This was posted 5 years 4 months 3 days ago, and might be an out-dated deal.

Related
  • expired

Cyxus Blue Light filter Blocking Glasses $23.90 + Delivery ($0 with Prime/ $49 Spend) @ Cyxus via Amazon AU

22
Cyxus Blue Light filter Blocking Glasses $23.90 + Delivery ($0 with Prime/ $49 Spend) @ Cyxus via Amazon AUAffiliate
Go to Deal
Cashback
Associatedblinkycha1 @ Cyxus Technology on 19/07/2019 - 12:44 amazon.com.au (293 clicks)
Last edited 19/07/2019 - 15:25
HL3AACA9
This post contains affiliate links. OzBargain might earn commissions when you click through and make purchases. Please see this page for more information.

Enjoy 20% Off with code HL3AACA9

price updates at checkout

As Described on Amazon:

ANTI BLUE LIGHT - Cyxus glasses can cut 90% of the blue light.Reduce eyestrain and headache.Give you a better sleeping.

Frame Material: Plastic ; Lens Material: Polycarbonate ; Notice: This glasses is without magnification and prescription.

FDA REGISTERED COMPANY- Cyxus is the professional eye protection glasses brand in USA with the FDA certification,CE certification and RoHS certification.

LIFETIME WARRANTY - You can return the defective products for repairing or exchanging for free at any time (if not man-made damage).

SELL OVER THE WORLD - All Our products are sold in the USA,Canada,Europe,South America,Oceania,Asia and Africa.

Price History at C CamelCamelCamel.
Fashion & Apparel Blue Light Filter Glasses Glasses

Related Stores

Amazon AU
Amazon AU
Marketplace
Cyxus Technology
Cyxus Technology

closed Comments

  • dandocmando on 19/07/2019 - 12:58

    I have a pair of these, they work good but if you use them for awhile and then stop your eyes really hurt when you look at screens until they get used to it again.

  • Tacooo on 19/07/2019 - 13:39
    -6

    Or use the built-in function in 99% of operating systems or any of the free apps instead.

    • Skinnerr on 19/07/2019 - 13:51
      -1

      Not a valid reason to neg as you haven't thought of all scenarios.

      • Tacooo on 19/07/2019 - 14:08

        Wanna give an example or would you prefer to just make the claim?

        Edit: Apparently just making the claim was the aim.

        • Skinnerr on 19/07/2019 - 16:03

          The workplace. Don't have to be so defensive buddy.

          • Tacooo on 19/07/2019 - 16:04
            -1

            @Skinnerr: What a bad answer. Could you be more broad? What aspect of the office? The computer screens? If so refer to my original comment.

            • Skinnerr on 19/07/2019 - 16:10
              -1

              @Tacooo: I was deliberately vague, that's what scenarios means. Because debunking your bullshit assertion that anyone can just install whatever they like, when they potentially can't, then get hostile.

              • Tacooo on 19/07/2019 - 16:14
                -1

                @Skinnerr:

                Because debunking your bullshit assertion that anyone can just install whatever they like, when they potentially can't

                If it's their phone, they can. It it's their laptop/PC, they can. If it's a work laptop/PC, their IT department can. If it's a work phone, their IT department can.

                Tell them the light is straining your eyes and watch as your request gets put through.

                Hell even if they miraculously get their request denied it's not hard to turn down the blue light on the monitor itself and those controls aren't locked out.

                • Skinnerr on 19/07/2019 - 16:23
                  -1

                  @Tacooo: What if they work for the government? Or the military? And those 'solutions' aren't possible. And these glasses help someone reduce eyestrain in the workplace and these glasses are $6 cheaper. Is that not a valid deal? Just cos you're convinced you can circumvent the problem doesn't make you the authority on what is and isn't a deal.

                  Do you understand this?

                  • Tacooo on 19/07/2019 - 16:28
                    -3

                    @Skinnerr: Yeah makes perfect sense. Would have been good if you just stated that to begin with but I suppose I don't mind a bit of theater. Guess I'll use my neg for the reason I didn't mention; the price is crap still and these can be gotten for cents on the dollar.

                    • Skinnerr on 19/07/2019 - 16:39
                      -1

                      @Tacooo: Ayoo more baseless bullshit reasoning. Would have been better to maybe think your answer wasn't the ultimate solution. At least after you pried it out of me I backed up my claim. 'Cents on the dollar' ok I'm done with your bullshit.

                      • Tacooo on 19/07/2019 - 17:13
                        -1

                        @Skinnerr:

                        'Cents on the dollar'

                        In this sense it's nothing more than hyperbole. Surely you can figure that basic shit out right? Point is I can still find glasses that do the exact same thing for cheaper (and have done so).

                        • Skinnerr on 19/07/2019 - 21:04

                          @Tacooo:

                          Surely you can figure that basic shit out right?

                          That I can figure out that you’re full of shit? Yeh I can.

                          What you you may not.

                  • BoltThrower on 19/07/2019 - 17:34

                    @Skinnerr: I guess it's not a bad deal for what it is, but if it's for the government or military, you'd get them to buy it. They might make you get quotes for them before disbursing money though. I have been in such a position with a 3-quote policy.
                    I didn't neg even though the only way I personally could justify wearing these is for driving. I have 'Night-Light' on Windows which turns on every night at 3am and I have a Blue-light filter on my phone added to the pull-down menu.

  • whiskeyjack89 on 19/07/2019 - 13:41
    +6

    "If optometrists are selling blue-blocking spectacle lenses, they should make their patients aware that there is no strong evidence that blue-blocking spectacle lenses will improve visual performance, alleviate symptoms of eye strain or improve sleep quality."

    https://www.college-optometrists.org/the-college/policy/posi…

    • Skinnerr on 19/07/2019 - 13:57

      Interesting. Devils advocate says there's no evidence it doesn't help either and that it's possible. With something as complex as sight there has to be more than meets eye, hehe.

      • whiskeyjack89 on 19/07/2019 - 15:10

        Heyyyoo. Pretty sure it's all marketing, but to each's own!

      • miarn on 19/07/2019 - 21:50

        Did you read the article? The studies they reviewed found no evidence these work, i.e. they don't work.

  • Rsole on 19/07/2019 - 13:55

    I bought Blue Light Globes for a party…Now when I wear these glasses they just look like ordinary light globes…

    • Skinnerr on 19/07/2019 - 13:58

      Har har

  • Popo on 19/07/2019 - 15:05
    +3

    Lets ask Specsavers: "1 hour outside on an overcast day projects 30 times more blue light than 1 hour in front of a screen."
    "The most recent evidence is that only extreme and sustained exposure to blue light may cause damage to your eyes."

  • Tigerhacker on 19/07/2019 - 16:21
    +1

    Time for me to 'invent' some clear glasses that give you ULTRA HIGH DEFNITION COLOURS and also wont damage your eyesight…

    Also, if it cuts out 90% of blue light, why isn't everything sepia toned, you can't "cut it out" and still see it?! Nothing about this anti-blue light trend makes sense to me…

  • Vaiels on 20/07/2019 - 12:23

    windows 10, Android, iOS and Mac os all currently have native blue light filters so I don't see the use of this

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join