 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / Vision / February 2007Vision Improves in Days
Dear open-minded friends (close-minded optometrists excluded), If you love your children, you should not allow them to become nearsighted and have poor vision for the rest of their lives. Nearsightedness is unnecessary. Nearsightedness can be prevented, controlled, reduced and cured. In our experience, it takes only days to see improvement in vision if you do it right. Here a young college student who found our website on the internet started vision improvement around Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 01:59:19 -0500 and notice some improvement in vision before Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 23:59:58 -0500 when he replied to us and told us that his vision had improved. Here is the correspondence between Ken (name changed) and us for your interest. Best regards, Myopia Cure Promoter http://www.geocities.com/myopiacure =========================================== --- Ken <.....@gmail.com> wrote: Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 22:20:18 -0500 From: "Ken" <.....@gmail.com> To: myopiacure@yahoo.com Subject: Is there no other way? Like prescription glasses, laser surgery is just creating another problem to solve one. Therefore, it is not a solution. I had blurry vision since I was 3 years old and it continues to progress to be worse. Instead of minus glasses, what if we wear plus? (put no strain on the eye, so there is no unnatural stress on it) how would our eyes change shape to cope with the new situation? Is there a way? I am sick of wearing them, so unnatural. ************************************************* Dear Ken, Plus lens method is one of the most effective ways to reduce or cure myopia if it is not too severe. Plus lens stops eyeball elongation and change the lens in the eye back to its original thin shape which reduces myopia or cures myopia if eyeball elongation has not started yet. How myopic are you right now (what is your current prescription)? Let me know and I will tell you how to use the plus lens in your case. Best regards, Sean ============================================ Reply from Ken --- Ken <.....@gmail.com> wrote: Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 18:33:04 -0500 From: "Ken" <.....@gmail.com> To: "Myopia Cure" <myopiacure@yahoo.com> Subject: Re: Is there no other way? woah, this was no joke. you actually replied?? how severe... minus 7.75 or something like that. I am not sure. It's so bad. ************************************************* Dear Ken, It is not very difficult to keep myopia from getting worse. It is quite easy. Basically, all you need to do is to use weaker glasses or wear reading glasses (plus lenses) over your regular glasses (full- correction) or contact lenses. 0.50 to 1.25 for outdoor activities (driving, bicycle riding, operating dangerous machinery, etc.) 1.50 to 2.50 for indoor 2.50 to 3.00 for near work (reading, writing, computer work, etc) For example, if you are -7.75 right now, you can wear -7.00 (which is 0.75 weaker) for outdoor (driving, sports, etc) -6.00 (which is 1.75 weaker) for indoor (talking, chatting, eating, ....) -5.00 (which is 2.75 weaker) for near work You can also wear reading glasses (plus lenses) over your glasses or contact lenses. For example, you can wear -7.00 for outdoor +1.00 over -7.00 for indoor +2.00 over -7.00 for near work To simplify things a little bit, you could wear, for example, -7.00 for outdoor -5.50 (or +1.50 over -7.00) for indoor and near work I hope you got the idea. If you do it properly, your myopia will be reduced and your vision will improve. Myopia reduction is a by-product or side-benefit of myopia control. Before you start, you should check your eyes with the eye-chart at 20 feet (6m). If you can see line "15" with your -7.75 glasses (check one eye at a time), then your eyes are -7.75. If you can't see line "15", but you can see line "30", that means your eyes are 20/30 with the glasses and they are -0.50 worse than -7.75. If you use the glasses properly to improve your eyes, as suggested, a few days or a few weeks later, you will be able to see line "15" with the same glasses which means your eyes have improved. So the eye-chart is one of the way to check your improvement. Another way of checking your improvement is by checking your far point. Far point is the distance at which the letters on a piece of paper change from perfectly clear to very slightly blurred. f (in meter) = 1/D For instance, a person who is -5.00, his/her far point is 20cm (about 8 inch) f = 1/D = 1/5 = 0.2m = 20cm ~= 8 inch When his/her far point increases to 25cm (10 inch), he/she has improve to -4.00. D = 1/f = 1/0.25 = 4 He/she is now 4.00 myopic. (His/her eyes are actually +4.00. He/she needs to wear -4.00 glasses to see line "15") Computer work, reading, and all other near work, create a lot of stress in the eyes due to accommodation. Reading glasses, if use properly, will eliminate accommodation completely! Reading at the far point will eliminate accommodation completely. For instance, if you put on a pair of +2.5D reading glasses (over your regular glasses), the letters on a piece of paper will change from perfectly clear to slightly blurry as soon as you move the paper beyond 16" (40cm). Reading at the far point means reading at the maximum clear distance. f (in meter) = 1/D => D =1/f In this example, f = 1/+2.5 = 0.4m = 40cm ~ = 16 inch Reading glasses from +1.5 D to +3.0 D are recommended. Choose the one that you can tolerate and feel comfortable. If your monitor is about 20 inches away from your eyes, then +2.0D reading glasses will be better for you. I hope you get the idea. This website is very good and I highly recommend it: http://members.aol.com/myopiaprev The eye exercises found here could also help: http://www.geocities.com/dolphinhill/theorynotes.html If you have more questions, please feel free to ask. Best regards, Sean =========================================== Replies from Ken --- Ken <.....@gmail.com> wrote: Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 01:59:19 -0500 From: "Ken" <.....@gmail.com> To: "Myopia Cure" <myopiacure@yahoo.com> Subject: Re: Is there no other way? WOW. I have never seen so much information. Thank you. And the methods are not that expensive. Wear reading glasses over your own glasses. Basically you have reduced the power, therefore making the eye muscles work. Since a slight blur is not clear, your eyes automatically attempt to correct. And through many times of repetition, the eyes get 'stronger' Thank you again, I am going to buy one of those reading (plus lense) glasses. And I see how long you messages are, how many people do you reply to? Lots of work I bet. You really made a difference. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ --- Ken <.....@gmail.com> wrote: Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 20:14:09 -0500 From: "Ken" <.....@gmail.com> To: "Myopia Cure" <myopiacure@yahoo.com> Subject: Re: Is there no other way? Hi again. I bought reading glasses but I can't see anything. When I do my homework, I have to go close (about 30cm from page) to do the work. Is this fine? Glasses + (+1.75 reading glasses) I would like to say thank you. I never knew that this and that causes myopia (humans naturally shouldn't have this problem) I believe there should be some national action because eye care industry I bet is liking that more people are 'slaves' to their products. ************************************************* Dear Ken, >> I bought reading glasses but I can't see anything. You can see almost everything, especially indoor, but they are just blurry. If you think it is too blurry for you, try to use weaker reading glasses. For example, use +1.00 instead of +2.00. >> When I do my homework, I have to go close (about 30cm from page) to do the work. >> Is this fine? Glasses + (+1.75 reading glasses) Yes, that is fine, as long as you are looking at the page at about your far point. (Again, far point is the distance at which the letters on a page changes from perfectly clear to very slightly blurred.) For instance, if your far point is 50cm but you are reading at 30cm, that is not good and not recommended. There is still quite a bit of stress involved. On the other hand, if your far point is 35cm and you are reading at around 30 to 35cm, that is good. >> When I do my homework, I have to go close (about 30cm from page) to do the work. If you don't like to be that close to the book, try to use weaker reading glasses which will increase your far point. >> Glasses + (+1.75 reading glasses) If using this glasses + (+1.75 reading glasses) and your far point is really 30cm, then, from my calculation, this glasses is about 1.50 weaker than your eyes. D = 1/f = 1/0.3m = 3.33 D = D(eye) + D(glasses) D(eye) = D - D(glasses) = 3.33 - (+1.75) = 1.58 ~= 1.50 Try to choose the glasses and reading glasses that will allow you to work comfortably at the distance you like or are used to. Also, you don't have to wear reading glasses over glasses if you don't want to. You can just wear, for instance, -5.00 glasses for doing homework. Try to calculate or figure out the power you are comfortable with and order the glasses here: http://www.zennioptical.com/ They are not expensive at all. Lowest price is $8.95 plus $4.95 shipping & handling. >> I would like to say thank you. It is my pleasure to help you. >> I believe there should be some national action because eye care industry I bet is liking that more people are 'slaves' to their products. I really hope there is a national action. If you have more questions, feel free to ask. Best regards, Sean =========================================== Reply from Ken --- Ken <.....@gmail.com> wrote: Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 23:59:58 -0500 From: "Ken" <.....@gmail.com> To: "Myopia Cure" <myopiacure@yahoo.com> Subject: Re: Is there no other way? I am very pleased to say, that my vision actually improve from previous~! I am serious! When I used to look at the gas station letters (about 30-40m away) it wasn't that clear, it was blurry. But the sharpness increased. Thank you so much. I will continue to pursue for healthy eyes. No more questions, though. You've answered everything. The above post is just another Otis fantasy. The names have been changed to protect an idiot. Bugger off Cletis. Your scams don't fool anyone dr grant > The above post is just another Otis fantasy. The names have been > changed to protect an idiot. Myopia Cure Promoter and Otis are two different men. This is Myopia Cure Promoter 15 years ago: http://www.geocities.com/myopiacure/Myopia_Cure_Promoter.jpg This is a strange world we live in today. People who solve problems or know how to solve problems are called idiots. Myopia Cure Promoter http://www.geocities.com/myopiacure > This is a strange world we live in today. Amen. > People who solve problems > or know how to solve problems are called idiots. I've been looking at things like this for decades. Perhaps not surprisingly, I can't recall a single case where somebody with the ability to solve a problem like myopia .... ever actually could. Neither can I recall ever seeing any valid proof of any vast conspiracy that tried to suppress such information. It's a certain kind of pathology to believe that a conspiracy SO vast can actually be perpetrated. It's a more dramatic kind of pathology to be the perpetrator in such a case (read: you). In the meantime, thousands have offered false hope to TENS of thousands, bilking them of MILLIONS in the process, using faith, pseudoscience, casuistry, sophistry, and lousy logic to make arguments that can't stand up to the usual scientific rigor. Nice picture, by the way. I wonder if Uncle Otie ever traveled the Far East in his younger day...... > > People who solve problems > > or know how to solve problems are called idiots. > > I've been looking at things like this for decades. Perhaps not > surprisingly, I can't recall a single case where somebody with the > ability to solve a problem like myopia .... ever actually could. You have seen them. You just don't want to believe them and continue to call them anecdote. You are close-minded. see this: > > Here is Ron's assessment of the plus-preventive > > method: [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Another useless, unverifiable, third-hand anecdote? On > SCI.med.vision? In reality, what you call anecdote is actually normal case; what you think is normal in conventional optometrists' office is actually TRAGEDY or DISASTER !!!!!! > Neither can I recall ever seeing any valid proof of any vast > conspiracy that tried to suppress such information. No? Never saw this website? http://www.myopia.org > It's a certain kind of pathology to believe that a conspiracy SO vast > can actually be perpetrated. It's a more dramatic kind of pathology > to be the perpetrator in such a case (read: you). Again, problem solvers are called idiots, and, now, perpetrator. What a strange world!! > In the meantime, thousands have offered false hope to TENS of > thousands, bilking them of MILLIONS in the process, using faith, > pseudoscience, casuistry, sophistry, and lousy logic to make arguments > that can't stand up to the usual scientific rigor. All I want to say here is: There is little MONEY to be made in myopia prevention and much to be made in myopia treatment. On Feb 19, 6:03 pm, "LucienTj" <tjea...@gmail.com> wrote: > I want to make it explicit that I am not siding with Otis or anyone > else here, but DrG, first, eight of the studies he listed were less [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Tom As Tom put it, Science progresses when current notions are challenged, revised, or expanded. > Nice picture, by the way. I wonder if Uncle Otie ever traveled the > Far East in his younger day...... Thank you. That is me, not Otis. Myopia Cure Promoter http://www.geocities.com/myopiacure > > > People who solve problems > > > or know how to solve problems are called idiots. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > You have seen them. You just don't want to believe them and continue > to call them anecdote. You are close-minded. Don't kid yourself. I'd LOVE to believe them. I'm just a bit more rational than that. In the Dark Ages, faith ruled the day. I'd like to think that we've come a bit further since then. Correlation simply does not equal causation. When it does, it should be able to be repeated. When it cannot be repeated, then it was something else. Please clear up any mistakes in my thinking here. > In reality, what you call anecdote is actually normal case; what you > think is normal in conventional optometrists' office is actually > TRAGEDY or DISASTER !!!!!! What I call third-hand IS third-hand. What I call unverifiable IS unverifiable. Otis makes stuff up. You may, too. I have no idea. > > Neither can I recall ever seeing any valid proof of any vast > > conspiracy that tried to suppress such information. > > No? Never saw this website?http://www.myopia.org I know who Don Rehm is, and know his position. Crafting a plausible argument STILL doesn't make it true. Still doesn't prove anything. Still a lousy excuse for not subjecting a theory to controlled testing. Right? > > It's a certain kind of pathology to believe that a conspiracy SO vast > > can actually be perpetrated. It's a more dramatic kind of pathology > > to be the perpetrator in such a case (read: you). > > Again, problem solvers are called idiots, and, now, perpetrator. What > a strange world!! It's a strange world where you cannot offer proof in the form of peer- reviewed, multicenter, randomized, controlled testing. Not that hard. Done every day. Until then, you're just blowing smoke. Why not prove and publish in a peer-reviewed journal? Is "The Man" holding you down? > > In the meantime, thousands have offered false hope to TENS of > > thousands, bilking them of MILLIONS in the process, using faith, [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > There is little MONEY to be made in myopia prevention and much to be > made in myopia treatment. Good basis for a conspiracy theory, but ... again ... nobody's ever proved one. What are the odds?? > As Tom put it, Science progresses when current notions are challenged, > revised, or expanded. Actually, that's how THEORIES and HYPOTHESES are formulated. Then (at the risk of repetition), one should - design and conduct experiments that seek to TEST the theory - revise and revisit the conclusion based on the results of those TESTS Skipping steps isn't science. It doesn't validate results. It doesn't verify cause and effect. It doesn't control for confounding variables. It doesn't establish the efficacy of the treatment vs. no treatment at all. Getting all this? > > Nice picture, by the way. I wonder if Uncle Otie ever traveled the > > Far East in his younger day...... > > Thank you. that is me, not Otis. .... was wondering if you were his son.... You know: correlation ... causation, and all that.... You are so full of sh.t Cletis. Stop posting under aliases and admit you are a lying crank. On 2/23/07 1:00 PM, in article 1172264418.478243.304460@a75g2000cwd.googlegroups.com, "CatmanX" <drgrant@ozemail.com.au> wrote: > You are so full of sh.t Cletis. > > Stop posting under aliases and admit you are a lying crank. Would negative lenses be useful for lengthening a penis? After all, the do lengthen eyeballs. Bill -- Fermez le Bush--about two years to go. > Would negative lenses be useful for lengthening a penis? After all, the do > lengthen eyeballs. I thought negative lenses would "shrink" the object in question. :) Question for otis: What is the "dynamic state" of a monkey penis? >> Would negative lenses be useful for lengthening a penis? After all, the do >> lengthen eyeballs. > >I thought negative lenses would "shrink" the object in question. :) > >Question for otis: What is the "dynamic state" of a monkey penis? Is that a fundamental monkey penis? I think you should specify. Ann > >> Would negative lenses be useful for lengthening a penis? After all, the do > >> lengthen eyeballs. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Is that a fundamental monkey penis? I think you should specify. It could be a chick penis ... whatever that is. Don't over-think it.... On 2/25/07 10:47 AM, in article 1172429239.928956.81000@z35g2000cwz.googlegroups.com, "Neil Brooks" <neil0502@yahoo.com> wrote: > I thought negative lenses would "shrink" the object in question. :) Negative lenses only make things look smaller. -- Fermez le Bush--about two years to go. I think we are talking about natural peni here. Fundamental peni are much more dangerous and have a tendency of attacking. > Dear open-minded friends (close-minded optometrists excluded), > [quoted text clipped - 318 lines] > > read more » very highly unlikely. ANY WAY I NEED FOR MY -1.5&-2.5 HOW IS THIS SO.......................... > ANY WAY I NEED FOR MY -1.5&-2.5 HOW IS THIS > SO.......................... Dear Rajesh, What is your age? For how many years have you been nearsighted or wearing glasses? Do you normally wear glasses all the time or you just use glasses for driving, TV, classroom board, etc? Do you wear glasses or contact lenses? Is your nearsightedness still getting worse or it has stopped? When I know a little bit more about your case, I will be able to tell you what works BEST for you. As an example, you can see here Christina improved from -2.50 (20/200) to -0.75 (20/40) in less than six months. http://www.geocities.com/myopiacure/Christina_Vision_Improvement_Record.jpg Best regards, Myopia Cure Promoter http://www.geocities.com/myopiacure "Vision Improvement is EASY if done PROPERLY" |
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
|
©2009 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.