iridology science
A complete text and reference work for the advanced student and those pursuing a career in iridology. Ten years in the making! The most complete English text on the fundamentals of iridology. Over 1,200 beautiful color plates showing the fiber structures of the eyes. Electromagnetic photography. Many charts and illustrations. Includes plastic overlays for eye pictures and references on every organ as reflexively seen in the iris. Eye charts from China, Russia and Spain.
– Hardbound
– 600 Pages
Topics include:
– Fundamental Iris Markings
– Importance of the Pupil
– Four Stages of Tissue Activity
– Five Channels of Elimination
– Glands: Endocrine & Exocrine
– Nerve Tissues and Pathways
– How We Build a Disease
– Subclinical Manifestations
– Genealogy and Genetic Factors
– Drugs, Psora and Miamas
– Whole System for the Whole Man
– Glandular Functions and The Metabolic Process
– Adnormal Growth, Operations, Injuries and Wounds
– Reflexology and Neurogenic Symptoms
– History of Iridology and Chart Development
– Homeopthic Concepts in Iridology
– Nine Body Systems and their Relationship to Iridology
– Anatomy of the Eye
– Eye Color and Variations
– Hering’s Law of Cure
– Breathing & Respiratory System
– The Digestive System
– The Brain: Master Control Center
– Nerve Tissues and Pathways
– Tissue Cleansing
– Case Histories
– The Brain: The Human Computer
– Theory and Philosophy of Iridology
Hi Daprof,
I usually stop working during weekends but since you dropped another comment (which is truly worth reading), I really think that I need to publish it for the benefits of my readers.
Again, you cited some credible references which are good to at least uphold your stand for Iridology. However, I am still against it and i know most of my readers will also agree with me.
Regarding my reference quackwatch, that site is just one of the many credible sources that I can cite against Iridology. I am not the only one who linked with Quackwatch, even wikipedia used that link for their reference. Lastly, I cited quackwatch due to some SEO purposes, which I assume you understand being a website owner yourself.
Plus, I disagree with you saying that not all science are perfect. Science is a group of studies with basis, and saying that it is not perfect is completely an overstatement just to prove that Iridology is also not a perfect science, insinuating that Iridology can be a dependable tool for health diagnosis.
Your contribution is highly appreciated Daprof. This information gave color to this article. I will just let my readers decide if they will believe in Iridology or not.
I must agree with daprof. I work for an Iridoligist and she is amazingly accurate. Ppl come from all over the US to see her. Many of her regular returning clients are local physicians. Her daughter is a respected nurse practitioner who continues to seek the counsel and guidence of her mother. There may be many quack or inexperienced iridologists in the world, however my boss is the real deal. So don’t knock it until you’ve truly tried it.
Do you patronize alternative medicines? If yes, have you undergone physical diagnosis through Iridology?
For over a century, Iridology became one of the most controversial practices among many known alternative medicines today. What it does is to diagnose your eye’s iris to basically tell which part of your body has a problem.
If you are intrigued with Iridology and want to learn if this type of practice is dependable or not, then this short but detailed article is perfectly for you.
First off, what is Iridology? Iridology or sometimes refer to as iridodiagnosis, iridiagnosis or simply as iris diagnosis, is part of an increasing family of alternative medicines. The earliest form of this treatment is found in Chiromatica Medica (homolaterality) dating back to 16th century.
Iris is the greenish-yellow area that surrounds the transparent pupil or the black area of your eyes. The white outer area is called sclera, while at the center is the cornea.
The main principle of Iridology is to identify an individual’s systemic health status by just looking at the patterns, colors and other characteristics of the iris. Practitioners uses an iris charts, which are divided into zones that constitutes to a specific parts of the human body.
A person who practice Iridology is called Iridologist. These iris experts sees the eyes as mirror into the body’s health status. They believe that the iris charts can pinpoint the exact health issues that your body have, which includes your organs, systems, inlflammations, distressed signs, or any illnesses.
Below is the iris chart.
Iridologists believe that every properties of the human body are linked with the iris nerve wreathes. However, Iridology in general doesn’t predict nor diagnose any illnesses but rather to get the connection of the body and its corresponding value from the iris.
Above is the left and the right iris charts. These charts were developed more than 70 years ago. It shows the iris of the eyes that are said to be associated with over 50 parts of the body.
For example, the health of stomach are located at the innermost blue circle in both charts. The quadrants at the top of the iris represents the brain and other areas of the head.
In the world stage, Iridology is not accepted in medicine and not supported by various health organizations. Plus, health experts considers this practice under pseudoscience category. This means that Iridology is more of a belief that has no solid scientific evidence to support its claims.
Like a regular health clinics, diagnostics through Iridology is also done in Iridology clinics worldwide. Below are some of the tools that are used in Iridology diagnosis:
The cameras are used to examine the irises of the patient for possible tissue changes. These changes or marking changes are then compared to the iris chart. Once the zones are identified, Iridologists will then conclude a physical diagnosis based from the iris chart.
Based on various clinical trials and studies, Iridology has higher rate of negative results in determining a certain health issue, which leads to incorrect and inaccurate diagnosis or if practiced, wrong treatment.
Several former Iridologists have testified that the science behind Iridology has no basis and will only cause confusions.
For example, five Dutch Iridologists in the late 80’s failed a diagnostic tests for 78 volunteer patients. Each Iridologists were given stereo color slides of the right iris of all volunteered patients. Half of those volunteers had gallbladder disease and the rest are healthy.
No one from the five Iridologists could identify which patients had the disease and which volunteers were healthy. Each of them even had different findings about their diagnosis.
Another study that involved Australian Iridologist in 1980, underwent two tests to see if Iridology is in fact dependable and accurate. First, he examined photographs of 15 patients (medically examined) with a total of 33 health problems. The Iridologist misdiagnosed all 15 patients by identifying wrong diseases.
There are more negative results regarding the accuracy of Iridology. The results of these studies were not surprising at all because there are no scientific proof that all properties of the body, or health in general, can be determined by just looking at the iris.
Read More: Iridology is Nonsense – Quackwatch
Based from the information above, Iridology is nothing but false claims and belongs to pseudoscience. The reason why Iridology became so famous is because of its constant marketing and hoax success stories.
Consulting to an Iridologist makes no sense as medical doctors are not difficult to reach these days. Possible health risks for Iridology includes:
So Iridology is definitely not for you. This form of alternative medicine poses too many risk for you. After all, why would you consult to an Iridologist if you can go to straight right to an Ophthalmologist right?
If you are looking for better way to achieve good health or you want to know the status of your health, go to a licensed medical diagnostic centers or hospital for physical examinations. Or, you can go straight to your physician for professional advise. Going for an Iridologist is not the best choice for your health, body and finances.
Did you like this article? If you do, then please share this post to your social media profiles. The social media buttons are provided below. Otherwise, you may leave your opinions or suggestions regarding this topic in the comment section below.
Please help make this post go viral online.
Iridology (sometimes referred to as iris diagnosis) is based on the bizarre belief that each area of the body is represented by a corresponding area in the iris of the eye (the colored area around the pupil). According to this viewpoint, a person’s state of health and disease can be diagnosed from the color, texture, and location of various pigment flecks in the eye. Iridology practitioners claim to diagnose “imbalances” that can be treated with vitamins, minerals, herbs, and similar products. Some also claim that the eye markings can reveal a complete history of past illnesses as well as previous treatment. One textbook, for example, states that a white triangle in the appropriate area indicates appendicitis, but a black speck indicates that the appendix had been removed by surgery. Iridology charts—dozens of which exist—vary somewhat in the location and interpretation of their iris signs. Some iridologists use a computer to help them analyze eye photographs and select the products they recommend. Sclerology is similar to iridology but interprets the shape and condition of blood vessels on the white portion (sclera) of the eyeball.
| This iridology chart was developed by a prominent naturopath more than 70 years ago. It relates various spots on the eye to about 50 parts of the body. The innermost blue circle in both eyes, for example, is said to reflect the health of the stomach. The topmost quadrants are said to represent the brain (cerebrum and cerebellum) and other parts of the head. |  |
![green-eye_p[1]](https://iriscope.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/green-eye_p1.png)
Proponents of iridology attribute its development to Ignatz von Peczely, a Hungarian physician who, during his childhood, had accidentally broken the leg of an owl and noticed a black stripe in the lower part of the owl’s eye. Nonadherents suggest that von Peczely may have developed his theory to pass time while he was imprisoned after the 1848 Hungarian revolution. After his release from prison he allegedly saved the life of his mother with homeopathic remedies, recalled the incident of the owl’s eye, and began studying the eyes of his patients.Bernard Jensen, D.C. (1908-2001), the leading American iridologist, stated that “Nature has provided us with a miniature television screen showing the most remote portions of the body by way of nerve reflex responses.” He also claimed that iridology analyses are more reliable and “offer much more information about the state of the body than do the examinations of Western medicine.”
A British iridology organization states that there are three main “constitutional types” of iris color:
Russell S. Worrall, O.D., an assistant clinical professor of optometry at the School of Optometry, University of California, Berkeley, has noted that many of the conditions detected by practitioners of iridology are “diseases” whose existence has been disputed or discredited by scientific investigation. Worrall also points out how spurious diagnoses by iridologists can have serious consequences, as illustrated by the case of an accountant who consulted a chiropractor who practiced iridology:
During the course of treatment an iridology workup was recommended. The results indicated, among many other health problems, the presence of cancer. Overwhelmed, the patient spent the day in torment. Unable to consult his family physician . . . he finally sought my advice. After a lengthy discussion, I was able to allay his fears. . . . He wondered how an intelligent person such as himself could be caught up in such a deep emotional web over such a diagnosis. The story fortunately had a pleasant ending. However, the outcome could have been much more serious since the patient is also suffering from a heart condition, which was not noted on the iridology evaluation!
The features of the iris are relatively stable throughout life . There is no scientific evidence that they change when a person’s health status changes. In fact, this stability is the foundation of the biometric technology that uses iris recognition for identification purposes.
![IridologyChart[1]](https://iriscope.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/IridologyChart1.jpg)
In 1979 Bernard Jensen and two other proponents failed a scientific test in which they examined photographs of the eyes of 143 persons in an attempt to determine which ones had kidney impairments. (Forty-eight had been diagnosed with a standard kidney function test, and the rest had normal function.) The three iridologists showed no statistically significant ability to detect which patients had kidney disease and which did not. One iridologist, for example, decided that 88% of the normal patients had kidney disease, while another judged that 74% of patients sick enough to need artificial kidney treatment were normal .
In 1980, an experienced Australian iridologist underwent two tests. In the first, he examined photographs of 15 patients who had been medically evaluated and had a total of 33 health problems. The iridologist did not correctly diagnose any of these problems. In three cases he named a part of the body that had had trouble (for example, he said “lesion in throat area” for a patient whose tonsils had been removed during childhood), but he completely missed the other 30 problem areas and made 60 incorrect diagnoses. In the second trial, four people had their eyes photographed when they were in good health and rephotographed when they reported being ill. The iridologist made a large number of (incorrect) diagnoses from the initial photographs and was unable to accurately identify any organ that underwent a change when the health problem arose. He was also asked to compare iris photographs of another healthy individual taken only two minutes apart. He made five incorrect diagnoses for the first of these and four different incorrect ones for the second .
In the late 1980s, five leading Dutch iridologists failed a similar test in which they were shown stereo color slides of the right iris of 78 people, half of whom had gallbladder disease. None of the five could distinguish between the patients with gallbladder disease and the people who were healthy. Nor did they agree with each other about which was which . These negative results, of course, are not surprising, because there is no known mechanism by which body organs can be represented or transmit their health status to specific locations in the iris.
In another study, researchers took color photographs of the eyes of 30 patients with ulcerative colitis, 25 with coronary heart disease, 30 with asthma, 30 with psoriasis, and a control group matched for age and gender. The photographs were coded and analyzed by an investigator, both manually and by a computer program according to criteria generated by leading iridologists. Using either method, discrimination between cases and controls was not different from what would be expected by chance. The authors concluded that “diagnosis of these diseases cannot be aided by an iridological-style analysis.”
In 1998, Eugene Emery, a science writer for the Providence Journal, tested the ability of two iridologists to assess his health and to match slide he had prepared of the eyes of eight people who had been medically diagnosed. Both iridologists scored very poorly .
In 2000, Dr. Edzard Ernst issued a thorough review of published reports up to that time. Noting that none of the “positive” studies had been properly designed, he concluded:
Might iridology be doing any harm? Waste of money and time are two obvious undesired effects. The possibility of false-positive diagnoses, ie, diagnosing—and subsequently treating—conditions that did not exist in the first place, seems more serious. The real problem, however, might be false-negative diagnoses: someone may feel unwell, go to an iridologist, and be given a clean bill of health. Subsequently, this person could be found to have a serious disease. In such cases, valuable time for early treatment (and indeed lives) can be lost through the use of iridology .
In another study, three iridologists and ten optometry students were shown color iris slides of 30 people with who had fractured an arm or leg and 30 controls without trauma history. Jensen and several other iridologists were consulted about the study’s design. None of the participants demonstrated significant diagnostic accuracy [9]. Fractures were chosen as the medicalk condition to see whether von Peczely original claim about the owl with a broken leg could be reproduced in humans.
A study published in 2005 tested whether iridology could be useful in diagnosing common forms of cancer. An experienced practitioner examined the eyes of 68 people who had proven cancers of the breast, ovary, uterus, prostate, or colorectum, and 42 for whom there was no medical evidence of cancer. The practitioner, who was unaware of their gender or medical details, was asked to suggest up to five diagnoses for each person and his results were then compared with each subject’s known medical diagnosis. Iridology correctly diagnosed cancer in only 3 of the 68 cases .
Worrall has noted the ways iridologists try to excuse their failures:
Proponents . . . use a number of ways to rationalize their inconsistencies. One may claim to make subclinical diagnoses; that is, sometimes years before there are signs or symptoms of disease. Or one may claim to use iridology to rate a subject’s constitution or susceptibility to disease. Another might dispute the medical tests used to confirm a medical diagnosis and 路may contest existence of the disease. Others may diagnose hypothetical and imagined disorders using terms such as toxic settlement, chronic weakness, or underactivity of an organ or system These broad characterizations of a subject’s state of health contrast with the detail contained in iris charts, and they are not easily quantifiable for study .
Herbalist Michael Tierra has described how he became disillusioned with iridology. After making various observations, he stopped using it but still hoped that it would turn out to have some value. Then, however:
A younger colleague fully equipped with the most up-to-date specialized iridology equipment introduced himself and stated that he wanted to give iridology readings at my clinic and at the same time monitor the course of my patients over a period of six months.
Given the fact that for most of us as well my patients six months is quite a long period, there was ample opportunity for many of these to go through a variety of health-related changes. Some people became well and got sick again with either the same or perhaps a different set of symptoms, others suffered injuries or operations. They all had their irises repeatedly photographed and studied by my colleague and myself. Where was Peczely’s owl or the markings he claimed to observe in patients of the 19th century Hungarian hospital ward? Where were the fine white healing lines that were supposed to knit together the small dark lacunae corresponding to the healing of operations and injuries of different parts of the body?
Our conclusion after six months: my colleague, trying to hold on to the fast disappearing shred of belief in the validity of iridology sheepishly and somewhat guiltily sold his camera to another would-be iridology enthusiast. I buried my official iridology magnifying head band in a box in a dark, hopefully soon forgotten area of my office closet, where I must confess it still remains after over 15 years, unopened .
Another former iridologist, Joshua David Mather Sr., has written a detailed account of the origin and termination of his beliefs. He began studying iridology at age nine when his father became a practitioner. He abandoned it at age 25 after examining polaroid films of many patients and finding out that although their symptoms often improved, their eye markings never changed .
Iridology makes no anatomic or physiologic sense. It is not merely worthless. Incorrect diagnoses can unnecessarily frighten people, cause them to waste money seeking medical care for nonexistent conditions, or steer them away from necessary medical care when a real problem is overlooked.
Some multilevel distributors are using iridology as a basis for recommending dietary supplements and/or herbs. Anyone who does this and is not a licensed health professional would be guilty of practicing medicine without a license, which is a violation of state law.
MAIKONG IRIDOLOGY SOFTWARE Installation and operation
Hi Daprof,
First off, thank you for your insights regarding iridology (although your links are from your site). Second, the link you gave about the pancreatic beta-cells detection as the cause of diabetes through iris inspection could be true to some extent. With references cited, I can’t argue with you about that.
However, I am talking in general here and in wider scope of the issue, Iridology is viewed more likely as a pseudoscience to most experts (as you already admitted that it lacks scientific evidence). And as the author of this article, I have to cite some facts about Iridology’s shortcomings. And I strongly believe that voting against Iridology is for the best interest of my readers.
I am publishing your comment to give others a different point of view regarding this issue.
Thanks…