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 / October 2005

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

!@! OTIS BROWN WARNING !@!

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Neil Brooks - 06 Oct 2005 14:45 GMT
Dear Reader,

Otis Brown is in no way qualified to give medical advice.

Before you consider paying attention to anything that Otis Brown
(otisbrown@pa.net) writes, I urge you to review all of his  previous
posts.  

Not only is there no scientific data on humans to support his fantasy,
but there IS plenty that proves him wrong.

Otis gets the basis of his warped, disproved ideas from concepts
written a century ago and one study done on CHICKENS!

Any of you folks chickens ?

Otis Brown is more than simply bizarre.  He's wrong. See the weekly
(Mondays)  "welcome to sci.med.vision" for information on  how to
block his ramblings.

If you can find a shred of evidence or scientifically accepted proof
of the efficacy of using plus lens therapy to prevent  the progression
of myopia in humans then, by all means, follow his advice, but do so
only under the care of a licensed  optometrist or ophthalmologist.

"Scientifically accepted proof" results from experiments conducted
within the "scientific method" explained here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method

Otis's posts tend to fall into the category of anecdotal (or made up):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anecdotal_evidence

Otis's posts can be reviewed at:

http://snipurl.com/e77s
http://snipurl.com/fe3d

The results of clinical trials of using plus lens therapy to prevent
the progression of myopia can be found at (hint: it did not work):

http://snipurl.com/fij0

http://snipurl.com/fimq

http://snipurl.com/fimr

The details of a proper, controlled test have been proposed and can be
reviewed at the following site, beginning with Page 40, Section 7(A)
and continuing through Page 42:

http://books.nap.edu/books/0309040817/html/40.html

The remainder of this text
(http://books.nap.edu/books/0309040817/html) provides significant
information as well.  Nothing contained within supports Otis's theory.
Much, in fact, directly contradicts it.
otisbrown@pa.net - 06 Oct 2005 18:00 GMT
Dear Reader,

Neil Brooks is a sick old man who has no clue about intellectual
research and analysis.

In his warped mind he even contacted my nephew Keith B., and blathered
to Keith that he should not have used the plus to keep his vision clear
for life.

Further he sent a letter to my wife!  Neil B. Brooks has truly slipped
off the deep end.  (B for Babbleing.)

Professor Theo. Grosvenor (Optomterist) strongly suggest -- as the
second opinion -- that a strong plus must be used if a negative
refractive state of the natural eye is to be prevented.  Keith simply
followed this wise advice -- and made it WORK FOR HIM.

I have shown respect for second-opinion optometrists likd Theo.
Grosvenor, and I know how difficult it is for a person to implement the
preventive method effectively.

But that is the true nature of the second opinion which Neil Babbling
Brook seeks to surpress.

Think and analyize for yourself.   That is what science is all about.

Best,

Otis
otisbrown@pa.net - 06 Oct 2005 18:33 GMT
Dear Analytic friends,

Some people have the ablity for analytic thought -- others do not.

Let there be no mistake -- I challenge you to think.  I would
prefer that you do that -- and take no action, than to not think.

What you might conclude is up to you.

In any event -- here is my legal disclaimer for you interest.

But ALL MEANS -- NEVER WEAR A PLUS ON MY ACCOUNT.

Best,

Otis

_____________

     "We can't solve problems by using the same kind of
thinking we used when we created them."

                   Albert Einstein

            LEGAL DISCLAIMER 1

    Let me recite my personal disclaimer.  Because I am not
medically trained and because I am averse to the prospect of being
sued for giving advice (medical or otherwise), I am stating
emphatically that everything written here ("How to Avoid
Nearsightedness", including all related pages on this site) is
nothing more than my personal opinion and experience.  If you are
interested in reading about that experience, I invite you to
continue reading.  If you want a medical opinion or advice, you
should contact a medical professional.

    If something I write seems to be advice, you should re-read
this paragraph and understand that I am only using literary
license to convey my experiences and opinions.    I offer you NO
ADVICE and I do not recommend to anyone that they should subscribe
to any treatment for any condition without proper medical advice,
EVEN IF I TELL YOU THAT I AVOID SOME MEDICAL ADVICE OR TREATMENT
FOR MYSELF.

    I take PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY for my health.  You should
take personal responsibility for your health (not my advice - just
my opinion).  It is up to you to decide if medical professionals
and the medical industry, the food industry and others act in your
best interest or not.  It is up to you to decide, if after reading
my experiences, how and whether to address any health issues
including those related to your vision.

PS:  These statements are adapted from Donald Rehm's "Myopia Myth"
    and the "Vision Freedom" site -- but the insight they
    developed about legal responsibility applies equally to this
    site.

    %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

            LEGAL DISCLAIMER 2

    "How to Avoid Nearsightedness", is an educational tool that
can assist you in accurately understanding the eye's proven
dynamic behavior.

    Our book is not intended to be a medical text, nor does it
substitute for medical diagnosis or treatment of eye disease by an
ophthalmologist.  The techniques developed for prevention are
derived from the concept presented in the book and is considered
to be the second opinion.  This second opinion is based on proven
scientific facts as they concern the dynamic behavior of the
natural and fundamental eye.

    It is the reader's sole responsibility to determine the
suitability of this book's advocacy for his use.  Once you make up
your own mind to use the preventive method, you should then find
an OD who will support you in your major effort -- based on your
own best judgment.  There are ODs who are now helping their own
children in the use of the plus lens for prevention.  That is the
type of "open minded" OD you need.

    This site is dedicated to your own personal interest and your
own goal in life -- where you assume complete technical and legal
control over your own eyes.

    You must understand the intended purpose of this site and
assume all risks and liabilities resulting from your actions.

    I can tell you personally that I wish I had been offered the
preventive method advocated here.  I acknowledged that the method
is difficult and requires your own understanding.  I wish I had
been offered this alternative -- when I was at the threshold.  I
believe that the method would have been effective at that point.

    Because of the advocacy of Dr.  Jacob Raphaelson, I realized
that the person (you) must play a very strong role in prevention.
If the effort is neglected or ignored at that point (by you) then
nearsightedness can not be prevented.  In the future you will find
some ODs who will help you -- once you personally make the
decision to use the plus for prevention.  The very nature of these
scientific arguments assumes that you have both the knowledge and
motivation to take a large if not total responsibility to carry
out the preventive work successfully.

            ***********************

            LEGAL DISCLAIMER 3

             TRUTH ON THE INTERNET

    Truth goes through three stages:

    First it is ridiculed.
    Then it is violently opposed.
    Finally it is accepted as self-evident.
otisbrown@pa.net - 06 Oct 2005 18:47 GMT
An Neil, here is a SUPPORTING statement about prevention by
a professor of ophthalmology.  But youi have your head buried
so deeply (you know where) you will never
see the (scientific) light of day.

>From a professor of Ophthalmology...

                Foreword

    Ophthalmologists, optometrists and research workers are
responsible for the second opinion presented in this book, that
nearsightedness (myopia) is as much, if not greatly more, due to
environment (and avoidable) than heredity (unavoidable).

    The essence of avoiding myopia is using a plus lens (a mild
magnifying glass, as in reading glasses required by older people)
before the eye becomes seriously nearsighted.

    If the approach advocated in this book is to work properly,
you must take full responsibility to develop a clear understanding
of the normal eye's behavior.  In addition, you must personally
implement the practical method of prevention.

    In this situation we can only offer the student of science an
accurate picture of existing practices, as well as an education
about the fundamental behavioral characteristic of the normal eye.
This approach will put you in full control of your visual welfare.

    The author has demonstrated a depth of understanding of the
problems and limits that occur in existing health practice.  With
good judgment, and personal effort, it is highly probable that you
can avoid nearsightedness.

                Paul E. Romano  M.D., M.S.O.
                Professor of Ophthalmology,
                University of Florida, Gainesville

             ACKNOWLEDGMENT

    Over the past thirty years I have made an exhaustive effort
to review the experimental data that allows us to accurately judge
the normal eye's behavior.

    In this effort I have met many fine individuals working in
the diverse fields of engineering, ophthalmology, aeronautical
education, optometry, and scientific research.    In addition, I
have been assisted by many friends who have patiently reviewed
this analysis and engaged in much discussion and review.  The
writing of this book was possible only with the assistance of the
following individuals:

Paul Romano, MD,       University of Florida
Peter Greene, PhD,     Harvard University
Karel Montor, PhD,     The United States Naval Academy
Dave Guyton, MD,       Johns Hopkins University
Alfred Sommers, MD,    Johns Hopkins Hospital
James Tielsch, MD,     Johns Hopkins Hospital
Lawrence Stark, PhD,   Research Scientist
Vera Rollo, PhD,       Author, Flight Instructor
William Ludlam, OD,    Research Optometrist
Francis Young, PhD,    Research Psychologist
Alan Shotwell, OD,     Research Optometrist
Stirling Colgate, PhD, Research Scientist, Los Alamos
Howard Howland, PhD,   Research Scientist, Cornell University
Maurice Brumer, OD,    Research Optometrist
Ron Berger, OD,        Child Diagnostics and Treatments Associates

    And last, but most important, I gratefully acknowledge Carol
Brown's support.  She has borne with patience the almost endless
academic discussions about the normal eye's behavior that led to
this book.

              INTRODUCTION

 "It is better to light one candle than to curse the darkness."

                         The Christophers

    It is a pleasure to produce the Ebook edition of this book.
While many scientists are convinced as to the accuracy of the
facts presented in this book, we could not be certain that pilots
of less experience could get the proper insight, work with the
plus lens, and ultimately clear their distance vision to normal.

    This book details the practical efforts that you must make in
order to achieve vision restoration from 20/50 to 20/20.  I cannot
claim that more than this is achievable, although Dr.  Stirling
Colgate states that he was able to recover from 20/80.    You will
find out the extent of your own recovery by actually implementing
the preventative procedure described in this book.

             IS THIS BOOK FOR YOU?

    This book is designed for use by two groups of individuals;
the research scientist who is willing to develop a thorough
understanding of the fundamental behavior characteristic of the
normal eye, and the person, for example a would- be pilot,
entering a four-year academic institution, who wishes to be
visually qualified upon graduation.  It is also of interest to
parents of school-age children.

    It is possible to avoid nearsightedness.  Recovery from
nearsightedness has been successfully accomplished, for example by
Stirling Colgate, a scientist who developed a clear understanding
of the normal eye's behavior.  It is, however, almost impossible
to recover from anything more than a slight amount of
nearsightedness.  Because of the difficulties of recovery, it is
important that you clearly understand the scientific basis for
this alternative approach.

    This alternative has been developed over the past three
decades by the eye care profession and is currently practiced by
twenty percent of the profession.  The practice requires the use
of a plus-lens (bifocal) for children who are slightly
nearsighted.  This development (of the second-opinion) encourages
us to look more deeply into scientific experiments that resolve
the normal eye's behavior.

             THE FIRST STEP

    Down-load a eye chart from www.i-see.org.    Xerox the the
chart so that you have additional eye charts for your use.  Now
tape them on a wall so you can read the chart at 20 feet.  With
both eyes read the lowest line possible.  Write the value down.
You must read 4 out of 5 characters to "pass" the line.  Now check
each eye individually.    If you are less than 20/70 with both eyes,
recovery will be difficult.  If you are at 20/30 or 20/40,
recovery could be achieved in a matter of weeks.

            SEQUENCE OF PRESENTATION

    This book explores three major scientific subjects:

1.  What practical steps must you take to avoid nearsightedness?
   (Chapter One to Three) Is the method effective?  (Chapter
   Eleven)

2.  How does the normal eye behave when it is actually tested?
   (Chapters Four to Seven)

3.  Why must the eye function as a dynamic system, rather than as
   a passive system?  (Chapters Eight to Ten)

    This book will help you understand how the normal eye behaves
under direct experimental control.  After you understand this
behavior, you can then begin to devise a strategy to successfully
avoid nearsightedness.

    EXPERIMENTAL VERIFICATION OF THE EYE'S BEHAVIOR

    This book is based on directly-obtained experimental data.
The facts clearly define the behavior characteristics of all
normal eyes.

    When the normal eye is placed in a confined visual
environment, or wears a negative lens, (such as is currently being
prescribed for nearsightedness) the normal eye will change its
focal state in a negative direction.  When the normal eye is
placed in an open environment, or wears a plus lens, the focal
state of the eye will change in a positive direction -- thus
achieving successful myopia avoidance.    Both theoretical analysis
and direct experimental testing has confirmed this fundamental
behavior characteristic of the eye.  (The plus and minus lenses
will be thoroughly discussed later in this book.)

    The concept of the eye's behavior presented in this book is
technical in nature.  However, I feel that most readers will be
able to understand most of the analysis.  A detailed understanding
requires a engineering background.  If you develop this insight,
you will be able understand the nature of the normal eye's
behavior.  The student of science will eventually be able to do
this.  For this reason I have not excessively simplified the
scientific presentation.

    If you will make the appropriate effort to understand the
eye's behavior, you will eventually be rewarded by your own
successful effort to defeat nearsightedness.

             A SCIENTIFIC APPROACH

    The outlook of this book follows the English (Scientific)
Royal Society's Motto, "Nullus in Verba", which has been best
translated as, "Take nobody's word for it; see for yourself." The
first step in learning to make a scientific judgment is to learn
to make your own decisions, based on your own measurements.

    Your eyes belong to you, and you must control your own visual
future.  The only way to make a responsible decision is by being
cognizant of your focal state.    With this knowledge you can act
effectively to control the behavior of your eyes.

             THE EYE CHART

    A standard eye chart is included in the back of the book.
You should use this chart to confirm your current focal status.  A
reading of 20/60 or 20/70 is not disastrous.  You should, however,
take this situation as a warning and consider the alternative.
Even if you read the chart at 20/20, there is no guarantee that
after four years of study and close work you will graduate with
20/20.    At the United States Naval Academy approximately 30
percent of the entering class are disqualified from flying due to
failure to read the 20/20 line upon graduation!

    THE EXPLICIT RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE EYE PROFESSION

    Because ophthalmologists are aware of existing experimental
studies, they have strongly suggested that prevention is the best
solution for the problem of nearsightedness.  Unfortunately, this
recommendation has never been effectively presented and acted
upon.  Although the correct solution is known, the methodology of
prevention has never been implemented.

    There is direct testimony as to the effectiveness of the use
of a positive (plus) lens to control the negative focal state of
the normal eye.  Many children and adults can help themselves if
the principles in this book are properly understood and applied.

        A PERSONAL NOTE BY DR.  STIRLING COLGATE

    Dr.  Stirling Colgate, a research scientist with the Los
Alamos National Laboratory, correctly deduced the behavior of the
normal eye, and began using a plus 2.5 diopter lens to reverse the
effect of a confined environment on his eyes.  By doing this, he
successfully recovered from a slight amount of myopia.

    "Fortunately, I understood most of this for myself when I was
studying biology and physics when I was 14.  I first started to
become nearsighted at 13 to 14.  As soon as I noticed it, I
immediately acted upon it by buying a pair of reading
(farsightedness) glasses, (positive lenses), at the dime store.  I
used these for reading.  A positive lens substitutes for further
contraction of the ciliary muscle; thereby allowing the eye focus
to remain in the relaxed state of infinity when reading a book up
close.    Within several weeks my eyesight had returned to normal --
relaxed state of focus at infinity."

    "Since I am a physicist I am not dependent upon optometry or
ophthalmology for my professional peer group.  I have managed my
own eyesight all during my life (now 63).  I have undertaken to
try to explain this because I believe that the condition of myopia
(and then having to wear nearsighted glasses for life) is totally
unnecessary for the majority of the human race.  I believe that
the condition of progressive myopia is a grotesque and needless
distortion of human physiology, created by our intellectual
environment of reading and continued because of our collective
denial of that very intellect."

               CONCLUSION

    If a fourteen-year-old can figure out how to act effectively
to avoid myopia then you should be able to duplicate his
successful preventive effort.

    This book contains a detailed scientific and engineering
assessment of the normal eye's behavior.  If you wish to develop a
complete understanding of eye's behavior under testable
conditions, then review Chapters Four through Ten.  The previous
discussions about problems of the eye have been qualitative.  A
qualitative statement is very difficult to test in a scientific
sense, and often has imbedded bias and assumptions.  These
arguments (about the cause of the defective eye) have not led to a
clear understanding of the normal eye's behavior.  To encompass a
full and accurate understanding of the eye it is necessary to
develop a precise quantitative model of the eye's behavior.

    It is always difficult to develop a book that advocates
change in existing medical practices.  However, if we are ever to
come to grips with a major scientific problem, we must be willing
to generate criticism of existing practices so that at least a few
of us will have the opportunity to effectively defeat the problem
of nearsightedness.

    This book applies only to nearsightedness that is
preventable.  You should consult with an ophthalmologist or
optometrist if you think that the blur at a distance is a result
of a diseased condition such as detached retina, glaucoma, etc.
After you are assured your problem has to do only with the
refractive state of your eyes, you should proceed with the
preventive approach recommended in this book.

               CONTENTS

               CHAPTER I

              Who Is Responsible?

    This section recommends that you be prepared to enter into an
aggressive analytical effort if you wish to come to grips with the
problem of nearsightedness.  The approach must include the
development of a clear understanding of the strengths and
weaknesses of current eye care practices.

               CHAPTER II

          Practical Nearsightedness Avoidance

    This chapter provides a discussion of a systematic effort
that you can institute to avoid myopia.
Robert Kopp - 11 Oct 2005 00:40 GMT
>       IS THIS BOOK FOR YOU?

>     Down-load a eye chart from www.i-see.org. Xerox the the
> chart so that you have additional eye charts for your use.  Now check
> each eye individually. If you are less than 20/70 with both eyes,
> recovery will be difficult.  If you are at 20/30 or 20/40,
> recovery could be achieved in a matter of weeks.

I have had bilateral cataract extraction and my unaided vision is between
20/40 and 20/70:

OD: -2.00 -0.50x180
OS: -1.25 -0.50x130
Add: +2.25

If I look through the reading segment, am I using the plus lens?

William Stacy - 11 Oct 2005 15:30 GMT
> I have had bilateral cataract extraction and my unaided vision is between
> 20/40 and 20/70:
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> If I look through the reading segment, am I using the plus lens?

Yes and no. Or maybe barely and no.

You are reading through

R. +0.25 -0.50 x 180
L. +1.00 -0.50 x 130

the spherical equivalent of which is

R.  0.00
L. +0.50

w.stacy, o.d.
 
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.