Additional Response and comments to Otis' postings.

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

Yasar, Mehmet C PFC A Co 602d ASB - 22 Aug 2005 14:59 GMT

Below you will find comments of Otis on my observations for Prevention minded friends,

>Subject: A pilot's use of the plus, and his judgment of the
> "ghosting" issue.
>
>Re: Risks to the optometrist who might offer the "preventive
> plus".
>
> (Revised)
>
> While some pilots have cleared from 20/50 to 20/20, others
>hate the process and judge that it is DANGEROUS as stated below.

If it harms, hating the process should be normal and I can see where all the doctors on this NG are coming from now.
Although I don't hate anything, I can't believe how desperate I must have been to try to reverse myopia at age 28 with plus lenses

>Here are some remarks by John that I judge are VERY IMPORTANT --
>and MUST be read BEFORE the use the plus.

Yes, hopefully it will be published at myopiafree.com and I-see.org message boards and teenagers emails.

>REMEMBER, pilots such as Captain Fread Deakins, Brian
>Severson and others have cleared their vision, as they have
>stated.

I never met these people, I have not read any follow up from them, it seems like they have disappeared.

> If you feel that you will develope 20/20 with some
>"ghosting" then please make no attempt to use the plus for
>prevention.

20/20 with some ghosting IS NOT NORMAL, this is what I am trying to tell. I can have perfect 20/20 with PRK and I can save the hussle of the plus, carrying it around, looking over tops at all times, plus you get side effects. How on this NG would think this is normal?

> I look at the fact that an eye with 20/40 will move "down" by
>about 1.3 diopters (-1.1 to -1.6 diopters) in a four year college.
>Thus your eyes (with high probability) will move "down" from 20/40
>to about 20/100 to 20/160. This is clearly a choice between
>"alternatives". The minus lens is easy, and you might prefere it.
>It is worth hearing the judgment against using the plus.

What is the link for this official study?

>From John:
>
>Otis, you said;
>
>Otis> If you read my site, you would find a pilot who went through
> the same thing you did -- as saw slight "ghosting".
>
>Otis> And you worked very hard at it -- and I appreciate the fact
> that you did.
>
>Otis> I read a report worked with Steve Leung OD and review a
> several papers that stated that about 30 to 40 percent of
> people with 20/20, have that "ghosting" or diplopia -- but
> they do not notice it since they always had it.
>
>Otis> But I would suggest that a person who previously had
> 20/50 vision, and begins to "clear" under his own control
> (monitors his eye chart) might well see the "ghosting" that
> was always there -- but now that his vision begins to clear
> -- he begins to notice it.
>
>John> This is unacceptable. I never had diplopia, or ghosting,
> hazing whatnot until I started using plus lenses. If there
> are other "pilots" who have tried plus lenses and also they
> had the same problem developed previously, you should have
> warned me and other kids who are currently trying to
> reverse their myopia.
>
>John> You never told me that there will be this side effect such
> as diplopia.
>
>[Comment: I did mention it -- and it was written-up on my
> site as discussed with the pilot Chet Thor. John does
> not remember this discussion. OSB]

Otis you have mentioned this after I started seeing these effects, not before, I have mentioned to you that I might be developing some kind of astigmatism, that I say distortions all the time, but you mentioned about, distortions are normal, it will go away in time etc. Autorefractor eliminated that possibiilty during my last exam that I have astigmatism... If I am eliminated from military flight program due to a diplopia or such nonsense, I will make every effort that plus will not be used for prevention. There was no forewarning. I remember clearly and keep a record of email transmission.

>John> You said it might be a "tear film". Never mentioned
> diplopia. I never noticed any ghosting in my life before,
> and now I have it in my right eye and slightly in the left.
>
>[Comment: If you are using the plus-for-prevention and see
> anything you don't like -- then stop using the plus
> permanently. I believe that the plus is completely safe,
> and represents a "trade-off" when entering a four year
> college. But issues of this nature must be decided by you
> alone. OSB]

It is too late for that now, don't you think? i am not using plus for prevention. As ODs mentioned they do not cut out accomodative effort completely anyway.

>John> I don't care what others say, I never had this thing and not
> noticing it is out of question. If it shows up once the
> vision is clear why I can't see my eyechart clearly then?
>
>[Commnet: The people who have used the plus successfuly did it
> because they determined that it was right for them, i.e.,
> it was THEIR concept. John had no obligation at all to use
> the plus. The nature of our discussions was that he was in
> complete control at all times. If the issues stated by
> John concern you, then do not wear the plus. OSB]

Does this mean I WAS NOT DETERMINED that it would work for me? I don't understand what does this complete control mean? Yes if anyone is interested in using plus "to reverse" myopia should talk to me. I have used them for so long.

>John> Right at this moment, my vision is about 20/40, it is 2130
> hours. Previously I was not originally 20/40 but I had
> extreme acoomodatiove myopia at the end of the day.
>
>[Comment: During his use of the plus, he reported 20/30 and 20/15
> vision. He has passed the military eye exam with 20/20
> vision. OSB]

Yes in the mornings... I also reported that my evenings and night vision sucked big time. Military eyes exam I took on May 31 was a walk in one, and not scheduled for a cyclo exam. There was no cyclo exam. Even though that will not throw of the results, I already had -0.50 which I had when I was 18. I might be still in military margins but for how long?

>John> My vision was fine in the mornings, it is still better
> in the mornings but for how long? Maybe an hour or so. The
> moment I start close work, my eyes get blurry and would stay
> like that the rest of the day while I strain to see.
>
>[Comment: It is not clear whether the means with or with-out the
> plus. OSB]

I can't drag the pluses wherever I go, I can't live depending on if I have a plus with me or not. I have a sensitive job I can not carry these glasses along. It is a burden to carry glasses for every close work you do, plus you need to know what power you need for that work... This is not acceptable. Is that the way people "clear"?

>John> I HAVE NOT REDUCED my refraction error by my own control or
> anything...
>
>[Comment: John did not refractive status measurements during this
> work. OSB]

Excuse me but this is nonsense, I have had eye examinations, I kept a rough track of my refractive status. If I was -0.50 when I was 18 and same result came out of the autorefractor 3 months ago, what does that show? My refractive status changed?

>John> PLUS LENSES did NOT reduce my refraction error. Acuity IS
> NOTHING in the eyes of military, in my opinion in any
> branch of aviation.
>
>[Comment: If that is your or his judgment -- then I fail to
> understand why he "bothered" with the plus at all. But
> this must be John's call. You must make up your own mind
> accordingly. OSB]

I have hoped that they might helped but I should have been professionally briefed by the advisor, this is where my problem is. This deal is not any different than See Clearly Method going to court.

>John> Today, I flew my second hour with a friend after yesterday's
> first hour, after years. I had absolutely NO clear vision.
> My last flight was about 5 years ago in Oklahoma, I clearly
> remember my eyesight back then.
>
>John> It was nothing like what I have now. You are not
> responsible for my refraction error in anyway of course,
> but the plus lenses are not worth the effort.
>
>[Comment: That is fine. Others, like Fred Deakins considered
> vision clearing to be very valuable for him. But there is
> no way that I can account for these differences, and will
> make no attempt to do so.

What is the email address for Capt Deakins?

>John> They didn't prevent anything, they didn't reverse anything,
> Here and there use it for reading or using computer but
> they will not reverse anyone's myopia!
>
>[Comment: The purpose of the plus is PREVENTION, as in entering a
> four-year college, where the complete statistics are
> avaleable for your understanding.

Provide them to me please.

>John> PLUS I GOT THIS THING YOU CALL DIPLOPIA. THIS IS
> UNACCEPTABLE. Teenager MIke was complaining about the same
> ghosting and he is only in his mid teens!
>
>[Comment: I discussed this issue with Mike in some detail. A
> word like "diplopia" will indeed scare most people. In
> fact I referred to the review with Chet Thor, and stated
> that vision clearing might involve this "ghosting". Mike
> was at -2.75 diopters (and 20/70). Last I heard he was at
> 20/40 to 20/30. The choice must remain with Mike, and how
> he evaluates the statistics at a four-year college. Mike
> has personally decided to go "cold turkey" BEFOR he
> contacted me. I suggested that he HAD TO PASS the DMV test
> to keep his vision clear -- when entering a college.
> Further decision on this issue must be made by Mike. OSB]

Make my statements available to him please, he deserves it.

>John> His vision is being ruined. However I don't hear from those
> kids no more, I don't know why.
>
>[Comment: Since Mike quit "cold turkey", it is essential that he
> understand the obligation of keeping his vision at 20/40 or
> better if he wishes to function without wearing a minus
> lens. The statments by others who have "cleared" with the
> plus with no ghosting must be a factor in Mike's decision.
> OSB]

20/40 in my opinion is still crappy vision, not acceptable to a pilot like me, we are seeing diplopia sort of effects because of plus use, this is evident. Mike shall immediately stop because he is seeing the same effects. He is young and if interested in aviation, his decision should be minus glasses, eventually PRK with wavefront. Plus didn't work on him.

>John> Tuesday, I am going in for a through eye exam I am hoping,
> this time I will buy my minus glasses which I know now I
> need for flying...
>
>John> My vision gets worse, I care less, PRK and LASIK is accepted
> by military and they are safe procedures.
>
>[Comment: When John contacted me he was concerned with passing
> the FAA with no glasses. Clearly John has changed his
> mind. If you are happy with the minus, please do not use
> the plus at all. The minus is indeed the easy solution.
> OSB]

Negative. I was not interested in FAA at the time and am not interested in FAA standards at the moment. I am obliged to wear glasses now for flying and I believe those long months I spent hoping that plus will reverse my myopia was a waste, this is the entire point. I was always interested in military standards and I can prove that by pasting my emails to you.

>John> Flying is serious business and they don't go by DMV
> standards. Anyone might have noticed my upset tone because
> plus lenses are NO HOPE.
>
>[Comment: John's recommendation. Other pilots prefer to work
> with the plus and keep their distant vision clear. It is a
> personal trade-off decision. OSB]

Yes, please do not waste time with pluses. How come people with normal eyesight can stay on computers or reading for hours and can still have perfect vision? I have yet to meet personally with these pilots who has reversed their refractive error using the plus.

>John> I don't care if they fixed a few kids' pseudomyopia here and
> there, I am not them and I only care about my own eyesight,
> not anyother's.
>
>[Comment: That is fine, and in my opinion this should be a
> one-time discussion with a parent about a child who is on
> the threshold of nearsighedness. If the parent's and child
> don't care, then that would permanently end any further
> work of using the plus for prevention. John does not
> "care" about stair-case myopia, and when he has a child at
> 20/50 at age five, I am certain he will not care about the
> child developing -8 to -12 diopters as the child goes
> through the school system. This concern must exist for
> you if you wish to protect your child's vision. John has
> made his own permanent decision in this matter. OSB]

Yes my eyesight only serves me, if it was my kid's, I would take care of it with my own personal resolution, I would never put a plus on my kid when he can stay back from the TV and the computer and early reading. Plus has side effects and I would not want my kids have messed up vision just because they will relieve accomodative stress. Plus in my opinion doesn't even achieve a complete relief from accomodative stress.

Reply to this Message

alexeremeev@gmail.com - 22 Aug 2005 16:10 GMT

It is possible to see recommendations which gave you for training with
positive lenses? I 10 years apply positive lenses at treatment of
children. In the children's ophthalmologic medical center. I did not
have any case diplopia. What techniques recommended you? There Are some
features of application of positive lenses. Wrong application of lenses
can lead diplopia.

Reply to this Message

Neil Brooks - 22 Aug 2005 17:41 GMT

Mehmet,

I'm sorry you're having these problems.

You've obviously seen what must have looked like a circus as so many
of us tried to get Otis Brown to stop posting his untested (or tested,
but proven incorrect) theories.

Some have suggested that the circus did nothing to inform people
coming to s.m.v. for help with their vision or their eyes. Because of
that pressure, I (and many others) toned down the rhetoric.

But I ask you: what was your perception of all that back-and-forth
regarding Otis's posts? What was it then? What is it now?

Do you have any ideas for how the contributors to this forum can
_productively_ alert people to the potential harm of listening to
"true believers" who--with nothing more than faith on their
side--fervently offer "cures" to the unsuspecting.

Does the weekly posting serve that end well enough, or do you think
there's something else that can be done?

Again, I'm very sorry that you're having these problems. I can't
imagine how you must feel right now.

Neil

Reply to this Message