Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
GeneralCardiologyVisionDentistryPharmacyLaboratoryNutritionAlternative
Diseases and Disorders
AIDSAlzheimer'sArthritisAsthmaCancerBreast CancerDiabetesEpilepsyGlaucomaHepatitisHerpesLupusProstate BPHProstate CancerProstatitisSinusitisTinnitus

Medical Forum / General / Vision / April 2005

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

-20 D, -16 D under self-treatment by rest methods

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
g.gatti@agora.it - 02 Apr 2005 16:08 GMT
Now we have some new data.

The girl went to an optician to be tested with the auto-refractometer.

The machine reported an IMPRESSIVE -16 D for one eye, -20 D for the
other.

The girl refused to be checked with the snellen chart and trial lenses
since she does not stand anymore the discomfort of any lenses before
her eyes.

Previous glasses prescription was -23 D.

Now she is looking for a magnifying glass to treat herself with the
light of the sun concentrated on the sclera and then she will be tested
again with the refractometer.

Of course the operator intimidated her by commanding not to blink the
eyes while under test and this created a tension in her eyes which was
measured by the machine.

The girl can read a letter less than 1 mm tall (calibrated for 1.25
feet of normal acuity standard) at 20 cm distance with good electric
light (so almost 70% of normal vision for that distance).

If the refractometer was right, she should not be able to read it by
any means.

However, this is a great success because we have an objective data to
start with and the data is sensibly better than the previous
prescription.

During the test, she was unable to imagine a little black dot while
looking at the image on the screen, that's why she could not relax her
mind and eyes and the measure was difficult.

The girl walks alone in the streets and has no problem at all with her
way: the optician was quite shocked to see her apparently in no
discomfort with such a great myopia measurement.

The treatment will continue, devoting same of the time for the
practicing of the weaker eye.

http://TheCentralFixation.com
Neil Brooks - 02 Apr 2005 16:45 GMT
g.gatti@agora.it wrote . . . and Neil translates and annotates:

>Now we have some new data.

(Listen as I spew some more bull$hit)

>The girl went to an optician to be tested with the auto-refractometer.
>
>The machine reported an IMPRESSIVE -16 D for one eye, -20 D for the
>other.

(No girl, nor optician (who don't often use autorefractors anyway)
ever existed)

>The girl refused to be checked with the snellen chart and trial lenses
>since she does not stand anymore the discomfort of any lenses before
>her eyes.

(As we all know, seeing clearly can be quite uncomfortable)

>Previous glasses prescription was -23 D.

(As measured by Rishi, a man with no knowledge, no training, and a
tenuous grasp on reality)

>Now she is looking for a magnifying glass to treat herself with the
>light of the sun concentrated on the sclera

(Which, in itself, is immediate grounds for a 72-hour psych hold)

>Of course the operator intimidated her by commanding not to blink the
>eyes while under test and this created a tension in her eyes which was
>measured by the machine.

(This tension was not nearly enough to offset the rohypnol that Rishi
has been slipping her for months)

>The girl can read a letter less than 1 mm tall (calibrated for 1.25
>feet of normal acuity standard) at 20 cm distance with good electric
>light (so almost 70% of normal vision for that distance).

(but only when looking through the phoropter)

>If the refractometer was right, she should not be able to read it by
>any means.

(If Rishi was ever right, there would be a star in the East)

>However, this is a great success because we have an objective data to
>start with and the data is sensibly better than the previous
>prescription.

(I can imagine nothing further from "objective data."  YMMV)

>During the test, she was unable to imagine a little black dot

(Most closely associated with Rishi's brain (or other part of his
anatomy.  You choose))

>The girl walks alone in the streets

(Puttana.  Rishi's treating hookers.  We've always speculated as to
whether these "patients" pay him.  It's clear that the situation is
quite the opposite)

>The treatment will continue, devoting same of the time for the
>practicing of the weaker eye.

(by the Italian of the weakest mind)
g.gatti@agora.it - 02 Apr 2005 19:51 GMT
With the better eye the girl could see the whole line of letters at
about 35 cm of the snellen reduced eyechart, so we can say that she has
reached normal vision for the distance of 35 cm.

She could read the letters continuously and was very happy. The other
eye is weaker, now she has to practice more with it.

http://TheCentralFixation.com
Access - 03 Apr 2005 12:52 GMT
> With the better eye the girl could see the whole line of letters at
> about 35 cm of the snellen reduced eyechart, so we can say that she has
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> http://TheCentralFixation.com

What's wrong with you anyway ?
g.gatti@agora.it - 03 Apr 2005 13:25 GMT
> What's wrong with you anyway ?

Are you an idiot?
Access - 03 Apr 2005 16:37 GMT
>> What's wrong with you anyway ?
>
> Are you an idiot?

Of course, but what about YOU ?
g.gatti@agora.it - 03 Apr 2005 17:24 GMT
> > Are you an idiot?
>
> Of course, but what about YOU ?

I am not an idiot.
Neil Brooks - 03 Apr 2005 14:25 GMT
>> With the better eye the girl could see the whole line of letters at
>> about 35 cm of the snellen reduced eyechart, so we can say that she has
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>
>What's wrong with you anyway ?

The answer to that has eluded medical science for years....
 
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.