 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / Vision / March 2005Astigmatism: Roberto Kaplans findings
Hi Mike I had another of these messages that i cannot reply to from within the thread. <Unable to retrieve message RHYXd.204$qW.64@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net? As you know 180 degree astigmatism is the most commonly observed astigmatism. A lay person might say 'oh they read more' or 'its to do with the shape of the glasses' or 'people are born that way' A scientist is interested in underlying causes and finding explanations for the world around us. Kaplan has found some relationships. 180 stubborn and inflexible and impatient 90 lack of committment lack of voicing your truth, lack of love 135 left eye 45 right eye. Clash of will surrender of will 135 right eye 45 left eye. Unresolved anger and resentment. I have investigated those relationships and they fit the people i have been talking to. Yes the pattern of 'Father saying one thing' and 'mother saying another is common'. It gets expressed in different ways though. My mother was very strict and relatively violent but loved us and expected us to love her, but my father was childishly easygoing and effectively the oldest child in the family - but occasionaly he was a bit violent - but always wanted us to love him. Looking back I can see that my mother and father loved me but it was a confusing experiencing growing up. Other people have fathers who for example 'had the look' so that no person would dare challenge his authority. Now of course its easy to say that 'could be any family'. And these days Astigmatism and divorce are relatively common. Each time an angle of astigmatism changes - and they do change - an OD has a wonderful opportunity to look a bit deeper into why that might be happening. I know people who have kept their prescriptions and who can pinpoint experiences that can be convincingly connected to their astigmatism temporarily changing. Similarly occasionally a person finds that they no longer need glasses. If only we could interview those people and see what they have in common. One day such research will be done perhaps. Its extraordinary that it has not been done in fact. Some OD's are looking deeper at this kind of stuff. Kaplans results are interesting. > Some OD's are looking deeper at this kind of stuff. Kaplans results > are interesting. So are UFOs. -MT > > Some OD's are looking deeper at this kind of stuff. Kaplans results > > are interesting. > > So are UFOs. > > -MT IT WOULD BE INTERESTING TO KNOW WHEN OUR MYTHICAL ANDREW WILL FIND A CURE FOR HIS OWN IMPERFECT SIGHT. WHY NOT? > As you know 180 degree astigmatism is the most commonly observed > astigmatism. [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > 135 right eye 45 left eye. Unresolved anger and resentment. > Now of course its easy to say that 'could be any family'. And these > days > Astigmatism and divorce are relatively common. Simply incredible! > Each time an angle of astigmatism changes - and they do change - an OD > has a wonderful opportunity to look a bit deeper into why that might > be happening. Perhaps the tendency of astigmatism to change with age from with-the-rule to against-the-rule relates more to zonular fiber relaxation instead of changes in personality traits. Dear Mike and RM, Subject: Dealing with Andrew If I were an OD, and Andrew came in and I checked his refractive status and found it to be -2 diopters. You know what I would do? I would write a -2 diopter prescription for him and send him on his way. No muss no fuss, no problem. Best, Otis > Dear Mike and RM, > Subject: Dealing with Andrew [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Otis But he wants to cure his imperfect sight! He maintains he can do it WHILE WARING GLASSES! Now this is impossible, how can you do it? But eventually I hope for him that he succeeds. He does not want your prescriptions. Dear Rishi, Andrew has been on i-see for the last 3 years I believe. In that time, Fred Deakins (pilot) was at college and noticed his vision going "down", I think 20/50 to 20/70. He had heard about the "plus" and decided to see what he could do with it. Working very hard with the plus, he "cleared" back to 20/20. (He previously had 20/20, by the way.) He posted on i-see. Andrew tore him up. The result? Andrew is still myopic, and Fred is flying jets for the Air Force. Let us see -- Andrew blater for 3 years, versus Fred clearing is 3 to 6 months. Who "won" this argument -- I wonder. These ODs have not choice but to deal with Andrew as he "is". It is not their business to "change" Andrew. If they measure him at -3 diopters -- so be it. They must make a living too. I certainly would not bother arguing with Andrew -- and I would not expect them to argue with him either. But, yes, Andrew shouold "clear" his vision the way that Fred did it. The difference? Fred did it, and Andrew wants to sit on his butt and argue about it -- and God knows what else. Fred had the insight and MOTIVATION --- and Andrew never will. Think about it. Best, Otis > These ODs have not choice but to deal with Andrew as he > "is". Like it or not, these OD's don't see all that much difference between Andrew and you. Both are pushing an agenda supported by anecdotal evidence which cannot be backed up by published findings. Scott Dear Scott, Yes, I understand. But then I draw a line between dealing with a great mass of people walking in off the street, who expect their vision sharpened instantly, from a pilot, who was 20/20, and sees his vision at 20/25 or 20/30. If the "public" is like "Andrew", then yes, use the minus. But for a pilot -- who sees great professional value in "clearing" from 20/25, to 20/20, and does it successfully under their own control -- then that is different. Since this takes a strong "will" in the pilot, and he does it successfully, then it follows that there never was any need for "OD" involvement at all. I would describe this as a change of refractive status of the natural eye, gong from negative, and then back to positive (because the average visual environment is substantially changed. This is the same dynamic behavior of the adolescent primate eye -- under direct test -- where you only concern yourself with that issue. But all of the above must NOT be considered "medicine" in any meaning of the word. Best, Otis >But he wants to cure his imperfect sight! > >He maintains he can do it WHILE WARING GLASSES! IIRC, Waring makes blenders, not spectacles. what's your favorite episode of X-files? |
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.