It is of course conclusive evidence against a genetic cause for myopia that the same person can have entirely different ocular characteristics in different personalities.
It’s an interesting topic. I wonder if refractive state is kind of like slouching vs standing up straight. Somebody with good habits who has learned good posture and works out might stand up straight most of the time. His identical twin (raised differently) might habitually slouch.
Clearing up blur as a habit may lead to good outcomes in myopia, just like someone who habitually cleans out his refrigerator probably doesn’t have a lot of rotten food there vs someone who waits until the bad smell is unbearable and the neighbors complain.
It wouldn’t surprise me too much if a big part of “refractive state” boils down to personal style more than genes or innate physical characteristics. If you stare at the ground or a screen all the time and never look off into the distance, it probably doesn’t help your distance vision any.
If they measured using objective means, it’s indeed can be qualified as paranormal, either it’s a supernatural event, or body can achieve such a plasticity. I believe demon possesion exists, this might be the case as well. Also as equipment personnel can create 2 diopter astigmatism and remove it (there were such studies)
Although autorefractors themself could have MPD They show what I wish, or what they wish, but not what I want. For example, brand new one showed (opto allowed for free instead of more than usual fee), cornea astigmatism of -2.5 and -2.0; and actual -2 and -1 (with sphere much lower). I am happy to see it in case I get the same using lenses but i can’t explain this, why they show lower results for me but for no one else. I believe in what other showed: -2 and -1.5 cornea cyl, -2.5 and -1.25 actual, it’s the same i get using cm. I am not exiting topic, I just say the machines can produce quite different results in each run and they can vary depening on brand/instance. Also individuals with psychical disorders can use accommodation hence the results will be very different.
I don’t look into the screen that much (20/20/20 is quite irrelevant if there are prisms although I still do efforts to incorporate it); my life is free from hyperopic defocus, I almost never use convergence (prism lenses eliminate the need) and accommodation (I do this occasionally, e.g. to take a photo, to pull off plants, to do kitchen work). Although I don’t improve at all. So for me it’s a bit hard to believe such a plasticity exists.