Enchroma Glasses Scam or Legit? Everything You Need to Know

  • Post author:
  • Post published:December 10, 2023
  • Post category:Reviews

Colorblindness is an incurable medical condition that affects millions of people around the world. As someone who lives with Deuteranopia (red-green color blindness), I’ve always been curious about technologies claiming to help people like me see color in new ways.

However, after years of following the story, it’s clear that one company in particular – Enchroma – has misled consumers through deceptive marketing practices amounting to what can only be described as a scam.

In this no-holds-barred exposé, I’m pulling back the curtain on Enchroma and the “colorblind glasses” industry as a whole to help you make an informed decision. By the end, you’ll understand why these products don’t live up to the hype and how you can protect yourself from similar scams in the future.

Let’s get started!

How the Enchroma Glasses Scam Began

The colorblind glasses phenomenon first emerged in 2007 when Enchroma was founded by three MIT graduates – two chemists and an optometrist. Their goal was to create tinted lenses that could improve color perception for those with red-green color vision deficiencies like myself.

While the science seemed promising in theory, Enchroma struggled to gain traction at first. That all changed in 2015 when they partnered with paint manufacturer PPG to launch a viral marketing campaign called “Seeing Is Believing.”

Through emotional online videos showcasing “reactions” to trying Enchroma glasses, the campaign went mega-viral, racking up hundreds of millions of views across social media platforms. The tearful testimonials sparked a phenomenon – overnight, Enchroma glasses became a best-selling product basically selling themselves through word-of-mouth.

Or so it seemed…

Understanding Color Vision Deficiencies

Before diving deeper, it’s important to have a basic scientific understanding of what it means to be colorblind and why Enchroma’s claims were always dubious.

The three main types of colorblindness affect how the red, green, and blue cone photoreceptors in the retina process wavelengths of light:

  • Deuteranopia (red-green deficiency): Most common type. Green and red appear similar shades.
  • Protanopia: Red and green confused, but blue perceived normally.
  • Tritanopia: Blue and yellow appear similar, but red and green perceived normally.

Importantly, colorblindness is not complete color blindness – it’s a partial deficiency that varies from mild to severe. We see some colors normally and can usually distinguish primary shades like red, yellow, blue even if confusing subtle tones between them.

What Enchroma claimed – that their glasses could make colorblind people see completely new colors for the first time – went against decades of visual science research. Color vision is set by the composition of retinal cones, not correctable with simple lens filters. At best, Enchroma could only enhance existing color perception marginally in certain lighting conditions.

Now let’s explore the evidence that Enchroma went way beyond science with misleading marketing and outright scams…

The Videos Don’t Add Up

One of the first red flags was analyzing those viral “reaction” videos more closely. While a few seemed genuinely emotional people finally having labels for subtle colors they’d never identified before, many just didn’t make logical sense.

For example, in several the newly “cured” colorblind individuals instantly named a array of colored objects perfectly upon putting the glasses on for the first time. That defied reality, as someone seeing colors for the first time wouldn’t immediately associate names and meanings.

ALSO READ:  Is Itinerade Scam or Legit? Uncovering the Truth (Beware)

There was also a suspicious lack of any negative reactions in these curated videos despite how variable people’s vision and experience of color is. Enchroma maintained their glasses were a “life-changing cure” that worked for most, which we now know is false based on studies and user reviews.

But it got even more dubious when investigative journalists discovered specific videos were outright fabrications. In one that ended up promoted on Enchroma’s own marketing website, a child was given colored balloons wrongly labeled so he could seem to suddenly identify them accurately with the glasses. All staged.

This level of deceptive, crafted marketing was unnerving yet highly effective at selling the romance of a fairytale cure, regardless of the science. The videos became the primary driver of sales rather than the actual product itself and vision outcomes.

Confirmation Bias Meets Poor Transparency

Of course, Enchroma didn’t want any negative feedback interfering with their multi-million dollar business model. So they took steps to control the narrative and filter out dissenting opinions.

For starters, all customer reviews were vetted and approved by Enchroma itself on their website. Not surprisingly, not a single one-star review could be found despite over 10,000 sales.

Third party review sites fared little better due to Enchroma’s strict policies. They demanded advanced notice of any reviews posted and removed critical ones flagged by customers. Not exactly an impartial process.

Scientific studies of their glasses published for media promotion were also misrepresented to hype results and minimize caveats. Some researchers involved later regretted cooperating due to how Enchroma spun findings to mislead consumers with false cure claims.

Confirmation bias also played a heavy role. Customers understandably wanted their glasses to work as promised after investing $400. So dissenters internalized it as “maybe I’m just not receptive” rather than admit the product failed them too. This reinforced Enchroma’s implausible narrative that their glasses truly benefited “most people.”

The Glasses Don’t Stand Up To Testing

At this point, the marketing smoke and mirrors were transparent. But what about evaluating Enchroma glasses on their technical performance alone?

Well, veteran color vision scientists conducting rigorous double-blind studies found the lenses offered little to no improvement over placebo lenses. Some participants even saw colors as less vibrant or more muted.

Independent product reviewers wore Enchroma for weeks as directed. None came away able to see genuinely new colors as claimed either. While brightness/contrast tweaks were noted, it did not expand their visual perceptions in any significant way.

I performed my own experiments too. After color blindness testing confirmed my deuteranopia diagnosis, I tried the Enchroma glasses and competitors like X-Chroma. Colors appeared more over-saturated overall but not distinctly new or unfamiliar. No improvement on standard colorblindness tests either while wearing them.

Studies found younger children or those with milder deficiencies saw marginal benefits at best in limited situations like fruit picking. Not the transformations promised in marketing though – merely something equivalent to sunglasses tint. Both science and lived experiences disagreed with Enchroma’s sensational claims.

The Ripple Effects of Colorblindness Scams

As is often the case with deceptive businesses, the damages of Enchroma’s actions spread far beyond individual consumers spending money on a fake cure. Here are a few other negative impacts:

ALSO READ:  Is Philucky.live Legit or a Scam? An Honest Review

Diminished Hope for Real Progress: By overpromising and under delivering, Enchroma set unrealistic expectations that soured many on future vision research. Anyone who just wants to see colors as others do is now wary of giving up hope for a true solution.

Trust Eroded for Legitimate Products: Technologies using augmented reality, lens filtration or even gene therapy show promise down the road. But their acceptance could be hampered now by the skepticism Enchroma created around “colorblind glasses.” Progress relies on public faith.

Diversion of Resources from Science: When donations, VC investments and media attention were pumped into Enchroma based on misleading results, those resources went to prop up a scam rather than fund honest scientific pursuits developing actual cures or aids. Misplaced effort slows true advances.

Copycat Scams Emerge: Enchroma’s commercial success inspired knock-offs like Pilestone and Carelux to play on similar ideas for fame and profit without care for ethics or facts. This only added to confusion and barriers to informed choices in the color vision community and public.

So in many ways, the harms of the Enchroma scam go far beyond those who bought their product in vain hopes of a cure that never existed. Their deception struck a blow against acceptance, innovation and trust at multiple levels.

What Does Real Progress Look Like?

Now that we understand the problems with Enchroma and similar companies, what legitimate technologies are actually showing promise to assist or potentially cure colorblindness one day? Here are a few:

Digital Color Perception Training: Software like Colorlite can help retrain the brain over time through color association games to better differentiate hues. Though limited, it aims to safely and ethically enhance natural vision.

Gene Therapy Trials: Using gene editing techniques to attempt to correct the mutated genes underlying certain types of colorblindness are underway. While high-risk, early animal tests prove encouraging for the future if proven safe.

Augmented & Virtual Reality Apps: Apps overlaying corrected color filters over the physical world through AR smart glasses or within virtual environments demonstrate ways technology may eventually impact color perception without relying on glasses alone. More study needed though to ensure benefit.

Adaptive Computer Displays: Advances allowing computers and electronics to sense and adapt color palettes in real-time based on an individual’s unique vision profile could compensate for certain types of color blindness without special hardware. Early tests show efficacy and increasing options.

Customizable Contact Lenses: Researchers are also exploring means of digitally controlling tint and optical properties of contact lenses via circuits embedded within them. If made programmable for personal vision profiles, they may one day offer color blind individuals customized correction on demand without glasses. However, this application remains quite distant and complex.

The general trend in genuinely promising technologies focuses on tapping retinal plasticity through repeated, controlled feedback rather than simplistic lens filters alone. It also aims to empower individuals and personalize solutions without unrealistic or impossible claims like seeing entirely new colors overnight.

ALSO READ:  Usps.uspskkk.com Scam Explained: Beware !! Don't Fall Victim

Progress takes time but having realistic expectations and supporting research with integrity, rather than scams, is the surest path. The experiences of skeptical testing, open transparency from companies and avoiding sensational hype will serve both consumers and science best.

How to Avoid Colorblindness Scams Going Forward

Now that you have the full picture of the perils regarding “colorblind glasses,” what can you do going forward to make informed choices and avoid similar scams? Here are some key guidelines:

✔️ Don’t Believe Impossible Promises. Any claim of instantly curing or radically transforming years of vision with non-invasive hardware should set off warning bells.

✔️ Research Studies Skeptically. Look for large, peer-reviewed, double-blind studies from respected researchers, not marketing white papers. Ask what caveats may exist.

✔️ Consider Alternative Perspectives. Never rely solely on curated positive reviews lacking dissent. Seek out critical analyses and discussions from different communities dealing with similar conditions.

✔️ Trust Lived Experience Over Hype. Give more credence to those honestly discussing trial results over tearful “after” videos or exaggerated headlines. Realism is key.

✔️ Look for Open Transparency. Healthy skepticism is needed toward companies controlling review platforms, filtering criticism, lacking unbiased analysts testing claims. Science demands scrutiny.

✔️ Support Responsible Innovation. Whenever possible, direct attention and patronage toward vision research groups and startups aiming to authentically help through evidence-based means respecting science and individual well-being. This fosters true progress.

Wrapping Up

In conclusion, the story of Enchroma demonstrates why it’s so important that we carefully evaluate both marketing tactics and scientific claims whenever life-changing medical advances are touted. While the hope of curing a lifelong condition like color blindness is undeniably enticing, we must thoughtfully separate fact from fiction to avoid being misled.

As someone living with color vision deficiency myself, I understand why something promising an easy fix could seem too good to be true. However, vision science is complex, and pushing nature’s limits often requires patience, not miracle promises. True progress happens slowly through diligent research, not flashy advertising exploiting emotion over evidence.

Going forward, it’s clear we must demand transparency from companies, think skeptically yet supportively about revolutionary claims, and recognize that individual experiences will naturally vary more than glossy marketing portrays. By keeping an open but analytical mindset, applying critical thinking and seeking diverse perspectives, consumers can avoid falling for ineffective or even downright unethical “cures.”

With continued truthful reporting that lays bare deceptive practices, plus funding directed to rigorous scientific pursuits rather than hype machines, there remains real hope that solutions may emerge one day. But that future relies on cooperation and integrity between researchers, advocates and the vision communities they aim to serve – not exploitation.

My hope is that this story serves as a cautionary tale empowering others to cut through scams with wisdom and discernment. Only then will the pursuit of PROGRESSVISION progress be guided by light, not colorfully tinted lenses.

People Also Read: