Iris diagnostics is highly controversial as a diagnostic procedure. In the following, you will learn which points of criticism are raised particularly frequently and how the criticism of iris diagnostics is to be assessed.
Justified criticism of orthodox medicine
Among orthodox physicians, iris diagnostics does not find supporters. On the contrary, doctors and scientists repeatedly point out that the very idea behind iris diagnostics is completely wrong and lacks any scientific basis.
There are no nerve tracts that connect the whole body with the iris. Color spots and different structures, which are of supposed importance in iris diagnostics, are normal variations of the healthy iris and not independent signs of disease.
Of course, there are numerous pathological changes of the iris. These include congenital “holes” in the iris, called iris colombs, as well as malignant tumors of the iris. However, these changes are independent and are not signs of changes in other organs.
Iris diagnostics – side-inverted assignment?
The second major point of criticism by orthodox physicians lies in the assignment of the halves of the body to the iris. A direct mapping of the organism on the iris is not possible, if only because the nerve tracts of the spinal cord intersect after entering the brain and thus run exactly mirror-inverted.
The claim of iris diagnosticians that the right half of the body projects onto the right iris and the left half of the body projects onto the left iris thus has no anatomical basis.
Warnings from the scientific advisory board
There is also criticism of iris diagnosis because the diagnostic principles are not uniform, and in repeated trials the representatives of different iris diagnostic doctrines arrived at very different diagnoses in the same patients. The positions of the organs are found in different places on the 20 different iris maps that are in circulation for diagnosis.
The scientific advisory board of the German Medical Association therefore warns against this procedure and the variant of pupil diagnostics, because misdiagnoses are likely. What’s more, there are a number of judicially documented cases in which misdiagnosis by iris diagnostics led to the death of the patient.
In addition, several clinical studies have failed to show that the accuracy of iris diagnostics is higher than chance.
Health insurers also do not support this diagnostic procedure: in unison, they are of the opinion that the community of the insured should not be burdened with the costs of a procedure that demonstrably does not allow any statements to be made about the state of health.
Conclusion: iris diagnostics should never be sole diagnostic procedure
Whether blue, green, brown, speckled or spotted, the iris is the individual characteristic of each person. It is as unmistakable as the fingerprint and is used in security technology as a unique identification feature for this very reason.
This would be completely impossible if the iris changed depending on the state of health. However, both the anatomy of the iris and its structure remain stable, just like the palm lines.
Iris diagnostics in itself is not dangerous – the eye is viewed with a magnifying glass or photographed. However, those who rely on iris diagnostics as their only diagnostic procedure run the risk of overlooking disease and putting their health at risk.
