Re: Question About "Add" Value
You are accessing this site in a read-only mode. For full access to all member benefits, including message posting, please login or register. Registration is completely free, simple, and takes only a few seconds.
Login |
Free MedKB.com registration |
Whole discussion thread
The message you are replying to and its parents are listed in the reverse order with the most recent posts first. This might not be the whole discussion thread. To read all the messages in this thread please click here.
Re: Question About "Add" Value
| odisbrown@pa.net | 26 Jun 2006 01:52 |
Dear Rich,
Subject: Think for yourself.
To expand a bit further, when I say "think for yourself," I DO MEAN that you should ignore scientifically verifiable human evidence, commonly-accepted beliefs, and standards of practice from evidence-based medicine.
I DO MEAN that you should ignore ALL of those "majority opinion" trappings and instead pay attention to the widom found here:
www.chinamybunghole.com
You will find many on sci.med.vision who disagree with me, but perhaps NONE as adamantly as my niece who listened to me and became highly myopic nonetheless.
Best,
Odis Avuncular, but Insane
|
| otisbrown@pa.net | 26 Jun 2006 01:10 |
Dear Rich,
Please disregard Allen's postings.
He thinks you are intellectually incompetent -- and I would bet that you are not.
To much "paternalism" here. AFTER you have done these simple checkes YOURSELF -- you can go back to your OD, and talk to him/her about them.
Think for yourself.
Otis
++++++++
> > You might take you glasses off and check this. If at 20 inches > > the reading is blurry, then you will need some "plus" to read. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Allen |
| A Lieberman | 26 Jun 2006 01:05 |
> You might take you glasses off and check this. If at 20 inches > the reading is blurry, then you will need some "plus" to read. Dear Rich,
Please disregard Otis's postings. He is not in the medical profession and not in any position to give medical advice like above.
Thank you!
Allen
|
| otisbrown@pa.net | 26 Jun 2006 01:00 |
Dear Rich,
I will make this statement as an Engineer.
I do not know how old you are, but your refractive state is +0.5 diopters as you state. The "range" of accommodation (stop-to-stop) reduces as we get older. If you "range is 2.5 diopters (let us say), then you can see clearly through a +0.5 diopter lens, down to about a distance of about -2 diopters. ( -2.0 diopters is a distance of about 20 inches -- or normal reading distance.)
You might take you glasses off and check this. If at 20 inches the reading is blurry, then you will need some "plus" to read.
You can obtain a "simple" plus in the drug store off-the-shelf.
You might try a +1.25 diopter lens, and see if that meets your "near" requirements.
And further, you might check your distance vision on my site:
www.myopiafree.com
on Eye-Chart #2 and determine your visual acuity with no plus.
These are easy checks, and do not require OD involvement.
Just "fun" things to do.
To further respond:
> Thank you for the reply. If I were to get bi-focal glasses for computer > use, the prescription would be something like OD, OS 1.5, add 1.00 & > that would yield a 2.5 diopter lower lens to read with? Otis> If you Snellen is good, then you need to obtain a "weak" plus, so that reading or the "computer" are comfortable for you.
Otis> Only YOU can check this -- if you wish.
Best,
Otis
> Thanks, > > Rich |
| Rich | 25 Jun 2006 21:08 |
>> Greetings, > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >> Rich Thank you for the reply. If I were to get bi-focal glasses for computer use, the prescription would be something like OD, OS 1.5, add 1.00 & that would yield a 2.5 diopter lower lens to read with?
Thanks,
Rich
|
| otisbrown@pa.net | 25 Jun 2006 20:53 |
> Greetings, Is it 0.5 + 2.00=2.5 diopters
Otis> That is correct.
(I am not an OD -- but I think they will agree.)
> Rich |
| Rich | 25 Jun 2006 20:11 |
Greetings,
I am primarily Presbyopic & my prescription I OD & OS +0.5; add 2.00. I have progressive lenses & my question is about the reading strength of the lenses. Is it 0.5 + 2.00=2.5 diopters or just 2.00 diopters at the bottom of the lens. Thanks.
Rich
|
Quick links:
|
|
|