> On Oct 22, 7:09 pm, "Peter Jason"
> <p...@jostle.com> wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 22 lines]
>
> It's not new.
Thanks, why then are optometrists still using
the old machine requiring manual selection of
lenses?
I have Sphere/Cyl adjustment and I get
varying results from different optometrists.
I have some friends back from overseas, and
they order their glasses there because this
"autorefractor" device gives excellent and
automatic results.
Peter
p.clarkii@gmail.com - 23 Oct 2007 06:10 GMT
> > On Oct 22, 7:09 pm, "Peter Jason"
> > <p...@jostle.com> wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 26 lines]
> the old machine requiring manual selection of
> lenses?
because they are inaccurate.
> I have Sphere/Cyl adjustment and I get
> varying results from different optometrists.
well you'd get WIDELY varying results from an autorefractor. they are
getting better, but still they are inaccurate and serve only as a
useful reference to a good manual refraction.
> I have some friends back from overseas, and
> they order their glasses there because this
> "autorefractor" device gives excellent and
> automatic results.
in some Asian countries they will sell you glasses based soley on a
autorefractor reading. bottome line is you'd end up with a lot of
glasses laying around that don't work very well.
Dr. Leukoma - 23 Oct 2007 13:48 GMT
> > On Oct 22, 7:09 pm, "Peter Jason"
> > <p...@jostle.com> wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 38 lines]
>
> - Show quoted text -
I find it useful to think of it this way. An autorefractor measures
the optics of the eye, and therefore what the eye sees. The
subjective refraction measures what the patient sees, i.e. after brain
interpretation.
lena102938 - 23 Oct 2007 15:09 GMT
> > > On Oct 22, 7:09 pm, "Peter Jason"
> > > <p...@jostle.com> wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 43 lines]
> subjective refraction measures what the patient sees, i.e. after brain
> interpretation.
Then OD brainwash that brain like in case of that post about 13 old
kid
who are pushed into glasses with OD who wants more clients.
Neil Brooks - 23 Oct 2007 16:20 GMT
> Then OD brainwash that brain like in case of that post about 13 old
> kid
> who are pushed into glasses with OD who wants more clients.
Lena? Were you raped by an optometrist or other vision care
professional?
Seriously. Were you?
If so, then ... wouldn't law enforcement and a psychologist's office
be a more appropriate venue for your hatred than this forum?
Ya' see: this forum is SCIENCE.med.vision. All you bring is wrath,
scorn, hatred, bitterness, and resentment.
No information.
Time to seek professional help.
> > I heard the other day there was a new machine
> > for eyeglass prescriptions.
[quoted text clipped - 17 lines]
>
> It's not new.
Do any of the big name opticians in UK / Ireland use that machine? I
have only ever had to put the frames on where they slot in and out
different powered lenses.
lena102938 - 30 Oct 2007 21:50 GMT
> > > I heard the other day there was a new machine
> > > for eyeglass prescriptions.
[quoted text clipped - 21 lines]
> have only ever had to put the frames on where they slot in and out
> different powered lenses.
Why would you need something like that?
Every OD's has "machine" which measures
refraction automatically the name of "machine" is "auto
refractor" (USA) or "auto refractometer"(some other countries)
The receptionist who worked yesterday in the grocery story push just
one button and device makes and prints the measurements (astigmatism,
refraction, average ) . Also it measures parameters for contact
lenses.
Copy and paste - it is the prescription.
If you are interesting you can ask about reading of the device.
Then the OD looks on that printed "receipt" and sticks the different
lenses.
Around +0.5 -0.5 of what the devise printed.
Another manipulation with one button devise.
Easier even then your cell phone which has "menu".
Dan Abel - 30 Oct 2007 22:33 GMT
> > > I heard the other day there was a new machine
> > > for eyeglass prescriptions.
[quoted text clipped - 21 lines]
> have only ever had to put the frames on where they slot in and out
> different powered lenses.
I'm sure many of those places have such a machine. It's often used for
brand new patients, those who have just had eye surgery and people who
temporarily can't see. It gives the doctor a starting place for
testing. Since they don't work well, no competent doctor would rely on
them for issuing a reliable prescription. I've had one used on me
twice, both times after eye surgery.
lena102938 - 31 Oct 2007 01:38 GMT
> In article <1193758476.765982.150...@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>,
>
[quoted text clipped - 30 lines]
> them for issuing a reliable prescription. I've had one used on me
> twice, both times after eye surgery.
Dan they use it every visit to OD
Dr. Leukoma - 31 Oct 2007 02:46 GMT
> > In article <1193758476.765982.150...@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>,
>
[quoted text clipped - 34 lines]
>
> - Show quoted text -
I don't use one. I use a retinoscope. It's quicker and more accurate.
lena102938 - 31 Oct 2007 03:08 GMT
> > > In article <1193758476.765982.150...@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>,
>
[quoted text clipped - 36 lines]
>
> I don't use one. I use a retinoscope. It's quicker and more accurate.
Do not think that quicker but I think receptionist can not use that
one.
Frankly I ' ve never seen a retinoscope
Mike Tyner - 31 Oct 2007 03:28 GMT
> Do not think that quicker but I think receptionist can
> not use that one.
I use both, every day. They're comparable - real time data-gathering is
about 10 seconds per eye, and highly variable.
They're usually done in different rooms. Once the patient is in the chair,
retinoscopy is 100 times faster than getting the patient up, into another
room, given instructions, etc.
> Frankly I ' ve never seen a retinoscope
Fascinating instrument, nothing more than a variable-focus streak or spot of
light.
See http://www.eyetec.net/group2/M6S1.htm
-MT
lena102938 - 31 Oct 2007 03:37 GMT
> > Do not think that quicker but I think receptionist can
> > not use that one.
[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]
>
> -MT
Mike, Mike It is absoluttely_absoluttely cool reference !
It has much more then retinoscope description.
Thanks
Lena
lena102938 - 31 Oct 2007 03:44 GMT
> > Do not think that quicker but I think receptionist can
> > not use that one.
[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]
>
> -MT
Mike, can you send me ref how to measure accomodation as precise as
possible ?
Neil Brooks - 31 Oct 2007 23:10 GMT
> Mike, can you send me ref how to measure accomodation as precise as
> possible ?
I think it's an appropriate time to warn you, Lena. If you start
ACTUALLY learning about this stuff, then:
1) You'll have to abandon many of your closely-held beliefs as
unsupported and factually wrong,
2) You'll probably start to view eye docs as pretty good people, and
3) You and Otis will have NOTHING to talk about.
Good luck.
Neil
lena102938 - 31 Oct 2007 03:11 GMT
> > > In article <1193758476.765982.150...@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>,
>
[quoted text clipped - 36 lines]
>
> I don't use one. I use a retinoscope. It's quicker and more accurate.