 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / Vision / September 2006Ace -- as an OD, how would you deal with this situation?
Dear Ace, Charles has every right to expect very, very sharp vision from a minus lens. That is what ODs do. For a child at 20/40 (passes the DMV) I think that it is an "idea" that should be reviewed -- and the second-opinion considered. But if you are dealing with 20 people a day, it is virtually impossible to "sort out" or discuss this issue of prevention with the parents -- or Charles. So all ODs just provide "Best Visual Acuity", and send the parent and child away "happy". Can you blame them? What would YOU DO if you were an optometrist? You have a person sitting in a chair. They read the chart at 20/50. You put a minus on them and they read 20/15. You must look for "medical" issues. And that takes time. There is no time to discuss other methods. The person like Charles is not tollerant of anything else other that BVA. You are wasting your time if you "attemped" that type of discussion. Further he would question you "motives" if you attempted anything else other than BVA. How would YOU change this system? Please explain. Best, Otis otisbrown@pa.net schreef: > Dear Ace, Use the email adress of Ace, this is not the MSW (Ministry of Silly Walks). Free to Marcus Porcius Cato's "Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam" In conclusion, I think that the "old plus lens junk therapy recovered by Otis" should be destroyed. Jan (normally Dutch spoken) > Dear Ace, > > Charles has every right to expect very, very sharp vision > from a minus lens. > > That is what ODs do. It's simply incredible how intellectually dishonest you are ; you can not even use the "ignorance" or "stupidity" card. Charles has astigmatism and is not myopic and you know it. It is even more sad and pathetic that you have to use a misguided kid as your (lone and only)groupie. Aren't you ashamed in the least???? If you really wanted this conversation to be private between yourself and Ace you would have e-mailed him (I'm sure you have his address). So please don't feign any artificial "disgust"- simply another example of your dishonesty. frank > It is even more sad and pathetic that you > have to use a misguided kid as your [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > frank It must be the tin foil hat connection between Otis(idiot engineer) and the retard. otisbrown@pa.net: > Dear Ace, > > Charles has every right to expect very, very sharp vision > from a minus lens. Correct, but with a cylindar of -1, he does not need correction, maybe for driving at night or watching a movie from the back seat of a theatre. His uncorrected vision is perhaps 20/25, not only passing the DMV but exceeding this. Therefore glasses are not neccessary. > For a child at 20/40 (passes the DMV) I think that > it is an "idea" that should be reviewed -- and the > second-opinion considered. Some smart S.O optometrists are already holding back from throwing the wretched minus lens on their eyes if they pass the DMV. The child could see the chalkboard fine from the front seat and should probably use reading glasses(with prisms if neccessary) for near work or at least *NOT* bury your nose 6 inches! Hold reading material away! > But if you are dealing with 20 people a day, it is > virtually impossible to "sort out" or discuss > this issue of prevention with the parents -- or > Charles. What I would do is make a website addressing the issue and give every patient a link to it so they can read and make an informed decision to clear their vision or embrace the wretched minus and get stair-case myopia. The choice is theirs. > So all ODs just provide "Best Visual Acuity", and > send the parent and child away "happy". That is why you need to see a second opinion OD so the child's vision is preserved and doesnt end in stair-case myopia which happened to me back when I was 12. > Can you blame them? >What would YOU DO if you were an optometrist? > You have a person sitting in a chair. > They read the chart at 20/50. > You put a minus on them and they > read 20/15. I guess I could tell them they dont need glasses yet and if they take good care of their eyes, they can avoid stair-case myopia and never need the wretched minus. > You must look for "medical" issues. And that > takes time. I would test for things like amblyopia, strabismus, retina tears, major floaters, cateracts, glaucoma. A slight negative refractive state is not a medical issue and something that can go away if you take care of your eyes. > The person like Charles is not tollerant of anything else > other that BVA. You are wasting your time > if you "attemped" that type of discussion. > Further he would question you "motives" if > you attempted anything else other than BVA. Then that is his choice and fault for being ignorant. I would just give him what he wants then shoo him out of there as hes a waste of time. The retard and Otis have this tin foil hat connection that will some day rule the opthalmic world. They do deserve each other. Dear Ace, It is good to thing of this "problem" from the perspective of an optometrist. They must deal with people like Charles, who only wnat very, very sharp vision -- and NO DISCUSSION of any preventive alternative. In my judgment that DEFINES the strength and "limit" of optometry. They can not satisfy EVERYONE. And must use a "magic pill" that WORKS. To do anything LESS would cause you to "distrust" them. But, if you "figure" this out -- and the limit imposed by the public that DEMANDS that quick fix, then you can understand the OD and the public, and why an OD can not offer "plus prevention". Success with the plus would depend on you on personal choice to use it -- as Stirling Colgate and others have done. They did it -- because no OD could do it for them -- and they were successful for that reason. But always think about the "pressure" on an OD to "impress" with that minus. It is very difficult to "resist" just doing it in 20 minutes. Best, Otis > otisbrown@pa.net: > > Dear Ace, [quoted text clipped - 61 lines] > Then that is his choice and fault for being ignorant. I would just give > him what he wants then shoo him out of there as hes a waste of time. Poor Otis. He must have lost the ability to read sometime during the 1970's and early 1980's, before his ideas were subjected to scientific scrutiny and debunked. DrG > Dear Ace, > [quoted text clipped - 97 lines] > > Then that is his choice and fault for being ignorant. I would just give > > him what he wants then shoo him out of there as hes a waste of time. >otisbrown@pa.net: >> Dear Ace, [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >> it is an "idea" that should be reviewed -- and the >> second-opinion considered. I thought the DMV was something to do with driving. Do children drive where you live? |
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
|
©2010 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.