Otis is right! The plus lens improved his 20/40(-1) to 20/20+(-.25)
acem...@yahoo.com
He rejected the minus lens, choosing the second opinion and using the
plus lens instead to clear from 20/40 to 20/20! Had he worn that -1
lens, his eyes would get worse and worse and stronger minus lenses
would need to be worn. This is stair-case myopia. The evidence that the
eye is dynamic and goes in the direction of the lens you wear is clear.
If you want more myopia, use the minus. If you want to stop and reverse
myopia and clear 20/40 or better yet, 20/20, use the plus lens
consistly! Otis is right, most people like the instant gratification of
very clear 20/20 or even 20/15 vision a minus lens gives. Their parents
and optometrists insist the child(ren) wear their minus glasses part or
full time. In 6 to 12 months, your eye drops by another half diopter
and stronger lenses are pescribed. Repeat over and over for many years
and youll end up with stair-case myopia that can be very high,
exceeding six diopters!
I am trying my best to undo the damage and have been using less
minus(in other words, more plus) for distance and taking my glasses off
for near. I improved my vision some and will improve as much as I can.
More importantly, I am preventing any further stair-case myopia. I wish
more optometrists and parents would "wake up" to the plus lens and take
the effort to keep their child's vision at 20/40 or better.
Quick
> http://www.tc.umn.edu/~schw0709/stories/VisionTherapy.html
>
> I am trying my best to undo the damage and have been
> using less minus(in other words, more plus) for distance
> and taking my glasses off for near. I improved my vision
> some and will improve as much as I can. More importantly,
> I am preventing any further stair-case myopia. I wish
> more optometrists and parents would "wake up" to the plus
> lens and take the effort to keep their child's vision at
> 20/40 or better.
Ace, use fresh mushrooms only. Check the expiration date
on your stash.
-Quick
CatmanX
acem...@yahoo.com wrote:
> http://www.tc.umn.edu/~schw0709/stories/VisionTherapy.html
>
>
tried this 3 times dickhead and no response. Looks like your references
are as good as Cletis'.
retinula
myopia is caused by a "stuck" accommodation system. read his
assumptions-- they are simply wrong. however you are confused by the
fact that the guy can put together a webpage with a nice graph and
throw in a mathematical formula and graph. learn to read and
critically think. you are a gullible fool.
accommodation is NOT caused by the lens becoming stuck in some
partially contracted state like this kid says it is. its caused
(usually) by an excessively long eyeball or an excessively steep
corneal curvature (usually the former). plus lenses do not change the
length of the eyeball.
just stick to drugs aceman.
==========
acem...@yahoo.com wrote:
> http://www.tc.umn.edu/~schw0709/stories/VisionTherapy.html
Rev Jessie James
yet it is another piece of anecdotal evidence to support Otis's theory.
"CatmanX" <drg...@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
news:1152350883.7...@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
retinula
in the 1st paragraph the guy writes "I know little to nothing about the
inner workings of the eye and therefore must write in very abstract
terms. The premise under which I am laboring is as follows:
Nearsightedness is the result of the eye's focusing muscles becoming
stiff after being held tense for long periods of time during close
work." His basic premise is wrong. stiff focusing muscles IS NOT what
causes myopia. if so, then cycloplegia would result in all myopic
prescriptions going away. what the guy IS describing is a form of
pseudomyopia.
ace thinks the webpage is cool, and has some cool-looking graphs and
equations so he is fooled into thinking what the guy wrote must be
right. if he were as intelligent as he would have us believe, then he
could recognize that whole argument was flawed to begin with.
as they say-- $hit in, $hit out.
=======
Roland J. Izaac
been placed across the top, it is even aligned slightly differently.Can
we be sure that the rx is for the same person?
Roland J. Izaac
Roland J. Izaac
been placed across the top, it is even aligned slightly differently.Can
we be sure that the rx is for the same person?
Roland J. Izaac
retinula wrote:
Mike Tyner
"Roland J. Izaac" <rol...@philip-d-izaac.com.sg>
> Look at the prescription and you will notice that a blue sticker has
> been placed across the top, it is even aligned slightly differently.Can
> we be sure that the rx is for the same person?
I have no reason to doubt that a young person could rid himself of
three-quarters of a diopter of tonic accommodation.
OTOH, after battling the unreadable web site, I could believe this person
knows very little about vision.
-MT
Mike Tyner
<acem...@yahoo.com> wrote
> would need to be worn. This is stair-case myopia. The evidence that the
> eye is dynamic and goes in the direction of the lens you wear is clear.
In your world, this happens to everybody. But in that other reality where we
actually measure stuff, young people easily adopt excess acommodation. In
that world, human eyes don't grow longer or shorter depending on which lens
you wear. At least after the very early years.
> If you want more myopia, use the minus.
If you want to be taller, stretch every day.
> If you want to stop and reverse
> myopia and clear 20/40 or better yet, 20/20, use the plus lens
> consistly!
If you want smaller feet, quit wearing shoes. Retinal blur has nothing to do
with increasing myopia.
> full time. In 6 to 12 months, your eye drops by another half diopter
> and stronger lenses are pescribed. Repeat over and over for many years
> and youll end up with stair-case myopia that can be very high,
> exceeding six diopters!
That's right... every myope who wears their glasses eventually
becomes -6.00.
If you want respect, you could begin with credibility. And a spell checker.
Nobody "pescribes."
> I am trying my best to undo the damage and have been using less
> minus(in other words, more plus) for distance and taking my glasses off
> for near. I improved my vision some and will improve as much as I can.
But Otis said that was impossible. You missed that?
> More importantly, I am preventing any further stair-case myopia. I wish
> more optometrists and parents would "wake up" to the plus lens and take
> the effort to keep their child's vision at 20/40 or better.
If you wish really really REALLY hard, it might even happen.
Just like if I wish really really hard, you might get a clue.
-MT
acem...@yahoo.com
geez your rude today. Forgot to take your meds? Go out and buy a refill
of chill pills.
in response to what retinula said:
Stuck accomodation is also known as tonic accomodation. If left
untreated, axial myopia begins. I understand perfectly what he wrote
and did. As Otis has said so many times, you gotta nip it in the bud,
prevent myopia from ever escalating and stair casing. His eyeball would
enlongate had he worn the wretched minus lens.
Rev Jessie James,
Thats correct and goes to show what Otis is talking about. He knows
about preventing myopia at the treshold if plus lenses are used
consistly and minus lens is avoided. Whats sad is the second opinion is
usually ignored in favor of instant gratification with a minus lens to
give very sharp vision. You pay the price for that with stair-case
myopia.
Mike Tyner,
as an optometrist, can you reconize the need for myopia prevention? Do
you give cycloplegic refractions to children just starting to become
myopic? Do you take any measures to try to stop their myopia
progression? I wish my optometrist had told me about that back when I
was -1.
Ann
<mty...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>> full time. In 6 to 12 months, your eye drops by another half diopter
>> and stronger lenses are pescribed. Repeat over and over for many years
>> and youll end up with stair-case myopia that can be very high,
>> exceeding six diopters!
>
>That's right... every myope who wears their glasses eventually
>becomes -6.00.
This has been pointed out to Ace several times and he constantly
ignores it. I wonder why.
Ann
acem...@yahoo.com
Didnt see that. The answer is both in the genes and environment.
Usually the earlier you begin the wretched minus lens, the more time
there is for staircase myopia. Luckily only 10% of people ever get to
the high myopia of -6. However lots of people become myopic at -2, -3,
-4 and this is still pretty bad. If you avoid the minus lens and make
the plus lens your friend, you will usually be able to keep your vision
at no worse than 20/40(-1) avoiding the need for glasses by passing the
DMV :)
Mike Tyner
<acem...@yahoo.com> wrote
> Stuck accomodation is also known as tonic accomodation. If left
> untreated, axial myopia begins.
That second part is the fuckwit qualification. If you care.
> His eyeball would
> enlongate had he worn the wretched minus lens.
Consider the source.
> Thats correct and goes to show what Otis is talking about. He knows
> about preventing myopia at the treshold if plus lenses are used
> consistly and minus lens is avoided.
Never mind that it hasn't worked.
> as an optometrist, can you reconize the need for myopia prevention? Do
> you give cycloplegic refractions to children just starting to become
> myopic? Do you take any measures to try to stop their myopia
> progression? I wish my optometrist had told me about that back when I
> was -1.
If wishes were fishes...
Show me a technique that works, compared to untreated controls. We'll all
use it. I promise.
-MT
Mike Tyner
"Ann" <m...@privacy.net> wrote
> This has been pointed out to Ace several times and he constantly
> ignores it. I wonder why.
Because Otis said so.
-MT
Mike Tyner
<acem...@yahoo.com> wrote
> Didnt see that. The answer is both in the genes and environment.
> Usually the earlier you begin the wretched minus lens, the more time
> there is for staircase myopia. Luckily only 10% of people ever get to
> the high myopia of -6. However lots of people become myopic at -2, -3,
> -4 and this is still pretty bad. If you avoid the minus lens and make
> the plus lens your friend, you will usually be able to keep your vision
> at no worse than 20/40(-1) avoiding the need for glasses by passing the
> DMV :)
Preach it, brudder. If Otis says so, it MUST be true.
-MT
Charles
>
> Didnt see that. The answer is both in the genes and environment.
> Usually the earlier you begin the wretched minus lens, the more time
> there is for staircase myopia. Luckily only 10% of people ever get to
> the high myopia of -6. However lots of people become myopic at -2, -3,
> -4 and this is still pretty bad. If you avoid the minus lens and make
> the plus lens your friend, you will usually be able to keep your
> vision at no worse than 20/40(-1) avoiding the need for glasses by
> passing the DMV :)
Give it up man, for crying out loud. Staircase myopia is intuitive,
but the docs say there are no studies or data to support it. Why do
you come off like you are so certain? At least say "I think", or "it
seems to me that..." or something. It clearly doesn't happen in all
cases, because millions of people are walking around with low myopia.
And who says that -6 is high? I know for sure of 4 people I work
closely with who are around -9, and judging by the lenses people wear,
there are dozens more in that ballpark or worse.
Why would someone with a moderate to high myopia ever get near a plus
power lens? They already can't see with bare eyes. Bifocals for a
high myope would still be quite negative in the reading part.
Please stop going on about 20/40. Nobody wants to see that poorly if
it can be fixed with glasses or contacts. Walking around in a blur
just to say you don't "need" glasses is simply idiotic.
--
otis...@pa.net
Dear AceMan,
It is always a pleasure to see an engineer-scientist "wake up" to the
PROVEN effect of a minus on the refractive STATE of all
natural eyes.
This is the scientific truth that August "woke up" to.
He cleared his vision from -1.0 diopters to pass all
legal visual-acuity requirements.
That is a major success, considering that the
majority-opinion ODs on sci.med.vision keep on
insisting that is it IMPOSSIBLE to clear your
distant vision from -1 diopter to normal.
But, try to avoid people who do not understand that
the fundamental eye is a successful and dynamic
system -- and cling to out-dated notions that the
eye is a "frozen" box camera.
I would also point out that when you place the DYNAMIC
eye in a confined environment the NATURAL eye will
change its refractive STATE in the direction and approximate
magnitude of that "applied" confined environment.
Further, if August continues his work, he will avoid
the -1/3 diopter NEGATIVE change in refractive
state seen at both West Point and Annapolis.
But it will be up to August to continue to protect
his distant vision by WISE use of the plus -- as
the PREVENTIVE second-opinion.
Best,
Otis
+++++++++
retinula
otis...@pa.net wrote:
> Dear AceMan,
>
> It is always a pleasure to see an engineer-scientist "wake up" to the
> PROVEN effect of a minus on the refractive STATE of all
> natural eyes.
proven? how so?
> This is the scientific truth that August "woke up" to.
>
> He cleared his vision from -1.0 diopters to pass all
> legal visual-acuity requirements.
at -1.00D myopia, a person is pretty much already at 20/40 which passes
at the BMV. however, who wants to drive around with vision that blurry
anyway?
> That is a major success, considering that the
> majority-opinion ODs on sci.med.vision keep on
> insisting that is it IMPOSSIBLE to clear your
> distant vision from -1 diopter to normal.
its possible if your nearsightedness is caused by accommodative
dysfunction rather than true anatomical myopia
>
> But, try to avoid people who do not understand that
> the fundamental eye is a successful and dynamic
> system -- and cling to out-dated notions that the
> eye is a "frozen" box camera.
you are the only one who uses this box camera analogy. must have read
it at some other wacko website. and it is YOU, not us, who clings to
old outdated methods. present a recent journal article where your
methods are used-- just one.
>
> I would also point out that when you place the DYNAMIC
> eye in a confined environment the NATURAL eye will
> change its refractive STATE in the direction and approximate
> magnitude of that "applied" confined environment.
>
> Further, if August continues his work, he will avoid
> the -1/3 diopter NEGATIVE change in refractive
> state seen at both West Point and Annapolis.
>
> But it will be up to August to continue to protect
> his distant vision by WISE use of the plus -- as
> the PREVENTIVE second-opinion.
>
preach it brother otis. kiss the snake.
Quick
Nice move Otis! Call Ace an engineer-scientist and
you will have a cult follower for life. Of course, it
follows that you used the same criteria to qualify
Ace as an engineer-scientist that you did to claim
yourself an engineer-scientist...
-Quick