Dear Friend,

I would be willing to lead a PREVENTIVE
study provided:

1.  It is a scientific-engineering study,
i.e., NOT BLIND.

2.  The "students" would have
vision between 20/30 to 20/60, on
the eye chart.

3.  The have a VERY STRONG
desire to succeed.

4.  The review the primate
studies EXHAUSTIVELY.
(The studies that the ODs
insist that we totally ignore!)

5.  The students make ALL MEASUREMENT,
as engineers.

6.  Oversight would be by the students
themselves, and the results would
be reported as "refracive states".

I have prepared a protocol for
the statistical basis of this
type of study.

The cost would be low -- since the
OD involvement would be minimum.

Other details can be made available
on request.

Best,

Otis

Proposed PREVENTIVE study:

The Agenda:

     INTRODUCTION TO THE ENTERING STUDENTS AT EMBRY RIDDLE

             FRESHMAN YEAR

THE FIRST YEAR -- Read the introductory syllabus on this page.

             INTRODUCTION

1.  What this study is:

    This study is an engineering-scientific study of the dynamic
nature of the fundamental eye.    Your personal expertise and
motivation are crucial for the success of this program.    The more
you know, the more you understand, the greater the probability of your
success.  In concept, you will be taking control of this
study.

2.  What this study it is not.

    This proposed study is not a medical study.  Since the pilots
in the study will have passed the Florida Snellen-DMV test, and
not require the use of a minus lens, the only issue is their
ability to personally verify their ability to clear their
distant vision to 20/20 through their own efforts.  Some medical
"over-sight" would be of value, but the main issue is the the
quality of effort of the pilot himself to take this issue
seriously.

              CONTROL

    This is an engineering-scientific study of the dynamic nature
of the fundamental eye.

    As such you have every right to review the experimental data
concerning the design, behavior and control of this device.

    Your will be in "control" of this study from start to finish.
In entering Embry-Riddle you will receive an excellent
technical-engineering education.  It is expected that four year
from now you will look back on this engineering analysis and
support and state that this approach made a great deal of sense --
from and engineering point-of-view.

        THE CONCEPT OF A "FIGHTING CHANCE"

    A study of this nature will depend completely on your
intellectual judgment.    While certain leadership functions and
guidance will be supplied now and next year, you are expected to
"get the idea" and proceed with the preventive work for the Junior
and Senior.  The statistical verification is also listed
on this page.  If your background it engineering-technical
then you should understand the nature of this type of testing.

    We can not guarantee any results -- since everything will
depend on your knowledge, actions and motivation.  We will say
that we will answer your questions to the best of our ability.

        THE CORE STUDY IN SOPHOMORE YEAR

    We need 100 engineers to lead this study.    The statistics are
crucial and must be understood in detail by you.  You will receive
detailed statistical analysis courses during your years at
Embry-Riddle, but we will need 100 pilots to participate.  As an
engineering study, requiring that you understand detailed
instruction, and make the measurements.

    At the end of the six months we will review the results and
submit them for publication in the IEEE/EMBS Magazine.

      ATTITUDES, DESTRUCTIVE VERSUS SUPPORTIVE

    Certain attitudes are destructive.  Some develop from the
general-public against prevention, and some attitudes develop
internal to optometry that are hostile to preventive work.  It
will be your responsibility to evaluate these attitudes as they
affect your personal visual welfare.  This should be part of your
review-process in your Freshman year.

    The "general public" is ignorant, and lacks
the motivation it takes to achieve effective prevention.
This is not the fault of anyone.  (Read "The Printer's Son"
by Jacob Raphaelson to understand this attitude.)

             CONCLUSION

    This has been a very brief description of what is becoming
the "second opinion", that a negative refractive state of the eye
(nearsightedness) can be prevented.

    You have one year to review this discussion.  Nothing is
required of you during this year.

    If you wish be part of and lead with the preventive effort we
invite you to join a six-month effort by strong use of a plus lens
-- at the beginning of the Sophomore yyear.

    The details of that use will be supplied at next year.

    Further steps will depend on your judgment of your results.

    It is intended that this discussion will become a "standing"
program at Embry-Riddle.  Therefore, this pitch will be made to
the next two incoming class.

    There is no cost to you in money.    The "cost" to you is in your
understanding, personal effort, logic, and scientific consistency.

Here is the syllabus

    "He who can take advice is sometimes superior to him who can
give it."

                    Karel von Knebel

Subject:  A proposed syllabus for a nearsightedness prevention
     program at a four-year aeronautical college such as
     Embry-Riddle.

            THE FRESHMAN YEAR

1.  A two hour introductory statement for the entering student
   body about the general concept of nearsightedness prevention.

2.  All pilots accepted into this program must have previously had
   20/20 (in high school).  The only issue will be a slight
   negative refractive status of their eyes.  All students will
   pass the Florida Snellen-DMV visual test.  The only issue
   will be failure to read the 20/20 line on the Snellen chart.

3.  The publish statistics concerning the U.  S.  Naval Academy
   will be reviewed and understood.

    If the pilot is interested in this study, he should identify
himself to us.    His vision must be such so that he can function
with out wearing a minus lens.    (Pilots with refractive states
from zero to +1/2 diopters would be encouraged to review the
concept for possibly joining the study in the Sophomore year.

    The method of measurement will be taught using a Snellen
chart and a simple trial-lens kit.  The measurements will be made
by the pilots and will be confirmed by the volunteer optometrist
or ophthalmologist.

    A team of two pilots would exchange places if a phoropter
(trial-lens) measurement is made.  This is to insure that the
pilots understand the measurements and can repeat them for
consistency.

    Nothing further would be done in the freshman year.  The
pilot should think very carefully about his visual future to
determine if he wishes to enter into the "practical-use" part of
the study.

    It is essential that the student be taught control-system
concepts as they apply to the dynamic behavior of the eye.

            THE SOPHOMORE YEAR

    Having review all information appropriate to the study, he
would be part of a team of 100 pilots who would intelligently use
the plus lens for four months.

    The group all measure their focal status (see original
measurement in the freshman year).  By now they would be
experienced with this process.

    The would randomly divide themselves into two groups.

    Both groups would continue to measure their focal status at
periodic intervals by use of the Snellen chart and trial-lens kit.

    The group using the plus lens would be given precise
instructions about the proper use of the plus.

    The other group would simply record their average
visual-environment in terms of diopters.

    The statistics of this type of work would be understood by
the group of 100 pilots.

    At the end of four months final measurements by the pilots
will be made, and the results will be discussed.

    If the refractive status of the test group and the control
group is identical, i.e., both groups have no significant
difference (.05 confidence level) the results would be written up
and submitted to an engineering journal (IEEE/EMBS) for potential
publication.

    If a difference exceeds the 0.05 confidence level then the
effort will be continued.  This result will be contingent on the
judgment of the men conducting the study.

    If these results are excellent, then the pilots in the
next cohort of pilots be offered the same opportunity to go
through this educational process.

    The purpose is to ensure that the results are repeatable,
with a completely different group of men.

          THE JUNIOR AND SENIOR YEARS

    The individual pilots can elect to continue with the
preventive process if they judge that it is effective in helping
them maintain 20/20 through their remaining two years at
Embry-Riddle.

              PUBLICATION

    The results will be submitted for publication in the
Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society magazine.

And here are the base-line statistics,
which each engineering student will
be expected to read and understand.

Subject:  How Can You Predict Nearsightedness Development at a
     Four Year College?

Re:  A question from Sci.med.vision.  Otis -- If a person is slightly
    myopic (20/25) at the time they reach college (the USAF Academy)
what
    are the chances that he will become more nearsighted from
    the required reading load?  Has the USAF run any experiments
    to find out about this nearsightedness change in their
    personnel?  Bill.

                 REFERENCES

1.  Reynolds Hayden, M.D., "Development and Prevention of Myopia
   at the United States Naval Academy", Volume 25, (old series
   Volume 82), Number 4., The American Medical Association.

2.  Gmelin, Maj.  Robert T., MSC, USA, "Myopia at West Point:
   Past and Present." Military Medicine, 141 (8) 542-3

Dear Bill,

    Let me rephrase your question as follows.    If you know the
refractive status of an "entering" student, can you predict the
resultant refractive state after four years?  The refractive
status is easily measured with a trial-lens kit.

    Once you know a person's refractive status you can predict the
resultant status change (degree of nearsightedness after four years in
college.

    If you check the person's focal status, and find it to close to
"zero" or "plano", on entry, (20/20) -- then what is the probability
that
that person will retain 20/20 for the four years.

     The probability is about one percent -- as stated by Dr.    Hayden,
and confirmed by a study at West Point.  (References 1 and 2)

Note:  The natural eye can have a negative or positive refractive
      status depending on the visual environment.  A positive
      status is called "hyperopia" or "hypermetropia" and a
      negative status is called "myopia", "nearsightedness".

    Here is the information that I have on your question about
"base-line data" concerning the behavior of the natural healthy eye at
the Naval Academy.

      OVER-ALL SYNOPSIS OF THESE MILITARY STUDIES OF THE EYE'S
       DOWNWARD MOVEMENT WHILE IN A FOUR YEAR COLLEGE.

    The studies of military cadets in the United States have
shown that their vision changes over the years of their academic
work.  Records reveal that a large percentage of the cadets (39%
of those at the U.S.  Military Academy in 1956) [2] became
nearsighted and needed a negative lens by graduation.  Further, of
those who developed 20/25 vision, only one percent recovered to
20/20 over the four years, [1].

    In early years the cause of their degraded vision not known,
and later, on any number of factors wear speculated, but the
upshot of these studies was that none of these circumstance were
really behind the cadet's loss of visual acuity.

    The development of nearsightedness (negative change of focal
state) was a result of the fact that the natural eye controls its
focal state to its average visual environment.    Roughly, that is
looking close, studying, reading, looking at books, for long
periods of time -- rather than at distant objects.

     SUMMARIZED STATEMENTS FROM DR.  HAYDEN, REFERENCE 1

    "...For many years the high incidence of myopia which
developed among midshipmen after admission to the United States
Naval Academy with supposedly normal vision was a cause of serious
concern to all those interested."

    Dr.  Hayden stated that many methods and efforts were made to
"save" the men with previously perfect vision.

    "...and by retaining may of them (who became nearsighted) in
the Naval Academy for one to three years in the hope that their
vision would improve."

    "...In the vast majority of cases their vision did not
improve, and the midshipmen was forced to leave the naval service
after two to four years in the Naval Academy.  Experience showed
that only about one percent of such men had 20/20 on their final
physical examination."

    [In summary -- if their focal status became even SLIGHTLY
negative (20/25) they had virtually no chance of clearing their
distant vision to 20/20.  At that time there was no attempt to
offer systematic use of a strong plus lens for the purpose of
recovery and prevention.  Otis Brown]

    "...Furthermore, an excessive number of junior line officers
were being retired because of defective vision, and the records
showed that the vision of 3/4 of these had become defection
defective (negative status, vision less than 20/20 for each eye)
at the Naval Academy."

    "...Any candidate, however, who if found to have any degree
of myopia following the use of a cycloplegic, even -0.12 or -0.25
diopters is rejected."

    [There are two methods of measuring refractive status of the
natural eye, eye chart and induced paralysis or cycloplegia.  They
produce slightly different values for the refractive status of the
eye.  OSB]

   NECESSITY OF A POSITVE REFRACTIVE STATUS (HYPEROPIC RESERVE) ON
           ENTRY AS DEFINED BY DR.  HAYDEN

    [I have paraphrased this rather long section.    OSB]

    A review of the refraction of the eye of candidates at the
time of preliminary entry physical examination showed that the
great majority of candidates whose refraction was of the
plano-type, (refractive state 0.0) to +0.25 diopters).

    At the first year their examination a significant number
would show that they had myopia.

    Occasionally a candidate who showed as much as +0.5 diopters
"hyper-metropia" on preliminary physical examination was found to
have become -0.25 diopters of myopia in the first year.

      DR.  HAYDEN STATES THAT EMMETROPIA IS NOT NORMAL FOR THE
              FOLLOWING REASONS

      [EMMETROPIA IS DEFINED AS NORMAL OR PERFECT BASED ON THE
         DONDERS-HELMHOLTZ CONCEPTUALIZATION -- OSB]

    "...As is well known, the emmetropic eye is for practical
purpose is an abnormal eye -- the great majority of persons with
so-called normal vision being actually hyper-metropic.    Those
candidates, then, whose refraction was of the plano (emmetropic --
focal status exactly zero) had borderline conditions definitely on
the way to myopia.  For all practical purposes, experience here
has shown that patients with +1/4 diopters of hyper-metropia are
in the same class."

    "In view of the experience at the Naval Academy during the
past three years as described, it is evident that a reserve of
preferably one diopter or at least 1/2 diopter is necessary at the
time of preliminary refraction to be reasonably sure that the
candidate will pass his physical examination for admission."

    "Furthermore, in order to be reasonably sure of being
visually qualified for a commission in the line of the Navy after
four years at the Naval Academy -- it is necessary that the
student have a reserve (positive refractive status) of at least
one diopter of hyper-metropia at the time of admission."

    "Of course, an occasional candidate will +1/4 to +1/2 diopter
of hypermetropia at the time of admission will survive visually
after four years and receive a commission, but that is
exceptional."

  DR.    HAYDEN THEN DISCUSSES ATROPINE A DRUG FOR INDUCING PARALYSIS
             FOR PURPOSE OF MEASUREMENT.

    He details the loss of people in various classes who were
"emmetropic" (focal state zero) on entry, using various drugs and
percentage mixtures of those drugs.  It was hoped that different
drugs would produce better results and these emmetropic eyes could
be "saved".  However the drug of choice for measurement and the
results were the same.

   DR.  HAYDEN PROVIDED SOME ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION OF ILLUMINATION
      LEVELS AND EFFORTS TO IMPROVE THESE LEVELS, BUT CONCLUDED
              THAT THIS HAD NO EFFECT.

              CONCLUSION BY DR.  HAYDEN

    "It is considered that during the past three years the Naval
Academy has definitely proved the necessity of midshipmen having a
"hyperopic reserve" of at least one diopter at the time of
admission to the Naval Academy, and of their meeting the present
visual requirements if the visual standards of the Naval are to be
maintained."

"...Any candidate having less than 1/2 diopter of
hyper-metropia at the time of a preliminary ocular refraction
should be informed that, while visually qualified at the time, he
has a borderline condition which may progress to a low degree of
myopia by the time he takes his physical examination for admission
to the Naval Academy, and may therefore be rejected."

    "Any candidate having from 1/2 to one diopters of
hypermetropia at the time of a preliminary ocular refraction
should be informed that, while he should pass the physical
examination for entrance to the Naval Academy, he stands no better
than an even chance of visually obtaining a commission in the line
of the Navy on graduation."

             __________________________

            The Gmelin Report

    Selected items:

    In the report by Maj McKenney "A Study of Refractive Trends
at West Point", he concluded:

1.  Pseudo-myopia during periods of stress associated with studying
   may result in blurred vision in cadets with little hyperopic
   reserve **

   **    [Their refractive status was very close to zero]

2.  The average increase in myopia was -1.37 diopters (the range
   being -1.12 diopters through -1.62 diopters).

3.  39 percent of the graduating class (1956) has less than 20/20
   vision at graduation

4.  Recommendation that the visual standard remain unchanged --
   that hyperopia over +2.0 diopters and myopia over -1.5
   diopters should be cause for ENTRANCE disqualification.

**   The natural eye changes its refractive status in a negative
    at a rate of -1/3 diopter per year (where accurate records
    are maintained) in a four year college.

        ***********************

Note 1:   All these men had healthy retinas.  All retinas had the
     capability of resolving 5 minute-of-angle targets at 20
     feet.  Their natural eye's behaved as expected.  The
     controlled their focal state to the visual environment.
     For this reason an "undesired" focal state does no
     indicate an "organic defect" or words to that effect.
     For that reason I use the term focal state so their is
     no confusion in your mind about that point.

Note 2:   The words emmetropia and ametropia were introduced by
     Donders.  Donders took the focal states of the normal
     eye to be DEFECTS of the eye.  Any non-zero focal state
     of the eye was, by definition, a defect (ametropia).    A
     focal state of EXACTLY zero was defined as "normal".
     Under this definition, very few, if any, animals or
     humans have eyes that are normal!

  _______________________________________________________

              The Gmelin Summary:

   After a century of investigation, it has been established
that the cadets at the United States Military Academy become
progressively myopic (or less hyperopic) ** during their four
years of education.  Still to be accomplished however, is an
in-depth study of myopia progression and prevention among these
USMA Cadets.

Dear Friends,

Subject:  99 percent go "down" at West Point.

MikeT> If you believe one percent survives four years without
      negative refractive change, then you believe 99% DID
      experience negative refractive change.

MikeT> Is that how you arrived at 99%?

Otis> It turns out that your are correct.

Otis> Mike -- Actually 100 percent nearsighted got worse.  Thus
     your 99 percent was not accurate -- it was 100 percent.  No
     one "improved" to 20/20.

Otis> Here are the figures for those cadets who are
     nearsightednss at West Point -- who were nearsighted on entry.

     __________________________________________________

Gmelin:  Myopia at West Point:    Past and Present Military
    Medicine, 141 (8) 542 - 3 Aug 76

2.    The average increase in myopia was -1.37 diopters (the range
     being -1.12 diopters through -1.62 diopters (over four
     years).

Otis> Always glad to "correct" your 99 percent got worse to 100
     percent for those who were nearsighted at West
     Point.

Best,

Otis

            _______________________

Otis> Are you just playing dumb?  I stated that the POPULATION
     AVERAGE moves "down" at a rate of -1/3 diopter per year.

MikeT> Yes, but you also "stated":

    at 20/25) that he will be the one-percent who survives four
    years with NO FURTHER NEGATIVE REFRACTIVE CHANGE.

MikeT> If you believe one percent survives four years without
      negative refractive change, then you believe 99% DID
      experience negative refractive change.

MikeT> Since it doesn't happen, we must assume you simply spout
      figures without understanding them.

     [I don't "spout figures".  Here are the published values
for those who "cleared" their vision from nearsightedness
     at West Point.  In fact NONE did. OSB]

Otis>  It is true that even high school students can figure out the
     implications of that statement.

MikeT> Is that how you arrived at 99%?

Otis> Actually this West Point study is how I arrived at the
     percentage of myopes who went "down" at the college.
     How did YOU calculate the percentage?

Best,

Otis Engineer

___________________________________

Gmelin> The subject of progressive myopia among the cadets remained
    dormant at the USMA for ten year.  Renewed interest in among
    the cadets remained dormant and not further investigations
    were made the subject of myopia was generated by the study
    of MAJ McKinney MC, on the Cadet Class of 1956.  In his
    unpublished report, "A Study of Refractive Trends at West
    Point", MAJ McKinney concluded:

1.    Pseudo-myopia during periods of stress associated with
     studying may result in blurred vision in cadets with little
     "hyperopic reserve".

2.    The average increase in myopia was -1.37 diopters (the range
     being -1.12 diopters through -1.62 diopters (over four
     years).

3.    39 percent of the graduating cadets of the 1956 had less
     than 20/20 vision at graduation; and

4.    Recommendation that the vision standards remain unchanged --
     that hyperopia over +2 diopters and that myopia less than -1.5
     diopters be cause for entrance disqualification.

And here are the statistics with the
"null hypothesis" that the natural eye
is a frozen box camera -- versus
the dynamic eye paradigm.

Dear Engineering Student,

    Nothing will ever be attempted if all possible objections
must be first overcome.

                         Samuel Johnson

Subject:  A statistical engineering study to determine if a
     negative focal state of the eye (nearsightedness) can be
     prevented.

    These remarks are addressed to engineering students entering
a four-year college, such as Embry-Riddle.  It is assumed that
they would have, or can develop the engineering and scientific
insights necessary to make this preventive effort work properly.
The entire work of judgment evaluation would depend completely on
their scientific understanding.

    As a engineering student entering a four year college I am
certain you must take a course in college statistics.
Participation in this type of study would occur in the first year.
In the following three years you could form a judgment about your
involvement in this type of analytical work.

    There are two types of studies.  Engineering studies where we
wish to determine the behavior of a mechanical or electrical
control system.  Since your background is in engineering, I think
you will understand the nature of this testing of the null
hypothesis.

    Medical studies do require the use of a placebo group.  Since
the Internet has become wide-spread and a great deal of
information is available to you about the effect the minus and
plus lens have on the focal state of the eye, it would be
impossible to maintain a "placebo group" at an engineering college
such as Embry Riddle.  Indeed the instructions and data collection
requirements would prohibit a medical study.

    The following constitutes a medical review of the statistical
analysis designed to show that the eye functions as an
auto-focused camera.

    When we attempted to institute a preventive effort at the
Naval Academy, it was necessary to provide a statistical analysis
to show that preliminary results would be meaningful.  We
suggested that 100 motivated pilots be offered a tutorial on the
subject, and if properly motivated be trained to make all the
critical measurements of their focal state.

    The study would run for 4 months should be sufficient to
demonstrate the basic separation of focal states for the test
group relative to the control group.  At the end of this work, the
engineers who must be privy to their own study would evaluate the
results and decide to continue with the effort or quit.

    The numbers are representative.  It is assumed that there
would be attrition in both the test group and the control group
for various reasons.  Any engineer could quit the study, but could
not re-enter the study.

    I have used standard college statistics for this analysis.
In my judgment, the pilot-students must understand this type of
technical analysis, and would appreciate the type of intellectual
and physical control they would use to protect their distant
vision -- through their four years at the college.

    The difference of 0.2 diopters between the test and control
groups in 4 months would be sufficient to reject the null "optical
bench", or "box camera" hypothesis.

    These are "talking points" for our proposal.

    Since you have the technical background I would think that
both you and the engineer-pilots would be interested in conducting
this type of study as an engineering effort.

    Best,

    Otis

            **************************

    A TEST TO DEMONSTRATED THAT THE FOCAL STATE OF THE
         EYE "FOLLOWS" THE ACCOMMODATION SIGNAL

    Test the hypothesis that there is absolutely no neurological
linkage between the accommodation system of the eye and the focal
state of the eye.

    The mean focal state of 100 midshipmen with 20/20 eyes is +
0.3 diopters with a standard deviation of 0.25 diopters.

    [It had been previously established that the focal state goes
downward at a rate of to -0.33 diopters per year for the average
focal state of all eyes.  Ref: Gemlin, West Point Study.]

    Using random number assignments, the group is divided into a
test group and a control group.  The control group will keep
accurate records of their visual environment.  The test group, who
use a positive lens (read at the blur-point) will change their
visual environment by +1.0 diopter (average).

    This use of the plus lens will produce an accommodation delta
of at least +0.75 diopters.

    At the end of six months, 45 students remain in the control
group and 35 in the test group.  The control group has a focal
state of +0.1 diopters, and the test group, a focal state of 0.3
diopters.  Both test and control groups have a standard-deviation
of 0.25 diopters.

            QUESTION:

    Are these results significant, and if so, what is the level
of significance of the results.

NOTE:  Standard testing states that a level of 0.05 is
      significant, and a level greater than 0.01 (1 in 100) is
      highly significant.

               SOLUTION:

    The pilot-engineers must decide between the hypothesis:

Ho:   The null hypothesis is the belief that the eye is a box
     camera, and there must be no relationship between the visual
     environment and focal state of the eye.

The Ho Hypothesis:  Focus of Test group = Focus of Control Group

    The null hypothesis states that there will be no significant
difference will develop between the two groups.

Ha:   Test-group (will develop a more positive focal state) than
     Control-group (The single-tailed test.)

    The alternative hypothesis (Ha) states that the natural eye
behaves as an auto-focused camera, and will control (change) its
focal state based on the "delta" produced by the assiduous use of
a plus lens.

           %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

    The values in this equation are translated as follows:

    X-Bar = Average of Test and Average of Control:

    At the start of the test, the average refractive status is
identical for the group -- considered to be homogeneous.

    After the group of 100 is randomly divided in half, then a
difference in refractive status (measured by the pilots with
trial-lens kit) will develop.  In this specific example the
difference between the two groups was projected as 0.2 diopters
after four months.

           Sigma = Standard deviation:

    In statistics, "Sigma" is a required calculation.  Before the
start of this test, Standard-deviation will be calculated for the
group of 100.

    After four months, standard-deviation will be calculated for
the test-group and the control-group.  This value is required for
this calculation.

            T = Test Group:

    The group that does not wear the a strong plus lens during
the four month of the study.  This group will, monitor their focal
status with a trial-lens kit.

            C = Control Group:

    This group will wear a proper-strength plus lens, as detailed
elsewhere on this site.  They must understand how they must wear
the plus lens.    The detailed instructions required will prevent
the use of a "blind study".  It is felt that that the engineers
will understand this need for detailed instructions and
understanding of both the method and goals of this study, as an
engineering, rather than a "medical" study.

              N = Number in group:

    100 people will start the test, with 50 in each group.  It is
expected that a number of pilots will not be able to complete the
test for various reasons.  In this example, 45 people reported
their measurements in the control group, and 35 reported their
measurements in the test group, thus meeting the protocol of this
engineering study.

              %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

    The null hypothesis Ho, assumes that the means of the
two groups are identical.  The following "Z" static is calculated
as described below.

         [  X-Bar(Test)  +  X-Bar(Control)  ]
Z =  ----------------------------------------------------------

  Square Root [  Sigma-T ^2 / N(test) + Sigma-C ^2 / N(Control) ]

Z = ( 0.3 ) - ( 0.1 ) / SQRT [ (0.25^2 / 35) + (0.25^2 / 45) ]

Z = 3.549

Notes:      X-Bar = Average of Test and Average of Control
      Sigma = Standard deviation
      ^2    = Squared
      T    = Test Group
      C    = Control Group
      N    = Number in group
      SQRT  = Square Root of [   ]

    Since the result, 3.549, exceeds 2.33, which is the 0.01 (99
percent) confidence level, we can say that it is highly probable
that the eye is a control-system, and that this result is in
agreement with the previous experiments that demonstrate that all
eyes will go negative when forced to wear a minus lens.

        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

               LEVELS OF SIGNIFICANCE:

             ------------  Percent -----------

Significance Level:    0.05    0.01    0.005    0.002

Critical "Z" values    1.645    2.33    2.58    2.88
for the one-tailed
test

              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

    The values chosen for this review are representative numbers.
The results of an a formal study will produce similar outcome.    It
is worth the effort to establish the above suggested relationship.

    On the basis of this test, using the one-tailed test at a
level of significance of 0.01 we should reject the null
hypothesis, Ho, that the natural eye is a rigid box camera, and
that there is NO RELATIONSHIP between the eye's visual environment
and its focal status.

Here you go...

"http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstra
ct&list_uids=2667638&query_hl=1"

-MT

Dear Chinese Male,

Subject:  Who should "administer" a scientific - preventive study.

Re:  "Warnings against scientific truth posted by Neil Brooks

Re:  Do you want to put the "foxes" in charnge of the chicken coop?

Since Neil is so convinced that the natural eye is
not dynamic, despite massive direct data to the contrary,
then Neil should be invited to present his "position"
to the group of engineers.  He should make the
case that the minus lens is "perfectly safe" and
the natural eye is NOT DYNAMIC when tested
on a scientific "input" versus "output" basis.

Best,

Otis

________

Its been done many times.  The undercorrected groups either are no different
or, in a few studies, the undercorrected actually progressed faster.  These
are the studies of humans with myopia that Otis choses to ignore, he likes
to quote studies about emmetropization involving neo natal animals without
myopia.  Below is a sampling of studies.

Dr Judy

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstra
ct&list_uids=12445849&query_hl=2

     Vision Res. 2002 Oct;42(22):2555-9.

Undercorrection of myopia enhances rather than inhibits myopia progression.

Chung K, Mohidin N, O'Leary DJ.

Department of Optometry, National University of Malaysia, 50300, Kuala
Lumpur, Malaysia.

The effect of myopic defocus on myopia progression was assessed in a
two-year prospective study on 94 myopes aged 9-14 years, randomly allocated
to an undercorrected group or a fully corrected control group. The 47
experimental subjects were blurred by approximately +0.75 D (blurring VA to
6/12), while the controls were fully corrected. Undercorrection produced
more rapid myopia progression and axial elongation (ANOVA, F(1,374)=14.32,
p<0.01). Contrary to animal studies, myopic defocus speeds up myopia
development in already myopic humans. Myopia could be caused by a failure to
detect the direction of defocus rather than by a mechanism exhibiting a
zero-point error.

Publication Types:
 a.. Clinical Trial
 b.. Randomized Controlled Trial
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstra
ct&list_uids=3310646&query_hl=2

     Am J Optom Physiol Opt. 1987 Aug;64(8):611-6. Related Articles, Links

Prevention of myopic progress by glasses. Study design and the first-year
results of a randomized trial among schoolchildren.

Hemminki E, Parssinen O.

Department of Public Health, University of Helsinki, Finland.

We report the design and first-year follow-up results of a randomized trial
of three different types of corrective lenses: (1) minus lenses with full
correction for continuous use (the reference group); (2) minus lenses with
full correction for distant vision only; and (3) bifocal lenses. Two hundred
and forty 9- to 11-year-old mildly myopic schoolchildren were randomly
allocated to the three treatment groups to be followed up to 3 years. During
the first year, 73% of the children were compliant with their treatment.
Refraction values after the first year were obtained from all but one child.
In the second group (spectacles for distant vision only) myopia had
progressed somewhat more than in the reference group. In respect of other
values (school achievement, reading habits, and accidents) there were no
statistically significant differences between the groups.

Publication Types:
 a.. Clinical Trial
 b.. Randomized Controlled Trial
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstra
ct&list_uids=6703005&query_hl=2

     Am J Optom Physiol Opt. 1984 Feb;61(2):112-7. Related Articles, Links

Plus lens, prism, and bifocal effects on myopia progression in military
students, Part II.

Shotwell AJ.

Military academies routinely lose a percentage of their pilot-qualified
students to myopia during the 4-year academic program. This study
investigated the progression of myopia during such a program and evaluated
the usefulness of reading glasses to prevent myopia progression and
subsequent acuity loss. A group of students at the United States Naval
Academy comprised three randomly divided groups: a placebo group (no. 1 pink
tint), a plus with prism group (+1.25 D with 2 delta base-in each eye), and
a bifocal group (+1.50 D near addition). All the lens powers were relative
to the experimental subject's distance refraction and were for use full-time
when reading. The pre- and post-test refractive errors at distance were
determined using 1% tropicamide HCl. At the end of 4 years, the tropicamide
refraction showed approximately -0.25 D of myopic shift in all groups. There
were no significant differences between the myopic shifts in the controls
and experimental groups.

Publication Types:
 a.. Clinical Trial
 b.. Randomized Controlled Trial