 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / Vision / May 2005It was a miracle - I was cured!
When I woke up this morning at 0700 I opened my eyes and every little thing immediately sprang into focus. Thought I: A miracle has occured! Then I realized that I fell asleep with my glasses on after I got up around 0600 to use the bathroom. What a bummer. So much for Otis's and Gatti's spontaneous correction theory. Wooly "myopia suits me" Grrl +++++++++++++ Reply to the list as I do not publish an email address to USENET. This practice has cut my spam by more than 95%. Of course, I did have to abandon a perfectly good email account... >When I woke up this morning at 0700 I opened my eyes and every little >thing immediately sprang into focus. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >Then I realized that I fell asleep with my glasses on after I got up >around 0600 to use the bathroom. ROFL! Love it. >What a bummer. So much for Otis's and Gatti's spontaneous correction >theory. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >This practice has cut my spam by more than 95%. >Of course, I did have to abandon a perfectly good email account... Dear Wooly, I of couse never said ANYTHING like this. But equally, I understand you have absolutly no interest in "prevention". I only have suggested that the idea be offered to you BEFORE you begin wearing the minus. You choice -- your consequence. Best, Otis > But equally, I understand you have > absolutly no interest in "prevention". Again with false statements. We're ALL interested in prevention. Show us a technique that works and we'll use it. Instead you ridicule us because we lack _faith._ -MT Dear Mike, You TOTALLY ingore all experimental data you 'DON'T LIKE", and then you claim you are "not biased". In fact I trust the scientific facts concerning the natural eye's behavior -- rather than your insistance that the natural eye is not a dyanamic system -- on the basis of "input" versus "output" testing. But I will post a discussion of these issues for your pleasant presual in due course. Best, Otis >Dear Mike, > >You TOTALLY ingore all experimental data you 'DON'T LIKE", >and then you claim you are "not biased". Pot . . . kettle . . . black. >In fact I trust the scientific facts concerning the natural eye's >behavior -- rather than your insistance that the natural eye >is not a dyanamic system -- on the basis of "input" versus >"output" testing. What the hell are you talking about?? Is this something about the printer's son and a box camera, by any chance? >But I will post a discussion of these issues for >your pleasant presual in due course. Ah, yes . . . a pleasant presual, indeed. Here another true story: Patient calls to say his left eye was blurry all day, so he removed his contacts before bed but woke up in the morning seeing clearly. Simply amazing! Turns out he put two contact lenses in the right eye the day before and he removed one leaving the other in all night. --LB, O.D.
|
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.