Subject:  New ideas in science develop ONLY if they are published.

Re:  It is a tragic mistake for an editor to say -- your wrong, so we
will not let you publish.

We should work TOWARDS open discussion.  No study is possible until
the preventive second-opinion is respected.

Subject: Remarks by Dr. Kaisu and response of the Finnish Medical
Journal.

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

5) Medical Editor-in-Chief

The Finnish Medical Journal

A week has passed since I sent in my comment.

I have had no response from you whatsoever; when can I expect to
receive one!

Kaisu Viikari

6) Dear Professor Viikari,

I forwarded your message to our Editor-in-chief Hannu Ollikainen last
week,
but the processing of the matter was unfortunately delayed because of
other
urgent issues. We will contact you as soon as possible.

Yours sincerely,

N.N.

7)  Dear Professor Viikari,

Editors of the Finnish Medical Journal have now dealt with your
comment. I
apologise for the delay in letting you have our reply.
References in a scientific article (!) are at the discretion of the
writer and
the experts having reviewed the article. In case an important and
recent
reference of great scientific authority is missed despite the
evaluation process
and the editors' input, we advise you to send in a compact
contribution to the
discussion. These cases typically concern a randomized investigation
or
meta-analysis.

No inherent right of reply is associated with scientific articles, and
I regret
to inform you that we feel the references suggested by you do not
complement the
review in the manner described above. Should anything new come up in
this
matter, however, we will be happy to reopen the discussion.

Yours sincerely,

N.N.

8)    THE FINNISH MEDICAL JOURNAL'S BLIND FAITH IN THE INFALLIBILITY
OF SCIENCE

I usually am a very happy child of coincidences.

This morning, for example, when I was drafting this text (in my small
writing
pad!) in bed, I happened to hear a rather interesting interview of
director
Jaana Vuoksenmaa concerning her film "Toinen jalka haudasta" (One foot
in the
grave"). In this review, she provided a very intelligent analysis of
how
awareness of death and the ending of life makes us understand what we
must do.

I have for some time now been sorting this out in my own little head:
I must
once more bring this issue (prevention of myopia and accommodation
strain) to
the attention of the world – no one else will do it for me.

And neither could anyone do it, as only I have studied the question
and worked
it out.

I understand that it is difficult for my colleagues to believe that
one woman in
the rank and file, Kaisu Viikari, could be behind a significant
discovery of
this magnitude, but that does not justify their fanatic attempts to
gag me, and
it is indeed appalling that the medical profession, and particularly
its leading
members, should do so in their principal mouthpiece.

I will always remember the time when my husband (a surgeon) understood
the idea;
he said he could never have imagined that the status of ophthalmology
in
Finland, and the whole world, could be so substandard.

Even if there are legions of patients and others following this issue
who
understand the idea and have seen the results, they are not up to
putting it
into practice in every respect. The departure of my colleague Aune
Adel was an
irrevocable loss to the cause, as she had so fully embraced it and did
her own
share to enrich our experiences.

Unbelievably, the Finnish medical society Duodecim and the Finnish
Medical
Journal have managed to smother any possible aftergrowth; the media –
excluding
a few outstanding positive exceptions (= magazine Anna and newspaper
Turun
Sanomat) – have mainly joined in the chorus.

It is fateful that in the face of this global plight, it has not been
possible
to make use of the boost of strength offered by relieving
accommodation strain,
which would be within an easy reach.

The Finnish Medical Journal has now revealed its bigoted and
outrageous
resistance to myopia prevention, which presumably is evidence of
shrinking in
front of the money mafia, even in Finland? Myopia means, increasingly,
frequently repeated, easily managed visits to an ophthalmologist or
optician due
to this complaint, profitable trade of glasses, plenty of contact
lenses; and
mutilation of healthy eyes that poses a risk to the eyesight and often
needs to
be repeated, as well as other surgical inventions, which keep an
immense
money-making racket going – a criminal abuse of the doctors'
knowledge, which is
intended for the safeguarding of people's health.

A great crime and tragedy, in the cogs of which a poor human being is
nothing
but a small pawn to be used.

Without shame, they prevent the facts from being made public to a
wider
audience, or even discussed within the medical profession. This issue
is too
explosive to be released in public, after all the negligences.

Personally I will not be here much longer to promote this cause, but
fortunately
there are intelligent people of all ages who have found help and who,
as
inspiring examples, see it as their duty to champion this cause, to
say nothing
of growing awareness abroad.

The immense range of symptoms of hyperopes who need plus dioptres is a
problem
that will be more difficult for the public at large to understand, as
a major
part of this deficiency is latent, but time will also help in this
respect. The
subheading of my book Panacea ("The Clinical Significance of Ocular
Accommodation"), although efficient and exhaustive, has not been
adequate as a
wakeup call for clinics, but neither the book nor the cause will be
any less
topical as time goes by.

But myopia alone, as an important cause of blindness, is a large-scale
catastrophe that could be prevented:

- In England, it accounted for 8.8% cases in the register of blind in
1966

- In 1972, it accounted for 18.2% of cases of blindness in the age
group 50 – 59
(this is only exceeded by rhetinopathia in diabetics)

- in Europe and the USA, macular degeneration in myopes ranks seventh
as a cause
of blindness in elderly people, but in Taiwan it already is the
leading cause.

Eye diseases due to myopia are numerous, not the least among these
being
glaucoma simplex, with its double figures compared to others (Schmid:
Myopia
Manual).

Without a care, the world of science still wallows in the same world
that
Galilei faced in the turn of the 16th century; dating back to that
period, we
have the adjective Copernican, which refers to a great revolution in a
field of
scientific research (Nicolaus Copernicus - Wikipedia).

How easy this could have been, if only the fully appropriate comment
sent in by
my patients on the references missing in Pärssinen's review (which
disprove his
belief in the hereditary nature of myopia that has had such an
immensely harmful
impact on prevention) had been immediately published in the Letters
column of
the Finnish Medical Journal!

The decision by the editors of the Finnish Medical Journal to reject
my
"comment" (was that heading such an erroneous one?) was a hilarious,
unrivaled
example of how "a mob has many heads but no brains".

This is another example of what I write about on page 61 of my book
"jotta
totuus ei unohtuisi", and what has been a great source of strength to
me: how I
"feel a sadistic triumph when I see them demonstrating their stupidity
to the
whole wide world in black and white", blinded by being considered, and
considering themselves, smart.

If they had taken the trouble to read my book, which has been offered
to them in
many forms, they might have been able to avoid this blunder!

I am sorry to say I cannot have pity on Päivi Hietanen and temper
justice with
mercy. I have offered her enough opportunities to put things right.

This tragedy has no parallel, not even on the global scale. As a crime
against
humanity, it would be a case for the tribunals, such as the EU Court
of Justice,
but where could we find the necessary expertise in solicitors, when it
cannot be
found even here, among doctors that have had the opportunity to follow
the cause
closely; intelligence to understand a purely medical question.
However, the
Finnish people with common sense have grasped it.

Pärssinen is not the only one who's life's work for the patients, or
study of
myopia, has been wasted. He is only one out of thousands and again
thousands.

And it is not even a consolation to say that "the most difficult thing
to
understand is the fact that you do not understand!"

Kaisu Viikari

19 Apr 2009 Kaisu