> The animation graphics, that the natural eye is dynamic
> and "follows" the applied minus lens are correct. The
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>
> That is why there is a second-opinion on plus-prevention.
Care to take a stab at fully, honestly, and completely answering these
questions ... yet?
http://tinyurl.com/ymk3wa
No? Okay. Thought not.
Thus ... [yawn]
> The animation graphics, that the natural eye is dynamic
> and "follows" the applied minus lens are correct. The
> basic facts confirm it.
The animation is about emmetropization and the minus lens was used to
simulate hyperopia. It has no relevance to using minus to correct
existing myopia. In fact, the emmetropization evidence supports the
idea that correcting existing myopia with a minus lens will not lead to
further progression.
Here are some other quotes from the same site as the animation:
http://vision.berkeley.edu/wildsoet/myopiaprimer.html
"In normal development, emmetropization eliminates pre-existing
refractive errors. However, experimentally imposed focusing errors
(refractive errors) also trigger emmetropization: for example, with
hyperopia imposed with negative defocusing lenses, the eye elongates
and with imposed myopia (with positive defocusing lenses), eye growth
is inhibited. In both cases, the end result in young animals is
emmetropia with the lenses in place."
"What are the cues to defocus for emmetropization?
However, attempts to track down the cues that might be used have so far
not been successful. We, among others, have shown that neither
chromatic aberration alone or combined with accommodation is essential
to this response. Monochromatic aberrations have become a more recent
focus of research, partly driven by reports that human myopes are more
aberrated than normal."
"Does near work cause myopia and why?
.... One theory argues that printed text, as most commonly encountered
in near work activities, acts as a form deprivation stimulus for all
but the central retina. On the other hand that human myopia could be a
response to hyperopic defocus is consistent with observations of
increased lags of accommodation in developing and progressing myopes.
However, the picture is by no means clear-cut in terms of causality.
Also, that eyes may progress at different rates leading to significant
anisometropia is not easily covered by this hypothesis. Currently in
this area, there are more questions than answers."
"Myopia control treatments
The most promising results to-date have come from pharmacological
treatments"
Dr Judy
Neil Brooks - 12 Dec 2006 00:25 GMT
> > The animation graphics, that the natural eye is dynamic
> > and "follows" the applied minus lens are correct. The
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>
> Here are some other quotes from the same site as the animation:
[snip]
Thus my yawn. It was nothing more than ANOTHER glaring example of Otis
posting information from a CREDIBLE source that CONTRADICTS his
ill-considered position.
This is but one of myriad reasons why I believe his ... uh ...
competence is in question.