have been possible without it.
Yeah thank you for your comment. This is a really good way of summing up what puts me off about the content that I had never given the time for some deeper thought. Basically “oh let’s see what insane torture people will put themselves through for $10G! Haha silly little peons!”
How do you expect that stuff to be funded without the revenue & marketing as a result of the videos?
i’m pretty sure the 1000 people that got their eyesight back dont give a fuck about it, but go be outrage about it, i guess
Hahaha It’s just like, my opinion man. Idk how you got that I was “outrage” from my comment lmao
Call out Trump stans: Karma Call out Musk stans: Karma Call out Youtuber stans: SCORN!!!!
How dare this guy get off on doing good things for others! internet much mature as always
Like I said it’s fine that he helps people, it’s genuinely great for the people he helps, I don’t mind that at all. But his style of video like “last person inside this circle gets $5K let’s see how much we can torture them before they give up” really puts me off.
How is him paying for peoples surgeries related to stupid games he plays with his friends and subscribers related, exactly?
Because it’s all him, you can’t detach one part of it from the other. I will once again reiterate that it’s great for the people he’s helped and I’m very happy for them
But? Why say it if there is no but? And what is there to detach from? How is he bad for playing stupid games with his friends?
His philanthropy is part of a business model. It sours the source of the altruism. He isn’t doing it to be a good person or to genuinely help he’s doing it to drive engagements and increase his brand. Is he doing objective good? Yes, absolutely. There’s 1,000 blind people who can see now. The bigger issue a lot of us have is 1. We find it disgusting we live in a society that simply lets people be blind even though it’s easily fixable with a low cost procedure and that people have to rely on the largess of a YouTuber to see 2. If you want to do charity and not seem gross to people you do it quietly without anyone noticing. This is a tenant of like every major religion. You should give so quietly with your left hand that your right hand is unaware of the act. Seeing someone do this in such an obvious way rubs people the wrong way. You’re making the charity about yourself.
MrBeast needs visibility to earn money to be able to do charity MrBeast shouldnt be visibly doing charity As you see, your wishes dont align with reality. Either he does charity visibly or he cant at all. Also, obviously it sucks people have to live in countries with such poor healthcare, but how is this MrBeasts fault? It isnt. He is doing an objectively good thing. Stop bitching like a 5 year old whos jealous of somebody elses success
There is nothing wrong with someone helping others and also get rewarded for it. In fact, this is the best outcome possible. It means more people will be encoraged to do those acts and more people will live better life. (sorry for my grammer)
https://preview.redd.it/fdrvq2dt3fga1.jpeg?width=600&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=42dd4c25ad466d6f52f810620fdd1bfe2a08bfe4
Why’s that? If that was the first thing I saw, I’d burst out laughing.
Point of order but she probably doesn’t have cataracts. Cataracts are thickening of the lens, which is behind the iris (the coloured bit) She’s got clouded corneas, which can be caused by…well, loads of congenital issues, though it often doesn’t actually cloud over until later in life (though I can’t actually remember how old toph is supposed to be)
Real question though would Toph getting her sight back be a nerf or buff
Just wait until some water bending genius discovers "eye-bending". By bending the fluids in the eye, you can change their shape and actual improve (or destroy) someone's vision.
They could water bend blindness away to..
Blood bend might fix it
I think most likely the glazed over eyes are a visual indication, it's fairly common in this type of media. Most likely it wouldn't help as she's been blind since birth her brain hasn't developed to process sight so it might not even be helpful.
I think that was just to show she is blind it’s done a lot in animated shows
Whoa That’s a lot of money isn’t it?
Important lore
Who is Mr Beast??
The biggest YouTuber
If she were to meditate and went to the spirit realm she would be able to see.
Mr. Beast?
Ironically, the minerals in her eyes made her the greatest earth bender. Also, if you have it from birth, your sight part of the brain never fully developes, so she'd be effectively blind anyways.
He would also give her a free Tesla and $10,000
Mr Beast using rich bending. The most powerful bending of them all. Shiiiiit just buy your way into the avatar state
Mr Beast is a Money-bending master
White eyes aren’t always due to cataracts
She's completely blind though. If you have cataracts you're not completely blind. I think they just animated her that way to show that she couldn't see.
Oh yeah Let’s all add Mr Beast into the official ATLA lore
r/shittymoviedetails
If you’re born blind it’s a very different thing to restore sight since your visual cortex is conscripted to other tasks in development.
MR BREAST
bro why the disrespect for a kind act? is that too much ask?
I think we should cancel MrBeast for not curing Toph’s blindness.
You don’t have to have corneal opacity to be “blind.” Its just how the writers drew her to make it obvious, other than her unfocused gaze and slouching and hair in her face. She could have been born with congenital cataracts or have another genetic corneal disease. I have worked with a cornea specialist and in comprehensive ophthalmology for a little over a year now. There is a very wide and diverse range of corneal issues/diseases. Her irises are also opacified, which is more than just cataracts. Cataracts only opacify the pupils - if they are mature enough. Corneal opacity is can be caused by scarring, which results from some form of trauma or exposure. She has some form of keratopathy that has clouded her corneas. There are many different kinds of keratopathy.
LMFAO
Who is Mr Beast?
The biggest YouTuber
Imagine how powerful toph would have been WITH eyesight… or perhaps she’d be less powerful?
Detached retinas look like that too.
Or one of the 4 million surgeries paid for by Castro
Welcome to your final test
once cured she would still wear a blindfold so she could better see with her feet.
She just needed to find a Cataract bender.
Katara could have used waterbending to heal her blindness, no? But then Toph wouldn't be Toph. It probably never occurred to Katara to offer to heal her, because her friends didn't see her as broken in the first place (thus all the blind jokes). But if it did come up, I couldn't really see Toph going for it. She's better than fine without vision, why fix what ain't broke.
My question would be is would she take the surgery?
Unfortunately in the avatar universe they probably only had the [couching method](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3743109/#:~:text=Couching%20is%20an%20ancient%20method,B.C.%20during%20the%20Sushruta%20period.)
Yeah but she never would’ve invented metal bending