Smoking and vision: what smoke does to the eye, organ by organ

In ophthalmology, smoking is one of the few major risk factors over which a patient has direct control. Age is not negotiable, and neither is genetics. The cigarette is. This article is not here to remind smokers of what they already know, but to say precisely what smoke does to each part of the eye, where the evidence is solid, where it is not, and what stopping brings down. The picture is not uniform: on the macula, the link is massive and demonstrated; on glaucoma, it is debated; on the retina of the patient with diabetes, the literature even says the opposite of what one would expect. Best to present it as it stands.

UNDERSTANDING

Does smoking really damage the eyes, or is it a prevention slogan?

It does damage them, and the recent reviews say so bluntly. Nicotine and the other substances in smoke impair the microcirculation, sustain oxidative stress and feed inflammatory processes. From this common basis follow very different kinds of damage depending on the structure involved: cataract, age-related macular degeneration, ocular vascular occlusions, damage to the ocular surface, unfavourable progression of glaucoma and of endocrine orbitopathy.

A word about the nature of the evidence, because it governs all the rest. Most of these links are statistical associations, and an association can arise from a common factor rather than from a cause. For two eye diseases, we have gone further: a meta-analysis of Mendelian randomisation studies, a method that uses genetics to free itself from confounding factors, finds a causal effect of smoking on age-related macular degeneration and on age-related cataract. For those two, this is no longer a simple correlation.

For the others, the strength of the link varies enormously. Announcing that “smoking is bad for the eyes” helps nobody; saying which structure is involved, and to what extent, changes the conversation. What follows therefore takes the areas one by one, with the level of evidence that goes with each, including when it is disappointing.

How the effect works: what smoke does to vessels and tissues

The effect works through three routes that act at the same time: the functioning of the small vessels, the oxidative balance and inflammation. The eye is particularly vulnerable to them, because the retina and the choroid are supplied by vessels of very small calibre and because the photoreceptors are among the most oxygen-hungry cells in the body.

Experimental work has begun to name the mechanisms. On the macula, a study combining samples from patients with mouse models shows that smoke activates a signalling pathway between certain T lymphocytes and the pericytes of the choroid, which unbalances the vessel wall and favours neovascularisation. On the orbit, exposing orbital fibroblasts to cigarette smoke extract triggers an inflammatory phenotype, a rise in oxidative stress and a twofold differentiation, towards fibrous tissue and towards fat.

These results are experimental and do not transpose directly to the patient, but they show that smoke does not merely accompany the disease: it acts on the cells that build it. To this must be added something rarely said: smoke is also air pollution deposited directly on the cornea and the conjunctiva, with no filter at all.

Key points

Smoking and vision: part by part

MACULA

This is where the essence of the message lies. Smoking is the main non-genetic risk factor for age-related macular degeneration. A 2025 meta-analysis covering 18 studies finds, for smoking, an odds ratio of 1.86 (95% confidence interval: 1.33 to 2.60), that is to say odds of developing it nearly twice those of non-smokers. A general review published in JAMA adds the notion of quantity: long-running prospective cohorts find a significantly higher incidence in people smoking more than twenty cigarettes a day than in those who have never smoked.

Smoking does not merely increase the risk: it shifts the timetable. A cohort of 547 patients with neovascular AMD, 490 of them seen again at twelve months, shows that current smokers had developed their disease on average 5.5 years earlier than those who had never smoked, and 4.4 years earlier than former smokers. In a person’s life, those five and a half years are five and a half years of central vision.

The effect continues during treatment. In the same cohort, the mean central macular thickness of current smokers was greater than that of former smokers (259.2 against 231.9 micrometres), and the odds of subretinal fluid being present at twelve months were 1.99 times higher (1.09 to 3.67) in current smokers than in those who had never smoked. One point of honesty: in that same study, visual acuity at twelve months did not differ significantly according to smoking status. It is the anatomical measures that move, not the measurement of vision.

For the atrophic form, the stakes are more direct still. No treatment is authorised in Europe today for geographic atrophy, the two complement inhibitors approved on the other side of the Atlantic having had their applications withdrawn after an unfavourable opinion from the European Medicines Agency. In that context, preventive measures — stopping smoking first among them — make up the essence of what is available, together with the monitoring set out in the article devoted to the follow-up of dry AMD.

LENS

Cataract: a real risk, of modest size

Smoking is one of the modifiable risk factors for age-related cataract, alongside exposure to ultraviolet light and socio-economic status, whereas age, sex and myopia cannot be modified. The link is long-standing and consistent, and Mendelian randomisation places it among the causal effects of smoking.

That leaves the size of it, and here one has to be precise so as not to dramatise. An analysis of the UK Biobank devoted to tobacco and cannabis exposures, which identified 28,432 subjects with cataract, with propensity score matching, finds for current smoking an odds ratio of 1.2, that is odds of developing it about 20% higher. It is a clear but moderate effect, in no way comparable to the one seen on the macula.

A clean dose-effect relationship, of the kind “so many pack-years bring the diagnosis forward by so many years”, would be convenient to write. The sources on which this article rests do not establish one: in the analysis quoted, the relationship between the number of pack-years and the age at diagnosis of cataract did not reach the threshold of significance. I prefer to say so rather than manufacture a precision. One fundamental difference from the other chapters remains: cataract can be treated. The clouded crystalline lens is replaced, and cataract surgery restores the transparency that was lost.

SURFACE

Stinging eyes, dry eyes: what the literature actually says

The answer is a surprise: the immediate irritation caused by smoke is in no doubt, but the link between smoking and a diagnosis of dry eye is poorly established. A meta-analysis of 22 studies bringing together 160,217 subjects finds no statistically significant relationship, either in current smokers (adjusted odds ratio 1.14; 0.95 to 1.36) or in former smokers (1.06; 0.93 to 1.20). A second meta-analysis finds 1.18 (1.07 to 1.29) for smoking taken as a whole, but nothing significant as soon as it separates current from past smoking. If an effect exists, it is small.

On severity, by contrast, the signal is there. In a study of 535 patients with moderate to severe dry eye across 27 centres, daily smoking was associated with more marked clinical signs (composite severity score 0.45 against 0.43; p = 0.047), with no difference in the symptoms experienced. The examination therefore sees something that the patient does not necessarily feel — which explains a good part of the misunderstanding between studies.

Passive smoking deserves separate treatment. A meta-analysis of 55 studies on air pollutants, which includes environmental tobacco smoke, finds, in the most exposed people, higher odds of occurrence for eye diseases, including diseases of the ocular surface — but this is an estimate covering all air pollutants taken together, whose figure for the ocular surface and its exact scope are given at the end of the article. In children, early exposure and maternal smoking during pregnancy are strongly associated with refractive errors and with squint.

On the electronic cigarette, I can state nothing: the references that support this article contain no eye data specific to vaping, and I will not write a comparison between vapour and smoke as long as no source has measured it. If your eyes sting, remember above all that smoking is probably not the only culprit: dry air, screens and age weigh at least as heavily, and are more easily corrected.

OPTIC NERVE

Glaucoma: what I honestly cannot tell you

I cannot tell you that smoking caused your glaucoma, and that has to be acknowledged plainly. A systematic review of 17 pieces of work shows the disarray: six of the nine case-control studies find a positive association, the others do not; the evidence for a causal link remains limited. Two recent and large studies, one of them a prospective cohort, do nevertheless find an increased risk in very heavy smokers.

One result even points the other way, and passing over it in silence would be dishonest. A Mendelian randomisation study finds a genetic predisposition to smoking associated with a lower intraocular pressure (−0.18 mmHg per standard deviation) and a genetically predicted smoking intensity associated with a lower risk of open-angle glaucoma (odds ratio 0.74; 0.61 to 0.90). What should be made of it? Nothing, as far as advice goes. A genetic result of this kind sheds light on the mechanism of disease; it is not an argument for smoking, and the authors do not present it as one.

What is better supported concerns not the onset of glaucoma but its progression. In patients already affected, a high smoking intensity goes with a faster decline of the visual field and a more marked thinning of the retinal nerve fibre layer. A 2024 review concludes that smoking might weigh on progression and that prolonged abstinence might go with less progression — with the conditional that the authors themselves use. It is a reasonable motive for stopping, it is not a demonstration.

RETINA

Diabetic retinopathy: the chapter where the literature is disconcerting

Against all expectation, smoking is not an established risk factor for diabetic retinopathy. A review of systemic risk factors concludes that no clear association could be established between smoking and retinopathy, the studies contradicting one another; the two levers that count remain blood sugar control and blood pressure. Other reviews nevertheless continue to list smoking among the risk factors, which gives the measure of the disagreement.

A 2024 piece of work goes further still: combining a cross-sectional analysis of population data with a Mendelian randomisation, it finds an inverse association between smoking and the presence of diabetic retinopathy (odds ratio 0.50), a result preserved after propensity score matching (0.56) and in Mendelian randomisation (0.50), with no association at all with progression of the disease.

How should this be read without going wrong? An observed inverse association is not a demonstrated protection: most often it signals that something has not been measured, and nobody recommends smoking in order to spare the retina. What remains certain is that smoking has a demonstrated causal effect on type 2 diabetes itself and on thirteen diseases of the circulatory system. In a patient with diabetes, the instruction to stop therefore holds entirely — it is simply that the main argument is not the retina. The follow-up of diabetic retinopathy, for its part, rests on parameters that we control better.

ORBIT

Graves’ orbitopathy: where smoking weighs heaviest, and nobody talks about it

Graves’ orbitopathy combines retraction of the eyelids, swelling and redness of the eyelids and the conjunctiva, proptosis, double vision and, in the most severe forms, damage to the optic nerve. It concerns about 30% of patients with Graves’ disease, and remains mild in 77% of cases, moderate to severe in 22%, sight-threatening in 1%.

Among all the risk factors identified — thyroid dysfunction, TSH receptor antibodies, treatment with radioactive iodine, hypercholesterolaemia — smoking is described as the most important. And it does not act on onset alone: smokers have more severe forms and respond less well to treatment. The 2021 European guidelines place the control of risk factors, smoking first among them, at the head of management, even before the choice of the underlying treatment.

The mechanism, here, is particularly telling. Exposed to cigarette smoke extract, orbital fibroblasts taken from patients become inflammatory, accumulate oxidative stress and differentiate both into fibrous cells and into fat cells — which is to say into exactly what fills the orbit and pushes the eye forward. Smoking patients do indeed show markers of this pathway at higher levels, in the orbit as well as in the blood.

One piece of data deserves to be known by the patients concerned. In a registry devoted to this disease, 73 smoking patients were given verbal advice to stop at every consultation; among the 51 who could be reached afterwards, 25 had stopped, that is about one person in two. The cessation medicine offered to the others was seen through to the end by a single patient. In other words: in this series, the conversation repeated in consultation had a distinctly more measurable effect than the prescription.

STOPPING

What stopping recovers, and what it does not

Stopping brings down a future risk; it does not repair what is already damaged. A lost photoreceptor does not grow back, a vanished optic nerve fibre does not return, an area of macular atrophy does not close up again. Nobody should promise an improvement in vision after stopping smoking.

What does change is the slope. The most tangible signal is the gap between current and former smokers: in the neovascular AMD cohort already quoted, the latter had developed their disease 4.4 years later than the former. On Graves’ orbitopathy, the window is explicit: the disease runs through an active phase of eighteen to twenty-four months before burning out, and complete recovery almost never occurs once the damage has gone beyond the mild stage. Acting on smoking during that window means acting at the moment when everything is decided.

On the other areas, honesty calls for reserve. For dry eye, neither current nor former smoker status reaches the threshold of significance: there is nothing to promise. For glaucoma, a slowed progression after prolonged abstinence remains a hypothesis. And I cannot put a date on the fall in risk: none of the sources used says “after so many years, the risk rejoins that of a non-smoker”. What is documented is that the former smoker’s profile is an intermediate one.

Frequently asked questions

Can smoking make me blind?

The best-documented path is that of age-related macular degeneration, the leading cause of central vision loss after the age of 50: the odds of developing it there are 1.86 times higher in smokers, and the neovascular form declares itself on average 5.5 years earlier than in people who have never smoked. That does not mean that every smoker will lose his sight — the majority will not develop AMD — but that smoking clearly shifts both the probability and the timetable.

I stopped ten years ago. Has the risk been wiped out?

No, but it has not stayed at the level of a current smoker either. In a cohort of patients with neovascular AMD, former smokers had developed their disease 4.4 years later than current smokers: their profile sits between that of the smoker and that of the person who has never smoked. None of the studies used, on the other hand, makes it possible to say after how many years the risk would rejoin that of a non-smoker: I will not give a figure on that.

If I stop, will my vision improve?

No, and this is the most important distinction in this article. What falls after stopping is the risk of onset or of worsening, not the damage already done: an area of macular atrophy, or optic nerve fibres that have disappeared, do not repair themselves. There is one exception to the irreversibility of those two lesions: cataract, which is not permanent damage but a clouding of the crystalline lens, and which is treated surgically — it is the operation that lifts it, not stopping smoking.

My partner smokes at home. Does this concern me?

For the ocular surface, yes: environmental tobacco smoke is associated with damage to the surface, including dry eye syndrome. A meta-analysis of 55 studies finds an odds ratio of 1.29 for diseases of the ocular surface — but this is the pooled estimate for all air pollutants taken together, of which environmental tobacco smoke is only one component: this figure is not a measurement of passive smoking alone. In children, early exposure and maternal smoking during pregnancy are strongly associated with refractive errors and with squint.

Is the electronic cigarette less risky for the eyes?

I cannot answer this question, and I prefer to say so rather than improvise. The medical references on which this article rests contain no eye data specific to vaping: neither in favour, nor against. The literature documents only that the surface of the eye reacts to the particles and irritants in the surrounding air, whatever their origin — which permits no numerical comparison between vapour and smoke.

I have glaucoma and I smoke. Is my cigarette the cause of it?

Nothing makes it possible to say so. The studies contradict one another, and one Mendelian randomisation study even points the other way, finding a lower intraocular pressure and a lower risk of open-angle glaucoma in people genetically predisposed to smoke. What is better supported concerns progression: in patients who already have glaucoma, a high smoking intensity goes with a faster decline of the visual field.

I have Graves’ disease. Why does my endocrinologist insist so much about smoking?

Because this is the area where smoking weighs heaviest in the whole of ophthalmology, and the number one modifiable risk factor for the eye disease. Smoking weighs on the onset of the orbitopathy, on its severity and on the response to treatment: smoking patients have more severe forms and respond less well. The European guidelines indeed place the control of risk factors before the choice of the underlying treatment. The active phase lasts eighteen to twenty-four months: that is the window in which stopping counts most.

Cachan practice · Tel. +33 1 45 47 08 11

Scientific sources

  • Barth T, Arnds J, Mohr S, et al. [Smoking and eye diseases]. Ophthalmologie. 2025;122(9):753-762. PMID 40742530
  • Karimi S, Nouri H, Mahmoudinejad-Azar S, Abtahi SH. Smoking and environmental tobacco smoke exposure: implications in ocular disorders. Cutan Ocul Toxicol. 2023;42(1):1-7. PMID 36369835
  • Larsson SC, Burgess S. Appraising the causal role of smoking in multiple diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis of Mendelian randomization studies. EBioMedicine. 2022;82:104154. PMID 35816897
  • Babaker R, Alzimami L, Al Ameer A, et al. Risk factors for age-related macular degeneration: updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Medicine (Baltimore). 2025;104(8):e41599. PMID 39993131
  • Fleckenstein M, Schmitz-Valckenberg S, Chakravarthy U. Age-related macular degeneration: a review. JAMA. 2024;331(2):147-157. PMID 38193957
  • Mitchell P, Liew G, Gopinath B, Wong TY. Age-related macular degeneration. Lancet. 2018;392(10153):1147-1159. PMID 30303083
  • Deng Y, Qiao L, Du M, et al. Age-related macular degeneration: epidemiology, genetics, pathophysiology, diagnosis, and targeted therapy. Genes Dis. 2022;9(1):62-79. PMID 35005108
  • Lam NV. Adult eye conditions: diabetic retinopathy and age-related macular degeneration. FP Essent. 2022;519:24-28. PMID 35947133
  • Detaram HD, Joachim N, Liew G, et al. Smoking and treatment outcomes of neovascular age-related macular degeneration over 12 months. Br J Ophthalmol. 2020;104(7):893-898. PMID 31558491
  • He K, Dong X, Yang T, et al. Smoking aggravates neovascular age-related macular degeneration via Sema4D-PlexinB1 axis-mediated activation of pericytes. Nat Commun. 2025;16(1):2821. PMID 40121188
  • Liakopoulos S, von der Emde L, Biller ML, et al. Geographic atrophy in age-related macular degeneration. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2025;122(3):82-88. PMID 39836449
  • Ang MJ, Afshari NA. Cataract and systemic disease: a review. Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2021;49(2):118-127. PMID 33426783
  • Lehrer S, Rheinstein PH. Marijuana smoking and cataract. J Fr Ophtalmol. 2022;45(3):267-271. PMID 35093261
  • Tariq MA, Amin H, Ahmed B, et al. Association of dry eye disease with smoking: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2022;70(6):1892-1904. PMID 35647954
  • Yang K, Wu S, Ke L, et al. Association between potential factors and dry eye disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Medicine (Baltimore). 2024;103(52):e41019. PMID 39969375
  • Yu K, Bunya V, Maguire M, et al. Systemic conditions associated with severity of dry eye signs and symptoms in the Dry Eye Assessment and Management Study. Ophthalmology. 2021;128(10):1384-1392. PMID 33785415
  • Li DL, Shi WS, Qiu T, et al. Association between air pollutant exposure and ocular surface, anterior and middle segment and fundus eye diseases. Eye (Lond). 2026;40(7):940-949. PMID 41851291
  • Jaiswal S, Jalbert I, Schmid K, et al. Smoke and the eyes: a review of the harmful effects of wildfire smoke and air pollution on the ocular surface. Environ Pollut. 2022;309:119732. PMID 35839974
  • Jain V, Jain M, Abdull MM, Bastawrous A. The association between cigarette smoking and primary open-angle glaucoma: a systematic review. Int Ophthalmol. 2017;37(1):291-301. PMID 27138591
  • Tran JH, Stuart KV, de Vries V, et al. Genetic associations between smoking- and glaucoma-related traits. Transl Vis Sci Technol. 2023;12(2):20. PMID 36786746
  • Elhusseiny AM, Aref AA. Lifestyle modifications and environmental risk factors for glaucoma. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2025;36(2):115-121. PMID 39446700
  • Mahmoudinezhad G, Meller L, Moghimi S. Impact of smoking on glaucoma. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2024;35(2):124-130. PMID 38018801
  • Wat N, Wong RL, Wong IY. Associations between diabetic retinopathy and systemic risk factors. Hong Kong Med J. 2016;22(6):589-599. PMID 27779095
  • Wang B, Li H, Ma H, Chen Z. The association of cigarette smoking with the development and progression of diabetic retinopathy. J Transl Med. 2024;22(1):1169. PMID 39741329
  • Kaur A, Kumar R, Sharma A. Diabetic retinopathy leading to blindness: a review. Curr Diabetes Rev. 2024;20(9). PMID 38275038
  • Wiersinga WM, Eckstein AK, Žarković M. Thyroid eye disease (Graves’ orbitopathy): clinical presentation, epidemiology, pathogenesis, and management. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2025;13(7):600-614. PMID 40324443
  • Bartalena L, Gallo D, Tanda ML, Kahaly GJ. Thyroid eye disease: epidemiology, natural history, and risk factors. Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg. 2023;39(6S):S2-S8. PMID 38054980
  • Bartalena L, Piantanida E, Gallo D, et al. Epidemiology, natural history, risk factors, and prevention of Graves’ orbitopathy. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2020;11:615993. PMID 33329408
  • Bartalena L, Kahaly GJ, Baldeschi L, et al. The 2021 European Group on Graves’ orbitopathy (EUGOGO) clinical practice guidelines for the medical management of Graves’ orbitopathy. Eur J Endocrinol. 2021;185(4):G43-G67. PMID 34297684
  • Bartalena L, Tanda ML. Current concepts regarding Graves’ orbitopathy. J Intern Med. 2022;292(5):692-716. PMID 35604323
  • Liu J, Zhu T, Yang L, et al. Cigarette smoking drives thyroid eye disease progression via RAGE signaling activation. Thyroid. 2025;35(7):803-815. PMID 40501349
  • Karimi N, Kashkouli MB, Keyhani A, et al. Mitigating the risks: addressing smoking cessation in thyroid eye disease. BMJ Open Ophthalmol. 2025;10(1):e002226. PMID 40889896

This article is intended for information and does not replace a medical consultation. Indications, expected benefits and risks depend on each individual situation. For any question about your vision, consult an ophthalmologist.

Written and reviewed by Dr Moïse Tourabaly, ophthalmic refractive surgeon — former chef de clinique (Quinze-Vingts National Eye Hospital).

Last updated: September 20, 2026

Similar Posts