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

Re: Can difference in vision be explained?

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.



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: Can difference in vision be explained?

Nicolaas Hawkins30 Dec 2006 02:51
>>> In fact there are two DIFFERENT methods of judging
>>> a person's refractive STATE.
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> My wife was a chemist.  Her boss was also.  He wanted a formula to
> convert volume into weight.  She couldn't do that.

I bet she couldn't write him a formula to calculate the length of a piece
of string, either...

Signature

Regards,
Nicolaas.

... The real art of conversation is not only to say the right thing at the
right time, but also to leave unsaid the wrong thing at a tempting moment.


Dan Abel30 Dec 2006 02:36
> > In fact there are two DIFFERENT methods of judging
> > a person's refractive STATE.
>
> Yes but your two "methods" don't really address her question, do they?
>
> She is asking why you can't predict VA from refraction.

My wife was a chemist.  Her boss was also.  He wanted a formula to
convert volume into weight.  She couldn't do that.

Mike Tyner29 Dec 2006 19:02
> In fact there are two DIFFERENT methods of judging
> a person's refractive STATE.

Yes but your two "methods" don't really address her question, do they?

She is asking why you can't predict VA from refraction.

> then use stronger minus lenses until the 20/20
> line is cleared, with say a -3/4 diopter lens.)

> 2.  Measure with a retinoscope/cycloplegic (drops),
> and determine a person's refractive STATE.

Is a cycloplegic necessary to do retinoscopy? Can't I use lenses with
cycloplegic?

> These two methods often do not agree -- and
> can be profoundly different.

Perhaps because they don't measure the same thing.

> In fact it is possible to have 20/20 and a reafractive
> STATE (cycloplegic) of -3/4 diopters.

And it's possible you don't know what you're talking about.

> This my explain some of the difference between
> your refractive measurement and your current
> visual acuity.

Not a whit.

Pick either of your "methods," then find two people who measure the same.
Why does one see better than the other without glasses?

Hint: Answers include pupil size, higher-order aberrations, accommodative
spasm and erroneous refraction, plus neurology, and psychology, and there's
also the possibility that measured VA might NOT vary quite as much as she
thinks it does.

> Obviously, opinions vary concerning your
> distant visual acuity.

She wasn't asking for opinions. She was asking why subjective acuity varies
from one person to another your refractive STATE is the same.

-MT

>> Is there a scientific explanation for why two people with the same
>> prescription appear to have different levels of vision?  For example,
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>> Message posted via MedKB.com
>> http://www.medkb.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/vision/200612/1

otisbrown@pa.net29 Dec 2006 15:34
Dear Katy,

In fact there are two DIFFERENT methods of judging
a person's refractive STATE.

1.  Use a Snellen and a trial lens kit.  (The so-called
"subjective" measurement).  In this method you
have the person read the snellen at say 20/50.  You
then use stronger minus lenses until the 20/20
line is cleared, with say a -3/4 diopter lens.)

2.  Measure with a retinoscope/cycloplegic (drops),
and determine a person's refractive STATE.

These two methods often do not agree -- and
can be profoundly different.

In fact it is possible to have 20/20 and a reafractive
STATE (cycloplegic) of -3/4 diopters.

This my explain some of the difference between
your refractive measurement and your current
visual acuity.

It is also true as suggested by the ODs on
sci.med.vision, that as you get older your
refractive STATE will change in a positive
direction, and your Snellen will clear.

That might also explain why you can
get along with no minus lens.

Obviously, opinions vary concerning your
distant visual acuity.

Best,

Otis

> Is there a scientific explanation for why two people with the same
> prescription appear to have different levels of vision?  For example, I've
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> Message posted via MedKB.com
> http://www.medkb.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/vision/200612/1

katy29 Dec 2006 07:22
Is there a scientific explanation for why two people with the same
prescription appear to have different levels of vision?  For example, I've
read somewhere that two people who are -3 won't necessarily see the same
without glasses, one might see better/worse than the other.  What factors
influence this?

Quick links:

 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage




©2009 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.