Pogue’s Posts Blog: Glasses That Solve Colorblindness, for a Big Price Tag

A few weeks back, I wrote about special lenses that were developed to give doctors “a clearer view of veins and vasculature, bruising, cyanosis, pallor, rashes, erythema, and other variations in blood O2 level, and concentration,” especially in bright light.

But these lenses turned out to have an unintended side effect: they “may cure red-green colorblindness.”

I’m severely red-green colorblind, so I was eager to try these $300 lenses. Turns out they didn’t help me; the company said that my colorblindness is too severe. They have helped many others, though (their Amazon reviews makes that clear).

After my column appeared, I heard from another company that makes color-enhancing glasses â€" this time, specifically for red-green colorblind folks. The company’s called EnChroma, and the EnChroma Cx sunglasses are a heartbeat-skipping $600 a pair.

“Our lenses are specifically designed to address color blindness,” the company wrote to me, “and utilize a 100+ layer dielectric coating we engineered for this precise purpose by keeping the physiology of the eyes of colorblind people in mind.”

I asked to try out a pair. (You can, too: there’s a 30-day money-back guarantee.)

To begin, you figure out which kind of colorblindness you have â€" Protan or Deutan â€" by taking the test at enchroma.com. Turns out I have something called Strong Protan. (“Protanomaly is a type of red-green color vision deficiency related to a genetic anomaly of the L-cone (i.e. the red cone).”) I’d never heard of it, but whatever.

The glasses themselves look like high-end mirrored sunglasses (actually, several styles are available). They come in a sleek, compact case. I was surprised to read some of the disclaimers. First, they’re sunglasses. They don’t work indoors unless the light is very bright. Second, they’re not designed for use with a computer screen.

And, weirdly enough, these glasses won’t help you pass the standard Ishihara colorblindness test, the ones where you try to see a number composed of hundreds of dots in a circular test pattern. I still failed that test. You can read much, much more about the fine print and the scientific basis here.

In any case, I took them outside on a sunny day â€" and was floored. I mean, I had a visceral reaction to what I saw.

Colors I see just fine â€" blues, yellows, oranges â€" looked exactly the same. But all of a sudden, greens and reds looked richer. It’s almost impossible to describe in words. In fact, it’s impossible for normal-vision people to understand, even by wearing them, because they don’t see anything different with the EnChroma glasses on!

But an old brown Vermont barn roof was revealed, quite clearly, to be salmon red. Yards full of leafy trees and plants suddenly had different shades of green. Everywhere I looked, desaturated or barely discernible red things were popping.

There was a weird sensation of seeing red and green areas in the periphery of my vision.

It was a little like the Claritin TV commercials, where you’re seeing a nature scene, and then they “peel away” what is revealed to be a subtly milky film over the camera lens, making the image much richer and more saturated.

The highlight came on Day 4 of my tests, when my kids discovered a rainbow arcing across the sky, pointing and exclaiming. I looked. With my own eyes, I could barely see it. Maybe there was a soft arc of yellow, but that was it.

Then I put on the glasses. Unbelievable! Now I saw two entire additional color bands, above and below the yellow arc. It was suddenly a complete rainbow. I don’t mind admitting, I felt a surge of emotion. It was like a peek into a world I knew existed, but had never been allowed to see.

My mind raced. Is this what normal people see all the time? Until eye-transplant surgery becomes cheap and commonplace, you and I will never know.

So would I pay $600 for these glasses?

The truth is, I don’t consider colorblindness much of a handicap. When I was growing up, my mom had to help me match my clothes. People had to help me choose the right color paint in art class in school.

But traffic lights, contrary to popular myth, aren’t a problem. The bottom one appears white to me, but so what? I still know that “bottom light” means “go.” A few times a year, someone will say, “What, you can’t see that reddish area?” (Or, somewhat uselessly: “What color does grass look to you?” Uh…)

No, I’ll never grow up to be an interior designer or house painter. I review cameras, of course, but I always have non-colorblind people look over the photos before I make any comments about their color.

So for me, a guy whose career, conversation and clothing don’t depend on accurate identification of color names, $600 is too steep.

But these glasses really do work. They clearly help you distinguish colors, detect reds and greens, and restore the richness of the world you’ve been missing. They’ve brought me at least a few moments of genuine, breath-catching wonder. And it’s joyous to know that if it’s ever important enough, somewhere out there, I can lay my hands on an item that will let me see the real world of color.

Dean to Speak at Iowa Labor Conference

Howard Dean is returning to Iowa, the birthplace of his innovative 2004 presidential campaign â€" and the site of his amplified death wail.

Mr. Dean’s main topic will not be the White House, but rather the state house, according to an aide at Democracy for America, the group the former Vermont governor founded after his failed bid for the Democratic presidential nomination. Mr. Dean plans to speak at the Iowa Federation of Labor convention in Altoona on Aug. 21 about his group’s effort to elect more Democrats to state legislatures.

The group’s “Purple to Blue” campaign has focused on five races in Virginia this year, but will expand to other states in 2014.

Senator Tom Harkin, Democrat of Iowa, who endorsed Mr. Dean’s campaign almost 10 years ago, encouraged him to speak at the labor convention, according to the aide. Next month, at his annual steak fry, Mr. Harkin will host another former â€" and possibly future â€" Democratic candidate, Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr.

Though Mr. Dean has been promoting Democracy for America’s efforts, he does not officially lead the organization he founded. That job belongs to his brother, Jim.

A former chairman of the Democratic National Committee, Mr. Dean now works as a part-time consultant on health care, alternative energy and grass-roots politics. So he surely knows that, while he might be looking down the ballot in his speeches, a trip to Iowa will prompt chatter about his aspirations for the top of the ticket â€" and draw national attention to a state labor event.

Bipartisan Group Offers Recommendations on Immigration Overhaul

The Bipartisan Policy Center’s immigration task force released a set of recommendations on Thursday for an overhaul of the nation’s immigration laws and called on members of Congress to participate in a civil discussion aimed at finding areas of consensus.

“We should refrain from demonizing individuals or organizations for positions that may not align directly with either our views or our opinions on the best method for resolving these important matters,” the center wrote in a statement Thursday. “Instead, we encourage a respectful dialogue that acknowledges these concerns and moves forward to find common ground.”

In an op-ed article in Politico written by the task force’s four co-chairmen â€" Haley Barbour, the former Republican governor of Mississippi; Henry Cisneros, a housing secretary under President Bill Clinton; Edward G. Rendell, the former Democratic governor of Pennsylvania; and Condoleezza Rice, a secretary of state under President George W. Bush â€" they said they saw “real progress” on the issue of repairing the nation’s immigration system, in an otherwise “seemingly gridlocked” Congress.

“We have been encouraged by the constructive debate that has occurred around immigration reform,” the task force wrote. “As the debate continues, we must avoid making the perfect the enemy of the good: Our current system is fundamentally flawed and broken. If we can focus on where there is agreement and then work conscientiously to narrow our differences, then real and durable reform is possible.”

The task force also outlined four guiding principles: controlling the flow of unauthorized immigration, offering a pathway for legalization and citizenship, creating a strong system to encourage and promote legal immigration, and recognizing the positive economic impacts of overhauling the nation’s immigration laws.

“Traditionally, August is a period where members go home and have discussions with constituents, and it’s a time for reflection and debate all across the country,” Michael Chertoff, a Homeland Security secretary under Mr. Bush and a task force member, said on a conference call Thursday. The group’s goal, he added, is to “frame the issues, demonstrate that there is a path forward that should address the major concerns raised and can do it in a way that appeals to a broad spectrum of people.”

Though the immigration bill that recently passed the Senate devotes billions of dollars to border security, the task force called for a “scientifically valid set of measures that are audited by an independent commission,” in order to help stanch the flow of illegal immigrants and ensure that the government is held accountable for the security of the nation’s borders.

On the question of legalization and a path to citizenship for the 11 million undocumented immigrants in the country, the task force recommended an earned path to citizenship for immigrants willing to pay all fines and penalties and pass a criminal background check. The task force also said that “undocumented immigrants should not be forced to choose between a green card and leaving the country,” but added, “Automatic citizenship should not be the default position.”

Though the group’s recommendations largely align with the immigration legislation that already passed the Senate, which includes a 13-year path to citizenship, they seem to go a bit further than some of the alternatives being considered in the Republican-controlled House, where many conservative members are hesitant to offer any path to legalization.

After noting that he was probably the “most conservative” voice on the conference call, Mr. Barbour said, “I believe if there is a rigorous path to citizenship, that does have rigorous requirements, I am comfortable with it.”