Actually, I should correct (or commit) myself:

MOST have access to that kind of medical
information.

MANY, in fact, actually READ IT

SOME may even LEARN FROM IT.

It is that last group that I "admire" the most, for
they are truly a "breed apart" from the likes of me.

I look to them with wide-eyed wonder--the same
sort of awe and reverence that I used to reserve
for commercial pilots.  Ah, if only.

Those who USE their access, AND read, AND learn
tend to see THROUGH my endless stream of
falsehoods.  They recognize when I misquote,
torture statistics, cite partial data, lie "by omission,"
cite false authorities, demonstrate VICIOUS hypocrisy,
extrapolate from single cases to larger pop-
ulations, and ignore overwhelming sums of
data in direct contradiction to my beliefs.

In fact, they tend to speak out in large
numbers when I AM errant, mis-informed,
dishonest, or simply wrong.

This occurs on a near-constant basis.

In a SCIENTIFIC (NOT medical) case, this is
known as a negative feedback loop.

But I pay them no "never-mind."

Enjoy,

Odis

Is staircase myopia the same as elevator or escalator myopia?
What about a spiral staircase? Do ladders count? How about magic
carpets?

What is the refractive state of a magic carpet?

The implication of the "Printer's Son".

Some parents, recognizing that they must take a more
supportive PREVENTIVE approach with their own
children -- to keep their distant vision clear through
the school years -- institute the preventive method
WITH THEIR OWN CHILREN, because of the
arrogance an ignorance of the majority-opinion
on the subject.

Here is the statement of "Ray" about his son:

++++++++++

Dear Prevention-minded parents,

    I have received this from a parent.

    I have changed the names of the people to protect them.

Best,

Otis

==================================

From: Ron

Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2006

Subject: Mike's vision 20/70 to 20/30

Dear Otis,

    I am Ron and my son is Mike.  Mike is eight years old now and
can read most of the 20/30 line of i-see random Snellen chart.    He
has been using plus for three months.

    In 2004 when he was 6.  My wife and I took him to see the
optometrist in a university.  We were told that Mike's vision was
farsighted +0.75D both eyes and the eyes were healthy.

    In 2005 he was 7.    We went to the same optometrist.  We were
told that Mike's farsightedness was gone.  We worried he would be
myopic soon.  But nothing we could do at the time.  The
optometrist said that they suggest some children to use the hard
contact lens to slow down the myopia if myopia grows fast.  But he
said Mike was not myopic yet and did not need at the time.  My
wife and I also think the hard contact lens is too dangerous for a
young boy like Michael.  We do not consider.  What we could do was
just keep an eye on his vision.

    At his regular body check early August this year.    The doctor
told us Mike needed to see an optometrist.  My wife and I took him
to see an optometrist on the same day.    We were told that Mike was
R -1.25 D and L -1.00 D nearsighted.  That guy said Mike needed a
pair of nearsightedness glasses.  I told him Mike's refractive
state was 0 diopter last year.    That guy said ..you know..  he has
grown.    he has grown taller.  his eyes have grown longer.  and
heredity.  so myopia.  I thought only the heredity made sense (not
any more now).

    I think the NBA players are much taller.  Are they all
myopic?  We rejected to let Michael wear glasses the guy wanted to
sell.  We went to two more different optometrists at different
places in the week (because I don't really trust some of them ).
One said Michael was R -1.25 D and L -1.50 D.  Another said he was
-1.50 D both eyes.  Sure enough he was nnearsighted.  We did not go
to the university because it takes months for an appointment.  We
needed to know earlier.

    My wife and I were very sad.  We have been doing everything
we can to protect his vision since he was a baby, no close reading
at home (in school we don't know and can not control), 12 feet
away from the TV and only two or three hours a week, no TV game
and no computer etc.  Unfortunately, he can not stay away from
myopia.

    In that week.  My wife and I searched on the net.    We wanted
to find some methods to slow down Mike's myopia progress.  We
found O.K lens then we found plus method on Steve's site and your
site.  We read as much as possible in a week.  Though we read a
lot.  We could not let Mike try the plus.  Because we didn't know
too much about this.  We worried.  So we decided to try the plus
lenses by myself first.  After a few days using plus lenses.  I
felt good and my vision improved little.  It was no harmful at
all.  Then we got a pair of +1.50 D lenses for Michael starting.
Mike started using plus in the end of August 2006.

    Mike's vision improved a little bit in a month.  I always
check his vision at home with the eye charts on the net.  I have
read a lot about plus prevention on the net.  Too bad Steve
doesn't update his website any more for some reason.  Some people
accused him.

    I have read a lot on your site, your forum, the Yabb vision
improvement forum, sci.med.vision and i-see etc.  I realize the
+1.50 D lenses are not strong enough for Michael when he reaches
20/50 or better.  So I gave him a pair of +2.50D lenses on 26
September 2006.  He uses plus at home and his class room.  He now
can read most of the 20/30.  Sometimes 4 of 6 sometimes 5 of 6.
His vision was about 20/60 - 20/70 three months ago.  He has
improved a lot through three months.

    Last week Mike had a vision assessment in the department of
health.  The optometrist put the -0.50D lenses on Mike's face.
Michael could read the smallest line each eye separately with
those lenses.  The optometrist said Mike was -0.50 D nearsighted
both eyes.  I asked him if the smallest line was 20/20.  He told
me that was 20/15.  He said Mike didn't need glasses.

    Otis, is that kind of over-prescription you always say?
Anyway, we are so happy about that Michael is just -0.50D
nearsighted (may be) confirmed by a professional optometrist
though I know his vision level on the eye chart at home, though I
don't trust some of them too much.

    Mike improves his vision by using plus.  So do I.    But my
vision is too bad can not be restored.    One thing is certain.
Plus prevention works.    Mike doesn't do any eye exercise like
zooming, sunning and palming etc.  He doesn't even know it.  I
have given him some blue berry extract with DHA since October
2006.  I don't know if it helps.  Who knows?

    One more thing is certain.  God has been helping us.  Thank
God.

    Otis, you are doing great.  You are helping a lot of people.
Some people overcome myopia with your help.  I have learnt much
about plus-prevention on your site.  Mike can avoid the stair-case
myopia.  His vision doesn't need to be sacrificed.  I can't tell
you how excited I am that he doesn't need the nearsightedness
glasses in his life even he is just 20/30 now.    You are making
things better.

    I have seen some people bash you unreasonably.  So I just
want to write this letter to say thank you and encourage you.  It
is not easy for me to type an English letter like this.  But I
have to.

    I don't know if Mike will reach 20/20.  I believe he will.  I
will let you know on the day.

    Thank you very much again Otis.

Best regards,

Ron

^^^^^^^^^^^^

So Dr. Raphaelson was correct about this issue.

It takes a wise parent to do plus-preventive
work "correctly".

And you wonder why YOU got stair-case myopia,
and no help with prevention?  Wonder no longer.

Otis

www.myopiafree.com

+++++++++++++

On May 3, 7:58 pm, "otisbr...@pa.net" <otisbr...@pa.net> wrote:

On May 3, 7:58 pm, "otisbr...@pa.net" <otisbr...@pa.net> wrote:

where is the beef Otis?  what is the true verification?  I mean the
data on human subjects.
who cares about some stupid story from Raphaelson which reads like an
old rerun of Little House on the Praire.  I asked you for the data
from the study that YOU performed just like you said you did.  where
is it?  quit dodging the issue and answer directly.

perhaps this so called "international myopia prevention association"
has some real data.  they claim to support research so perhaps someone
could present it.  the stupid video that you posted a link to depicts
a human child so your arguments about chickens, shrews, and monkeys
don't apply.  where is the data from humans that says myopia is caused
by near work and that plus lenses prevent it?  how come REAL studies
done by REAL scientists arrive at the opposite conclusion?

and exactly how many real people are a member of this "association".
is this something that you and your stupid friend Don Rehm dreamed up
on your own?  do you think you can dupe stupid people into believing
you just because somebody put a cartoon video on the internet?

and whatever happened to your good buddy Don's letter to congress
recommending that the wretched minus lens be banned-- how did that
go?  how long did it take before everyone stopped laughing?

and what is the status of the complaint against you for practicing
medicine without a license in the state of Pennsylvania?  has the
subject of your plus lens therapy actually endangering the public ever
been raised since you could push barely-compensated exophores over the
edge into permanent diplopia?  i know you actually HAVE harmed poor
unsuspecting saps by pushing plus lenses on them and causing them to
get double vision.  has anybody sued you yet?  its coming.