Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
GeneralCardiologyVisionDentistryPharmacyLaboratoryNutritionAlternative
Diseases and Disorders
AIDSAlzheimer'sArthritisAsthmaCancerBreast CancerDiabetesEpilepsyGlaucomaHepatitisHerpesLupusProstate BPHProstate CancerProstatitisSinusitisTinnitus

Medical Forum / General / Vision / October 2007

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

A professional argues for plus "stress relief"

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
otisbrown@pa.net - 02 Oct 2007 17:42 GMT
Dear Second-opinion friends,

Here an optometrist, Dr. Robert Hohendorf describes
why intelligent use of the plus is needed
to clear your refractive STATE back to normal.

As one person is now doing it on sci.med.vision.

I always like to hear the second-opinion -- and
make my preventive judgment accordingly.

Enjoy,

Otis

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

Baltimore Academy for Behavioral Optometry (BABO) News

-------------------------------------------------

Volume I, Issue 2 April 1997

-------------------------------------------------

    A Clinical Analogy for Close Working Distances:

    Stress and Stress Relief

    Robert Hohendorf, O.D., F.C.O.V.D.

    Stress demands change.  I feel it can occur any one of three
ways.  Here is a sample way of explaining a habitual working distance
inside the Harmon distance, its impact on vision, and treatment
options.

    "Suppose I put a 25 lb.  (11 kg) sack of flour on your back
behind your shoulders.  Would you walk bent over or normal?"

    You are looking for the answer "bent over".  If they say,
"normal" then continue to increase the amount of the weight until they
say, "bent over".

    "What if I left it on your back for the next six hours and
then took it off.  Wouldn't it feel good to straighten up and
stretch?  That's easily reversible change!  Now suppose I left
that sack of flour on your back for six months.  When I took it
off would you straighten right up?"

    You are looking for the answer "no".  If you need to, keep
making the time with the flour on the back longer and longer until
they say, "no".

    "You would probably have to exercise and stretch to regain
your posture.  Maybe even sleep on a board for a few nights.  This is
an example of change with effort!  Suppose we left that weight on your
back for six years?"

    For child:  "How much taller will you be in six year?  Do you
think you will grow crooked or straight with that weight on your
back?

    "All the bones and all the muscles will be crooked supporting
that extra weight.  This is the third kind of change which is not
easily reversible!  (even with surgery) You have grown crooked and you
have altered the way you do everything because of a weight on your
back."

    "The weight is a strain on your back.  Holding things close
to your eyes is a strain on your visual system.  Right now you are in
that easily reversible (or reversible with effort) visual
stage.  Here are some things you can do to change your habit of
holding things too close to your eyes."

    Visual hygiene, plus lenses, and/or VT can be discussed here as
options.

    "Suppose I was a back doctor and you came in complaining of a
back ache and you had that sack of flour on your back.    If I was a good
doctor, what would I do?"

    Looking for "take that sack off my back" as an answer.

    "That's what these glasses for reading, desk work, and
computers do for your eyes.  They take the strain off, so your
eyes grow up straight and strong.  You can still get all your work
done, probably even better, without your visual symptoms.  These are
(use one of the following:) stress relieving, preventive, protective
lenses.
Scott Seidman - 02 Oct 2007 17:50 GMT
> Here an optometrist, Dr. Robert Hohendorf describes
> why intelligent use of the plus is needed
> to clear your refractive STATE back to normal.

No, he speaks to taking your glasses off and using plus lenses, but he
never says this will prevent myopia.

Signature

Scott
Reverse name to reply

otisbrown@pa.net - 03 Oct 2007 15:17 GMT
Dear Scott,

Yes, indeed.  He intimated that plus-prevention would be
a good idea.

It takes some WISDOM in the person to put logical
facts together, like adding 1 + 1, and consistently
getting "2" for the answer.

Scientifically best,

Otis

> "otisbr...@pa.net" <otisbr...@pa.net> wrote innews:1191343367.410925.272280@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com:
>
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> Scott
> Reverse name to reply
Scott Seidman - 03 Oct 2007 16:14 GMT
> It takes some WISDOM in the person to put logical
> facts together, like adding 1 + 1, and consistently
> getting "2" for the answer.

So, checking out http://lc.brooklyn.cuny.edu/smarttutor/logic/rules.html, I
suppose one could infer that
"good for the eyes"== "prevents myopia"???

Signature

Scott
Reverse name to reply

Neil Brooks - 03 Oct 2007 20:06 GMT
On Oct 3, 7:17 am, "otisbr...@pa.net" <otisbr...@pa.net> wrote:

> Yes, indeed.

Yes, indeed.  As always, you're a pathological liar and an absolute
f.cking idiot.

Sounds like another Dave Guyton case: he makes recommendations
consistent with MINE, but in NO WAY supporting your position, yet ...
you say he agrees with you.

Yes, indeed: a pathological liar and a f.cking idiot.

How's that call to Dave Granet coming, anyway, you f.cking idiot?
p.clarkii@gmail.com - 05 Oct 2007 11:57 GMT
On Oct 2, 12:42 pm, "otisbr...@pa.net" <otisbr...@pa.net> wrote:

> Baltimore Academy for Behavioral Optometry (BABO) News

Wow!  another impressive highly-acclaimed academic institution.  you
sure must have a lot of credibility since you read all of this high-
level scientific information, right Otis?  I wonder why I have an OD
and PhD in vision research and I haven't heard of these so-called
institutes you keep writing about?  I bet their street address is some
schmuck's home.

these people are a bunch of snake-oil selling idiots Otis.  BTW, how
is the sale of your book coming along?

BTW, what is the status of your legal complaint from the State of
Pennsylvania for practicing medicine without a license coming?

you are such an idiot Otis.  why do you expect anyone believes or
cares about what you have to say?  have you noticed that no one
replies to your posts except for the hecklers?

pathetic
otisbrown@pa.net - 05 Oct 2007 16:10 GMT
PClar>  BTW, what is the status of your legal complaint from the State
of
Pennsylvania for practicing medicine without a license coming?

Otis> As you know, Layman Brooks filed the "complain" on-line.

Otis> I sent them a lot of his foul-mouth remarks, and they
concluded he was a first-rate jerk -- and that was the end
of that.

Otis> But further, I explained that I was an ENGINEER, and
ONLY advocated that the person search-out a SUPPORTIVE
second-opinion optometrist -- and get the PREVENTIVE
help he truly need.

Otis> I just stated that there was an HONEST professional
disagreement, and that the second-opinion OD judged
that a negative refractive STATE of the natural eye
could be PREVENTED under excellent circumstance.
I referred them to this site to prove that point:

www.chinamyopia.org

Otis

On Oct 5, 6:57 am, p.clar...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Oct 2, 12:42 pm, "otisbr...@pa.net" <otisbr...@pa.net> wrote:
>
[quoted text clipped - 18 lines]
>
> pathetic
Neil Brooks - 05 Oct 2007 18:06 GMT
On Oct 5, 8:10 am, "otisbr...@pa.net" <otisbr...@pa.net> wrote:
> PClar>  BTW, what is the status of your legal complaint from the State
> of
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> concluded he was a first-rate jerk -- and that was the end
> of that.

Gosh, Scrotis.  That's not what they told me.  They simply need a
small handful of people willing to swear out a complaint against
you.

The people whose children you DID hurt felt HORRIBLY that they EVER
listened to you in the first place and felt strongly that they wanted
to put it all behind them.

As I say, you will UNDOUBTEDLY cause MORE HARM ... and I'll be right
there when you do :-)

Then ... the State of Pennsylvania will, too.

As I've oft said: I may have a foul mouth, but you're a pathological
liar, an absolute f.cking idiot, AND you hurt people with reckless
disregard.

I'll be on the beach in Maui while you're ignorant carcass is rotting
in hell :-p

By the way, Otis.  Have you called Dave Granet (858-534-2020) about
the delayed adjustable sutures question yet?

I know you're virtually brain dead, so I'll keep reminding you ...
just so that you can stay a little closer to the truth ... as we all
know you MUST want ... right?
Neil Brooks - 05 Oct 2007 18:02 GMT
On Oct 5, 3:57 am, p.clar...@gmail.com wrote:

> you are such an idiot Otis.

Fair.  Accurate.  Probably even UNDERstates the case.

> why do you expect anyone believes or
> cares about what you have to say?  have you noticed that no one
> replies to your posts except for the hecklers?

Not entirely true, at all.  Like Atchoo, Otis CONSTANTLY replies to
HIS OWN posts.

I presume, though, that this is not really what you meant.

> pathetic

Fair.  Accurate.  Probably even UNDERstates the case.

Good precis.
 
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.