 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / Vision / July 2007Contact lens design
Can anyone point me towards references regarding the design of contact lenses? I am interested in the complete product from optical design to materials to biology. Are there any useful books or landmark papers? www.richardfisher.com why? X-No-Archive: Dear Helpful Person, I regret to inform you that you will get a lot of un-helpful remarks from Dr. (CatMan) Grant. I would suggest using Google -- better than Catman, and more reasonable. Otis > why? >I regret to inform you that you will get a lot >of un-helpful remarks from Dr. (CatMan) Grant. > >I would suggest using Google -- better than Catman, >and more reasonable. Oh, Otis. Here's one of your basic problems: you think that unfiltered content found on the internet is more valuable than the opinion of a gruff optometrist with multiple degrees, fellowships, and decades of clinical experience. Most people wouldn't. You shouldn't either. You're usually unfailingly polite, but insane. See what I mean? Evidently you missed my question. > I said that the natural eye simply changes its > refractive STATE in a negative direction if > you wear a full strength minus ALL THE TIME. Since they don't, you're either stubbornly ignorant, or you're lying. Which is it? -MT >Evidently you missed my question. > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >-MT Other than my previous answer: "He could be both," I have an idea here. Otis MAY be referring to the monkey studies in which ONE SPECIES of macaque monkey ... that DID NOT NEED corrective lenses ... had them SUTURED to its eyes. Over time, THAT ONE SPECIES of macaque DID adapt to the new lens. However, OTHER SPECIES OF MONKEY DID NOT PRODUCE THE SAME result in the same tests, AND even short periodic BREAKS FROM THE UNNECESSARY LENSES ELIMINATED THIS EFFECT. The takeaway from this is simple: if you have a particular species of macaque (a monkey), and it sees 20/20, DO NOT SUTURE LENSES TO THEIR EYES (I actually think it's unreasonable to suture lenses to anybody or anything's eyes, but....). So ... maybe Otis is simply an idiot (different from "stubbornly ignorant") and cannot understand the error of his ... um ... "thinking." Just another shot in the dark.... > Can anyone point me towards references regarding the design of contact > lenses? I am interested in the complete product from optical design [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > www.richardfisher.com Rigid or soft? You haven't any received any useful replies to date, so I thought I would take a stab at it though my knowledge here is limited.This forum is populated by mostly by people who use the end products, not the engineers who developed them. You might have more success in posting to chemical engineering or industrial design forums, if they exist. Rigid lenses started as molded scleral lens in the 1920s, moved to smaller intrapalpebral fit in the 1950s, material was PMMA until the early 1970s with the first gas permable. Design and materials exploded in the 1980s with computer assisted lathes and multiple materials. Many are patented or "in house" industrial secrets, don't know if details were published. Soft lens design and materials started in the 1960s, most design and material development was inside contact lens companies so again, details may not be published. If you are near an Optometry School, you could try their libraries. Most contact lens texts have a chapter or two on design and materials and you could then explore the references for those chapters. The physiology of the cornea is usually well explored in contact lens texts. Dr Judy X-No-Archive: Dear Judy, Thanks for being a helpful-person. Tragically these other sh.t-heads are more interested in attacking my advice (to check Google), than in PROVIDING ANY HONEST ANSWER TO THE ORIGINAL POSTER. When I ask honest questions about the dynamic nature of the fundamental eye -- I expect an honest answer. I doubt that you will get even an ATTEMPT at an honest, well thought-out answer from these people. Just one man's opinion. Otis > > Can anyone point me towards references regarding the design of contact > > lenses? I am interested in the complete product from optical design [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > > Dr Judy >Thanks for being a helpful-person. And thank YOU for being a harmful person. >Tragically these other sh.t-heads YIKES! I can't speak for anybody else here, but ... OUCH! That really stings. Wow. > are more interested >in attacking my advice (to check Google), than >in PROVIDING ANY HONEST ANSWER TO THE >ORIGINAL POSTER. Cautioning people about the worthlessness of, or harm to be derived from, your posts is valid and important advice. >When I ask honest questions about the dynamic >nature of the fundamental eye -- I expect an >honest answer. In theory. In practice, however, you do NOT ask such questions and you CERTAINLY do not ANSWER questions. These, for example: www.nbeener.com/NDB_OSB_Qs.txt Worse, you continue to lie, misquote, and scurry away to your personal soapbox to falsify other people's statements here. >I doubt that you will >get even an ATTEMPT at an honest, >well thought-out answer from these people. No, Otis. That's only true of you. If somebody can be warned not to listen to you, then ... preventing harm IS doing good. You hurt people. You don't care. You may be mentally ill, have diminished capacity, simply be a sociopath, or any and all of the above. But you hurt people. > When I ask honest questions about the dynamic > nature of the fundamental eye -- I expect an > honest answer. So why are you so DISHONEST about minus lenses causing myopia? Are you lying, or do you just believe that all the human studies were wrong? Which is it? -MT > > Can anyone point me towards references regarding the design of contact > > lenses? I am interested in the complete product from optical design [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > > Dr Judy Judy, Thanks for giving the only reply on topic. I am presently interested in all forms of modern contact lens design. I have found a limited amount of useful information on line but am looking for as much modern detail as possible. Although not optomistic about finding it on this forum I consider it still worth trying! www.richardfisher.com Why are you interested and why do you feel the need to post it on the net? You haven't found out much because you haven't even begun looking in the right places. Try reading some books. There is all the information you need. It is really not so difficult. dr grant > Why are you interested and why do you feel the need to post it on the > net? [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > dr grant No need to be rude. If you had bothered to read my original post you would have discovered that I was asking for pointers to the best books. If you are so against people asking for help on the internet then why are you reading these posts? www.richardfisher.com Subject: About Richard. Check his web site. He probably has more optical design ability -- than you ever will. Why not respect Richard's honest questions with respectful answers? After all -- he did not insult you. > Why are you interested and why do you feel the need to post it on the > net? [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > dr grant On Jul 28, 11:57 pm, "otisbr...@pa.net" <otisbr...@pa.net> wrote: > Subject: About Richard. > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > > dr grant Otis, Please go away. YOU are not being a helpful person. To you, a contact lens is but another method to provide "the wretched minus", or "the quick fix", whichever you prefer.
|
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.