 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / Vision / June 2007Another victim of Uncle Otie
Posted today ... on Otis's personal soapbox forum: http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Myopiafree2/message/758 [quote] Well, I started this journey some time after Christmas, and had started with diligent use of the plus lenses. Noticing an onset of double vision, which I believed to be diplopia, I stopped the use of the plus lenses, although I was told it was a result of astigmatism that I already had. Anyways I have not worn my minus glasses since Christmas save in circumstances when I am required to watch a movie in class. I don't wear my glasses even in the cinema. I have seen no progress on the Snellen chart, and I didn't expect to, but I haven;t seen any decline. I think that I have stabilized my vision effectively by completely cutting out my use of the minus lenses. I realize hat I am lucky in having my myopia at a low enough level to be able to completely end my use of the plus lenses. So it seems that minus lenses are the only thing that was making my vision worse, but I cannot know for sure until I go to the optometrist to test my vision. I have been contemplating over starting with the plus lenses again, because the double vision has begun to disappear. This is the only thing that confuses me. I am unsure if my eyes have healed the double vision that was caused by the plus lenses or if the use of the double lenses uncloaked the astigmatism from the veil of blurriness cause by myopia. Anyways, I am happy that I am able to go through life, indoors and outdoors without the use of my minus glasses, except when I have to read stuff on the blackboard. If you have any advice on how I should continue, or anymore information on the diplopia, or the headaches caused by the plus lenses, I would be extremely grateful. [/quote] You're a jackass, Otis--an uncaring, insensitive, heartless, soulless jackass. Yup, Otis is a supreme jackass no doubt, but what does it tell you when people rely on the internet for their healthcare instead of simply seeing a doctor? > Yup, Otis is a supreme jackass no doubt, but what does it tell you > when people rely on the internet for their healthcare instead of > simply seeing a doctor? It tells me that: - the person is naive - the person is desperate - the person is NOT knowledgeable - the person is gullible - the person is trusting - the person is young - the person is vulnerable - the person needs help, defense, and protection > > Yup, Otis is a supreme jackass no doubt, but what does it tell you > > when people rely on the internet for their healthcare instead of [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > - the person needs help, defense, and protection In addition it might tell you (and me) that there is no comprehensive healthcare system in the U.S. (the richest country in the world) and many people don't have access to healthcare or cannot afford it. > In addition it might tell you (and me) that there is no comprehensive > healthcare system in the U.S. (the richest country in the world) and > many people don't have access to healthcare or cannot afford it.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Did you know that the only people in the U.S. who are entitled BY LAW to healthcare are are prisoners? > In addition it might tell you (and me) that there is no comprehensive > healthcare system in the U.S. (the richest country in the world) and > many people don't have access to healthcare or cannot afford it.- Not entirely true here, Many cannot afford HEALTH INSURANCE, but access to healthcare is available. One reason you pay ten bucks for an aspirin at a hospital is to cover costs for people who cannot pay. > > Yup, Otis is a supreme jackass no doubt, but what does it tell you > > when people rely on the internet for their healthcare instead of [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > - the person needs help, defense, and protection This is not the end of it. Following is Otis' response to his victim: Dear Chris, Subject: Keeping your vision clear through the school years. Re: The nature of my "advice". As you know, I would I had been on the RECEIVING end of my advice. I recognize how hard it is to use the preventive-plus properly. I do not consider my advice "medical" at all, but wise under the circumstances. Our eyes are designed for DISTANT objects most of the time. It takes a long time to understand it that way -- but that is how I think of it. The Eskimo data (on my site) makes this situation absolutly clear (to me at least.) The Eskmios who had no schooling at all, had postive refractive STATES from zero to +3 diopters -- and excellent distant vision. Their children, who spent 12 years in scool, had an AVERAGE refractive STATE of -2 diopters, and average Snellens of 20/140. Or 88 percent were nearsighted. The real issue is to "control" that near enviroment, by getting rid of it with a plus lens. The plus is pure-protective in nature, not a "cure". It indeed does take a wise person to review these issues an make his choice accordingly. I know you intend to spend an additional 8 years in college and graduate school. The average "down" rate (of students who do not wear any proctive plus) is -1/3 diopters per year. (Data from two military academys.) That should be part of your choice. More response: --- In Myopiafree2@yahoogroups.com, "armistice1112" <armistice1112@...> wrote: > Well, I started this journey some time after Christmas, and had > started with diligent use of the plus lenses. Noticing an onset of > double vision, which I believed to be diplopia, I stopped the use of > the plus lenses, although I was told it was a result of astigmatism > that I already had. Otis> Good! If you think there is any problem -- do not wear the plus. Anyways I have not worn my minus glasses since > Christmas save in circumstances when I am required to watch a movie in > class. Otis> Good! The practical use of the minus is to wear it only when necessary. This is a strong suggestion by Bates. I don't wear my glasses even in the cinema. I have seen no > progress on the Snellen chart, and I didn't expect to, but I haven;t > seen any decline. Otis> This is a critical judgment by you. Because of that -1/2 and -1/3 diopter per year figure, just keeping what you have is a success. Only you can judge this, however. I think that I have stabilized my vision effectively > by completely cutting out my use of the minus lenses. Otis> I agree. I realize hat I > am lucky in having my myopia at a low enough level to be able to > completely end my use of the plus lenses. Otis> (you mean minus lens -- I assume). But yes, avoiding the minus is wise. So it seems that minus > lenses are the only thing that was making my vision worse, but I > cannot know for sure until I go to the optometrist to test my vision. Otis> You Snellen is your best check. Your OD simply has you read a Snellen, and finds a minus lens to clear the 20/20, 20/15 or 20/10 line. Most prescribe for "best visual acuity" which means that even with 20/20 you would be perscribed a strong minus. > I have been contemplating over starting with the plus lenses again, > because the double vision has begun to disappear. Otis> This is ALWAYS a personal choice. I can only state what I WISH I had been able to do with high quality science supporting this type of choice. This is the only > thing that confuses me. I am unsure if my eyes have healed the double > vision that was caused by the plus lenses or if the use of the double > lenses uncloaked the astigmatism from the veil of blurriness cause by > myopia. Otis> That depends on the degree of astigmatism. A certain amount of astigmatism is normal, and is seen in the primate eye. Anyways, I am happy that I am able to go through life, indoors > and outdoors without the use of my minus glasses, except when I have > to read stuff on the blackboard. Otis> A very reasonable decision. If you have any advice on how I > should continue, or anymore information on the diplopia, or the > headaches caused by the plus lenses, I would be extremely grateful. Otis> I can only have you read Dr. Stirling Colgates experience with the plus. His choice was to "accept" some headache as the price of keeping his distant vision clear. Otis> This is indeed a "fighting chance", with you the sole judge of this process. It is indeed tough to do. Best, Otis > Yup, Otis is a supreme jackass no doubt, but what does it tell you > when people rely on the internet for their healthcare instead of > simply seeing a doctor? one must be careful. most eye docs are "first opinion" eye docs who use the "wretched minus" lens so as to give the patient instant gratification and then push them over the edge into stair-step myopia. then the patient will need stronger and stronger glasses all the time and will continue to visit the eye doctor over and over again ensuring that doctor lifelong revenues! Otis believes the internet is better! On Jun 2, 10:17 pm, p.clar...@gmail.com wrote: > one must be careful. most eye docs are "first opinion" eye docs who > use the "wretched minus" lens so as to give the patient instant [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > ensuring that doctor lifelong revenues! Otis believes the internet is > better! Ah, then Otis does have a plan. I have to take some strong, mind altering drugs now. :) This Otis fellow seems to be really dangerous What can we do to stop him before its to late and another person gets hurt? This Otis fellowe seems to be really dangerous What can we do to stop him before its to late and more person get hurt?! > This Otis fellowe seems to be really dangerous > > What can we do to stop him before its to late and more person get hurt?! Er, nothing, this is the internet after all. |
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
|
©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.