Orthokeratology with high plus inverted focus day and night soft contacts!
acem...@yahoo.com
I fitted her with Focus Night & Day lenses 8.6/13.8 - Right dominant
for distance with +1.25D and Left +3.75D, for near. She was rapt with
the results and wore them successfully for up to 30N EW, for a few
weeks. After being ill and not wearing the lenses for around two months
she came in within a month or two of resuming wear complaining of
reduced vision, particularly at near. She reported she was struggling
to read the paper and do other fine near visual tasks. Measurements
revealed that she needed more plus in the left eye [around +1.00D more]
and refraction confirmed a hyperopic shift of a similar order. Sure
enough K readings confirmed that indeed her cornea had flattened around
1.00D
http://www.siliconehydrogels.org/editorials/previous_editorial_nina.asp
My comments: Whoa! Nice find! The highest plus for focus day and night
is +6 which is plenty, enough for a reduction of 1.5 to 2 diopters of
myopia! I guess this could be "poor man's" orthoK
One challenge is the person inverting the contacts inside out, sleeping
in them then waking up will see very blurry till the lenses are
removed. But the improvement in vision is amazing! Low myopes less than
-3 may greatly reduce, if not eliminate their dependacy on glasses
while more moderate myopes of -3 to -5 will experience a significent
improve in UCVA and a reduction in glasses dependacy.
acem...@yahoo.com
will be revolutionary for most low(er) myopes with little or no
astigmatism!
Quick
> One challenge is the person inverting the contacts inside
> out, sleeping in them then waking up will see very blurry
> till the lenses are removed. But the improvement in
> vision is amazing!
Dicky would be proud of you Ace. This expose along with
the home LASIK kit will reduce any vision care cost by
orders of magnitude.
-Quick
acem...@yahoo.com
Home lasik is a hoax. A trained surgeon needs to operate the laser, not
some noob doing it himself at home. Its impossible to give yourself
lasik as you wouldnt see what you were doing either. I doubt anyone has
even attempted RK on themselves!
OrthoK is a reality and far safer than any refractive surgury, you
havent read the article!
Quick
No. I saw it on the internet. They had pictures of the kit
and more pictures of someone giving themself LASIK.
How do you explain that? It must be true! You're just
one of all those others trying to keep up the ridiculous
cost of these simple procedures that you can do yourself.
-Quick
serebel
acem...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
>
> Home lasik is a hoax. A trained surgeon needs to operate the laser, not
> some noob doing it himself at home. Its impossible to give yourself
> lasik as you wouldnt see what you were doing either. I doubt anyone has
> even attempted RK on themselves!
> OrthoK is a reality and far safer than any refractive surgury, you
> havent read the article!
Is it possible to be more retarded than this?
acem...@yahoo.com
it takes is a prescription of +6 lens and you can make history about
-1.5 diopters of your myopia! Will greatly reduce glasses dependency
for low myopes less than -3. Will still benefit those up to -5. RGP
orthoK can make history much higher amounts of myopia.
serebel
Apparently it is possible to post more retarded crap on a continuing
basis.
CatmanX
also think that I can eliminate my myopa with plus lenses.
Even if the nice plus doesn't get rid of the evil minus, I still like
to play with penises.
Nancy, your friend
otis...@pa.net
CatMan (Grant)
You reveal the type of mind you have.
That is some majority-opinion you have. Do
you call youself a professional?
I wonder why -- when other professionals support
plus-prevention for their own children.
Are you defending your "practice", versus helping
people understand the preventive alternative?
Or are you afraid of the consequences when they
recognize the scientific truth about the proven
dynamic behavior of all fundamental eyes?
Otis
Dr. Leukoma
otis...@pa.net wrote:
> I wonder why -- when other professionals support
> plus-prevention for their own children.
Thus far, you have come up with one eye professional who does this.
Where are the others?
>
> Are you defending your "practice", versus helping
> people understand the preventive alternative?
He doesn't have to "defend" his practice, but you certainly need to
defend yours. Unfortunately, there is no defense for what amounts to
science fiction.
>
> Or are you afraid of the consequences when they
> recognize the scientific truth about the proven
> dynamic behavior of all fundamental eyes?
[sarcasm]How long does it take for the world to come to their senses,
Otis? When will the world recognize you, poor, unrecognized genius
that you are? [/sarcasm]
DrG
Quick
> [sarcasm]How long does it take for the world to come to
> their senses, Otis? When will the world recognize you,
> poor, unrecognized genius that you are? [/sarcasm]
There is an upside. Otis will only need a small pitcher
when it comes time to drink the Kool-aid.
-Quick