Talk:Cortical blindness

Merge with CVI?

Why has it been suggested that Cortical visual impairment be merged into this stub article? As far as I understand, CVI is not the same thing as cortical blindness (and anyway "blindness" conveys the idea of being totally blind, which a lot of CVI people are not).

If you want to merge, perhaps it would be better to create an article for Neurological visual impairment (NVI), and merge both CVI and Cortical Blindness into NVI? Silas S. Brown (talk) 19:47, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Some other-language wikipedias have NVI/CVI articles/stubs now, so it makes more sense to keep with the CVI or NVI heading. 128.232.254.104 (talk) 12:52, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

• Disagree (as far as merging goes, that is...) Having recently recovered around 95% of my vision after occipital lobe stroke-induced cortical blindness, I can say with certainty (from my own experience and the input of two neurologists) that cortical blindness is indeed blindness and not merely "visual impairment". The first 36-48 hours following my stroke, I could not count fingers, I could not read, I developed very low blood sugar because I could not see the food on the delivered tray, and the only reason I knew a person was in front of me was that something was blocking the light in that general direction. Even two weeks out, when my brain had begun relearning how to interpret the eye's signals, I found myself completely unable to see a breakfast plate consisting of a white unshelled hard-boiled egg with white untoasted bread on a white styrofoam plate with white plasticware sitting on a white styrofoam tray because there was virtually no contrast for my brain to identify separate objects present. If this article should be merged with anything, try NVI instead. Scarletsmith (talk) 17:14, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
• This may be 9 years old, but I would agree based on the fact that blindness redirects to visual impairment. SUM1 (talk) 03:38, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

Should "eclipse blindness" redirect here?

I have no expertise in the subject matter but came to wikipedia searching for "eclipse blindness" - which redirected to this page.

After reading an article at NASA, http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEhelp/safety2.html, I wondered if I could find any numbers or at least some documented cases, as I see many people claiming it is just a myth that there is any danger going blind from looking at the sun (at least unless one forces oneself to do so even when it's very uncomfortable, in contradiction to what the NASA article claims, namely that even when visible light appears dim and there is no pain one can still literally *cook* one's retina, leading to permanent retinal damage, including complete blindness).

Clearly at least one of wikipedia or NASA is wrong here, though I can't say which one. According to NASA, eclipse blindness has to do with damaging the retina, but according to wikipedia it is to do with the cortex and thus the processing of visual information.

I also think eclipse blindness deserves if not it's own page then at least some mention, whether or not it is true that looking at eclipses injures a lot of people. There must be many more than me who want to get information about it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.203.21.189 (talk) 20:53, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Cortical blindness. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121110031938/http://hadley.edu/SeminarDownload/Cortical_Visual%20Impairment_and_Blindness-PPT-Hadley.ppt to http://www.hadley.edu/SeminarDownload/Cortical_Visual%20Impairment_and_Blindness-PPT-Hadley.ppt
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120415080815/http://www.aph.org/cvi/define.html to http://www.aph.org/cvi/define.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:13, 13 August 2017 (UTC)