 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / Vision / February 2005Vision clearing from -1.5 diopters (20/70)
Dear Prevention minded friends Subject: Correct use of the "second opinion" As you know the "traditional method" of the minus lens works instantly. Most, perhaps, prefer nothing else -- as will become "hostile" if offered the "correct use" of a plus lens. This person contacted me, and stated she was -10 diopters, and was deeply concerned about her child. The recent OD exam showed a refractive state of -1.5 diopters and about 20/70 vision. I explained that I was an engineer -- but I had done extensive research to establish that the natural eye was "dynamic" and she should understand that a percentage of ODs and MDs supported the concept of prevention -- at the threshold -- only. She decided to proceed, and obtained a +3 diopter lens for her daughter about 3 months ago. This is her statement of current progress. As always, enjoy our pleasant conversations about "alternative methods". As always -- I changed the names. Best, Otis Engineer _______________ Current vision clearing progress: Subject: can see a little bit of 20/20 Date: Thursday, February 10, 2005 4:51 PM Dear Otis, With the persistent wearing of +3 lenses, my daughter can now see a few letters along the 20/20 line (must be with both eyes open though). She can read her blackboard with the plus 3 lenses on now so she doesn't even take them off for looking at teacher's writings. It is interesting to see that most of the kids in her class (7-8 yr olds) are already in need of glasses. (Some already have glasses while others need eye exams). The teacher just moved the entire class' seats closer to the front so they can see better. Even with this change, some children are still squinting to read while sitting in first row. I will let you know of my daughter's progress. best wishes, Y. Wright [usual bulls*it snipped] > Y. Wright That's pronounced "Yeah, right...." BTW: I literally added him to my killfile, but for some reason, he cannot be killed. I'll keep working on it. Dear Neil, As usual your "closed mind" wins the day. Because OTHER ODs are more "wise" than you are -- they SUPPORT this woman's use of a plus on her daughter. In the final analysis, it will be mother-and-daughter (with the support of prevention-minded ODs) who finally win this difficult struggle. And yes, effective prevention, that will be achieved by this woman's child is the "Holy Grail" of science (and not optometry). Soving problems by accuratly reproting fact as they concern the dynamic behavior of the natural eye as sophisticated control-system. The alternative is to continue the minus-lens method put is place 400 years ago because it worked instantly if 15 minutes. Superficial, of course, but it is impressive. But is it science? Think about it. Best, Otis > And yes, effective prevention, that will be achieved > by this woman's child is the "Holy Grail" of > science (and not optometry). So why hasn't science published results showing it works? No answer. -MT Dear Mike, The work is published in various forums, and is available to an educated person who wishes to make a choice ON HER JUDGEMENT -- NOT YOURS. She KNOWs what your opinion is -- that perevention with the plus -- must be destoryed. She read the scientific reports by Dr. Francis Young that demonstrated that a properly fitted plus lens will STOP the eye's movement into nearsighedness. She is also aware that other ODs, specifically www.chinamyopia.org express the second-opinion, and that none of these issues are resolved. In the face of advice by experts that is profoundly contradictory -- you might well decide that there are no real "experts". She has a right to judge YOUR opinion, that the eye is "frozen", and can not change at all, versus the second-opinion that the natural eye controls its refractive status to its average visual enviroment. Clearly HER CHOICE will have life-time consequences for her child. She was not willing to let your opinion dictate HER course of action. Indeed, I SUPPORT ODs, who support this second opinion -- with the person involved making the final choise. That is both right and ethical. Best, Otis > She read the scientific reports by Dr. Francis Young > that demonstrated that a properly fitted plus lens > will STOP the eye's movement into nearsighedness. I would like to advertise this service for my patients. Can you tell me where I might find studies that show plus lenses stop nearsightedness? Has Dr. Young produced any results with human subjects? Has ANYONE published significant results with human subjects? -MT > BTW: I literally added him to my killfile, but for some reason, he cannot be > killed. I'll keep working on it. you are so stupid. ***** OTIS WARNING ***** This posting is an automatic reply to any sci.med.vision newsgroup thread that is receiving comments from a person named "Otis", "Otis Brown", "otisbrown@pa.net" or "Otis, Engineer". Otis is not an expert in any field of vision. His medical and eyecare training is nil. He is a proponent of a myopia prevention technique that is unproven. Otis continually misquotes people in his posts. He drops the names of doctors whom he falsely claims to be associated with. He has been caught in out-and-out lies. He has given people incorrect medical advise. Sadly, his behavior suggests he may have psychological problems that compel him to argue against people just for the sake of causing an argument. Otis is what is known in internet newsgroup lingo as a "troll". Do not reply to his postings-- it just takes up bandwidth and storage space that should be reserved for meaningful topics. It also just fulfils his sick psychological needs. No one means to suppress the honest opinions of others. This message is only meant to forewarn newcomers who might misconstrue Otis as a trained eyecare expert. Those of us who have been here for awhile know Otis oh too well! For anyone who is interested in understanding the true state of scientific/medical research on myopia prevention, I offer the following link: http://annals.edu.sg/pdf200401/V33N1p4.pdf. If you are truly interested in Otis' theories of myopia prevention then visit his favorite websites www.i-see.org and www.chinamyopia.com. If you have other topics you wish to discuss, there are experts here who will usually help you. Don't waste your time with Otis. Please see the weekly posting "welcome to sci.med.vision", which usually appears on Mondays, for a guide regarding this newsgroup and for information on how to filter out Otis' posts so that you may be able to participate in worthwhile discussions in this forum. Dear Friends, RM is "full of himself". I would look for ODs and MDs who are more open minded -- and will offer you and honest choice for prevention. They do exist -- and they will support you if you ask. Be careful -- and be wise. The mother cited above read RM's crap and relized what the long-term effect of that minus lens would be on he daughter's eyes. She chose to become part of the solution -- rather than part of the problem. But YOU decide -- and enjoy! Best, Otis Engineer > Dear Friends, SNIP more Otis lies and misrepresentation > But YOU decide -- and enjoy! > > Best, > > Otis > Engineer Sir-- There is no evidence for an effective prevention method for myopia. Please show us the reference for human studies which demonstrate it. You, sir, are a smooth talking bullshitter with some kind of axe to grind. You can't prove anything you say. Attention prevention-minded friends. Do a newgroup search on all threads Otis has participated in. He cannot prove anything he says. He avoids questions that eye doctors ask him because he knows they prove his claims are invalid. He gives incorrect medical advise. He is probably in violation of laws regarding the practice of medicine without a license. Avoid Otis Engineer like the plaque! |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.