FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups 
 ProfileProfile   PreferencesPreferences   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
Forum index » Medicine forums » vision
Otis is your friend he will help you prevent, reduce and improve myopia
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 2 [24 Posts] View previous topic :: View next topic
Goto page:  1, 2 Next
Author Message
CatmanX
medicine forum Guru


Joined: 17 May 2005
Posts: 367

PostPosted: Wed Jul 05, 2006 10:01 pm    Post subject: Re: Otis is your friend. Actually, he's a quack and a borderline personality. Reply with quote

Right on there Neil
Back to top
Neil Brooks
medicine forum Guru


Joined: 24 Mar 2005
Posts: 1148

PostPosted: Wed Jul 05, 2006 5:40 pm    Post subject: Re: Otis is your friend he will help you prevent, reduce and improve myopia Reply with quote

On 5 Jul 2006 10:22:59 -0700, "otisbrown@pa.net" <otisbrown@pa.net>
wrote:

Quote:
Dear AceMan,

Thanks for the complement.

Ace> Otis is your friend

Actually, he's a quack and a borderline personality.
Back to top
otisbrown@pa.net
medicine forum Guru


Joined: 24 Mar 2005
Posts: 1447

PostPosted: Wed Jul 05, 2006 5:22 pm    Post subject: Re: Otis is your friend he will help you prevent, reduce and improve myopia Reply with quote

Dear AceMan,

Thanks for the complement.

Ace> Otis is your friend he will help you prevent, reduce and improve
myopia

But I should clarify. I am a friend of the SECOND-OPINION optometrist,
and support a person who wishes prevention. I would therefore guide
you to a professional optometrist (when your Snellen is 20/50) to
provide you with advice and support to clear your vision from that
level. See:

www.chinamyopia.org

I can not say, "Improve myopia", since the true goal is to AVOID
entry into myopia in the first place.

It is my belief -- that is a -10 dioper parent will help his child
in wearing a +3 dioper lens -- the child's refractive state
will be maintained at zero or slightly positive, and will
always PASS all legal visual acuity statdards that
apply to her.

The support of a second-opinion optometrist (who has
his own children wearing the preventive plus) would be
of great value to the mother and child at that point.

At age 6, my ophthamologist told my parents that I
was going to be nearsighed. How did he know that???

Simple, any child with a refractive state of zero, is almost
certain to "move negaitve" in the confined visual environment
of school.

In retrospect, I would have PAID for professional advice
concerning plus-prevention at that point. The WORST that
might have happened -- is that I would have ignored
the warning and refused to wear the plus (preventive) lens.

And then, of course, the refractive state of my eyes would
have moved negative -- as a natural process. (Exactly
the same as the primate eyes -- under SCIENTIFIC TEST.

Best,

Otis

Quote:

1. The eye is dynamic.
2. Thats why the minus lens should be avoided!
3. Myopia is not a disease, correction is not medically neccessary
4. www.chinamyopia.org
5. Ill let Otis elaborate this
6. Ill let Otis elaborate this
7. Use prisms
8. I bet he is alot less myopic than those stair-case victims.
9. Otis isnt in it for the money
10. Otis already explained this
11. No one has to buy anything
12. Myopia starts out pseudo but the eyeball enlongates and stair-case
begins
13. Otis may know dozens of such optometrists
14. I bet he is alot less myopic than those stair-case victims.
15. She passes the DMV and is not required to wear glasses.
16. near work causes myopia.

Happy now? You got all the answers Smile
Back to top
Mike Tyner
medicine forum Guru


Joined: 24 Mar 2005
Posts: 1299

PostPosted: Sun Jul 02, 2006 5:42 am    Post subject: Re: Cletis is stupid and Nancy is even stupider Reply with quote

"Dick Adams" <bad.addr@nonexist.com> wrote

Quote:
Then you might think that optically placing a page image at
infinity, or at some increased distance, might be beneficial.

No I might not, and it might not. I agree that it SHOULD, logically. It just
doesn't work, unless they're keeping secrets in the halls of academe.

What we _do_ know is that myopia increases with time spent in near work of
any sort, and with closer working distances. The projector addresses this
more completely than lenses do.

As I've told you, accommodation isn't the mechanism. Lenses can trick
accommodation but it doesn't work.

Distances are real and this idea hasn't really been tested, AFAIK. An image
on the wall has the advantage of actually _being_ 4-5 feet away. It begs the
question: if they're worse than -1.00, do they wear glasses? Glasses
correcting just under? at? beyond focal distance?

Anyway, professors and PhDs and those who see countless myopes in academic
practice offer no recognized technique or principle that allows us to use
lenses to control myopia. Their techniques would quickly become
standard-of-care and everybody would know about it. Otis would tell us.

Meanwhile, those same authorities make their living warning us about the
risk of retinal detachment, the "duty to warn" regarding impact resistance,
the product liabilities and the practical difficulties of all sorts of
correction. But nowhere do they warn of the effects of lenses on myopia
progression. Because there ain't any, or because what's there is subtle and
doesn't behave as expected.

Otherwise, you can be sure it would be commercially exploited. The
SeeClearlyMethod would be getting awards, not investigations. Merrill Allen
was good; I heard him speak in 1985. But he basically sold his name to
charlatans, IMO.

I still find it hard to accept that undercorrection INCREASES myopia.

-MT
Back to top
Dick Adams
medicine forum Guru


Joined: 12 Oct 2005
Posts: 300

PostPosted: Sun Jul 02, 2006 4:38 am    Post subject: Re: Cletis is stupid and Nancy is even stupider Reply with quote

"Mike Tyner" <mtyner@mindspring.com> wrote in message news:R6-dnbQWZP_8uzrZnZ2dnUVZ_tSdnZ2d@giganews.com...

Quote:
I see good reason to think that the projector idea might work.

Then you might think that optically placing a page image at
infinity, or at some increased distance, might be beneficial.

Quote:
And it's a lot more practical and socially acceptable than
making a kid wear that myopter thingy.

The myopter definitely seems clutzy.

Mike Tyner" <mtyner@mindspring.com> wrote in message news:3aWdne29zfENmDnZnZ2dnUVZ_sWdnZ2d@giganews.com...
Quote:

"Dick Adams" <bad.addr@nonexist.com> wrote

Unfortunately you will probably not be able to find an Eyecare
Professional who will help you with this. It's been tried, and found
not to work, they will say. ... Nobody will touch it.

I'm sure there are doctors who will prescribe appropriate lenses in order to
relieve you of $200-$400.

Oh, I see. You mean charlatans! Well, you see, I have, over the years,

had some experience for this, case of myself and of one of my children.
The Professional response characteristically was that it was not a usual
thing to do. But there also seemed some trepidation in the face of
calculating the amount of prism to relieve vergence consistent with the
amount of accommodation relief sought. It is a trigonometric thing. You'd
think that somewhere in the Professional tool kit there would be a formula or
simple nomogram to relate needed prism power to "add" value as a function
of interpupillary distance. To solve the problem from scratch, one needs
the definition of prism diopter, but you would be surprised at how many
people do not know how a prism diopter is defined.

Vergence-correct reading glasses would not, as the myopter claims to,
flatten vision, in the sense of rendering non-stereoscopic. But I don't
think that is consequential, except that the glasses might not be so
mass-producable as the myopter thingy.

--
Dicky
Back to top
Mike Tyner
medicine forum Guru


Joined: 24 Mar 2005
Posts: 1299

PostPosted: Sun Jul 02, 2006 1:52 am    Post subject: Re: Cletis is stupid and Nancy is even stupider Reply with quote

"Rev Jessie James" <Jessie@yahoo.com> wrote

Quote:
The reference in my previous post were identical twins. I assume that
your
kids are fraternal twins.

Thanks. We had to assume you meant identical.

Most of the identical-twin studies go the other way, showing similar myopia
despite environment.

Only a few authorities will argue that myopia is purely genetic, because the
influence of environment has been repeatedly measured. What's controversial
is the unsupported belief that the environmental influence can be
manipulated with lenses.

I see good reason to think that the projector idea might work. And it's a
lot more practical and socially acceptable than making a kid wear that
myopter thingy.

-MT
Back to top
Neil Brooks
medicine forum Guru


Joined: 24 Mar 2005
Posts: 1148

PostPosted: Sat Jul 01, 2006 8:39 pm    Post subject: Re: Otis is your friend he will help you prevent, reduce and improve myopia Reply with quote

On 1 Jul 2006 07:08:54 -0700, "otisbrown@pa.net" <otisbrown@pa.net>
wrote:

Quote:

Dear AceMan,

Subject: Thanks for the vote-of-confidence -- for the SECOND-OPINION
OPTOMETRIST

Not many grown people would take much pride in a cheering section
comprising Ace and Doogle and nobody else.

Quote:
It is very clear, from the study of the dynamic primate eye, that we
INDUCE
a negative refractive STATE, because we have moved our visual "world"
close to our eyes.

But you CAN'T answer these simple questions???

1. There seems to be a great deal of evidence that primates have
widely differing visual systems. How is it that you feel so secure in
saying that "all primate eyes" behave similarly in ANY regard?

2. In these monkey studies that you reference, isn't it true that
the SAME STUDIES showed that, with even BRIEF periods away from the
minus lens, the myopia was prevented?

3. If there was no medical indication that these monkeys needed
corrective lenses at all, can you be sure that appropriate CORRECTION
of somebody's REFRACTIVE ERROR will have similar results? If so, how?

Quote:
Our eyes should be recognized to be dyanmic SYSTEMS, and have a
WARNING stenciled on them -- excellent visual system, but this
sytem controls its refractive STATE to its average visual environment
(defined
in DIOPTERS.)

Actually, you should s**t-can the theory and pay attention to the
evidence. It's much more compelling.
Back to top
Rev Jessie James
medicine forum beginner


Joined: 18 Apr 2006
Posts: 25

PostPosted: Sat Jul 01, 2006 8:09 pm    Post subject: Re: Cletis is stupid and Nancy is even stupider Reply with quote

There is a fairly strong correlation that identical twins, growing up in the
same environment will have almost identical physical characteristics (
including myopia progression). Although sometimes, factors during the
pregnancy, especially twin to twin transfusion syndrome, can lead to
identical twins that have very different birth weights and are mistakenly
thought to be fraternal. And sometimes, fraternal twins can look enough
alike to be confused with identical twins.
The reference in my previous post were identical twins. I assume that your
kids are fraternal twins.


"Quick" <quick7135-news@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:6wzpg.76239$4L1.72468@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
Rev Jessie James wrote:


Really? I have twin boys. How come they don't look anything
alike? Also, one is small for his age, wirey, and extroverted
while the other is very large for his age, obese and introverted.
I guess there is a pretty strong correlation with a sample size
of one.

-Quick
Back to top
Quick
medicine forum Guru


Joined: 19 Jun 2005
Posts: 343

PostPosted: Sat Jul 01, 2006 6:52 pm    Post subject: Re: Cletis is stupid and Nancy is even stupider Reply with quote

Rev Jessie James wrote:
Quote:

I totally agree with this statement. In almost every
aspect of human development there is a genetic and
environmental influence. Look at the cases of the Medina
twins, 2 boys who were separated at birth. One grew up
in an enviroment where reading and academics were
stressed (joe) the other on a farm where lots of outside
physical labor was the norm (jim). 20 years later, Joe
is an overweight collage student who wears -6 lenses,
whereas Jim is a mechanic and has uncorrected vision of
20/40.

From this I could claim that they both had the genetic
substrate to be both overwieght and myopic, and the
difference in environment had shaped the extent these
traits were to develop.

Really? I have twin boys. How come they don't look anything
alike? Also, one is small for his age, wirey, and extroverted
while the other is very large for his age, obese and introverted.
I guess there is a pretty strong correlation with a sample size
of one.

-Quick
Back to top
Quick
medicine forum Guru


Joined: 19 Jun 2005
Posts: 343

PostPosted: Sat Jul 01, 2006 6:52 pm    Post subject: Re: Otis is your friend he will help you prevent, reduce and improve myopia Reply with quote

I've been puzzled about that too. When I did my first
go round with soft multifocals about the best we could
do for distance was 20/40 at one point. I was stunned.
I felt barely functional. I did try driving (during the day)
but felt *very* uncomfortable doing so. I went a couple
of blocks, parked and took them out (presbyopia is what
I need corrected - my distance script is around +1 or less).
That vision was unacceptable to me. I can understand if
one is only *correctable* to 20/40 then you could *legally*
drive if necessary. But to have a goal of 20/40 not corrected
so you can drive without correction seems pointless.
In fact, I think if you do so you're self centered and
irresponsible. If 20/40 has been determined to be the
minimum safe limit I think it should only apply as
best corrected attested by a doctor. Allowable uncorrected
should be much more stringent. So I agree with you 100%.

-Quick


Charles wrote:
Quote:
Why this obsession with "pass the DMV"? Most people
don't want to see 20/40, despite what you repeatedly keep
saying. Please understand and absorb the fact that most
people don't want to walk around seeing 20/40, or blowing
off a -1.5 diopter prescription (sph or cyl) if they can
wear glasses and see clearly. When corrected, I see
20/15 or slightly better, and I can tell when I'm not
there. Doctors on this forum have indicated that this is
not unusual (being picky). Please assimilate this
information and stop acting like everyone is as
un-demanding about their vision as you claim to be.

Even if you guys had a way of getting nearsighted people
to 20/40, it doesn't do all that much except keep some
people from having to find their glasses to go to the
bathroom at night.

acemanvx@yahoo.com wrote:

By realizing the fundamental eye is dynamic and
understanding the impact a wretched, evil minus lens has
on stair-case myopia, one can strive thru effort to
exercise an ounce of prevention is worth a ton of cure.
Think about your poor eyes and take the effort at the
treshold to always pass the 20/40 DMV. Because Otis and
I are NOT doctors, we both have suggested you seek a
second opinion optometrist who can pescribe a plus
lens(with prisms if neccessary) and he can also teach
you about the dynamic eye and how to keep it a positive
refractive state. Otis realizes the importance of
preventing myopia at the threshold and keeping your
distance vision clear and always passing DMV. He has
saved dozens of children from stair-case myopia
including his own nephew and neice(she DOES pass the
DMV, at least in the better eye) He is to be praised for
his way of thinking and as an engineer for understanding
that the eye is dynamic and not passive. A -2 or -3
diopter minus lens will cause stair-case myopia in
chickens and monkies and any other animals. Lots of near
work starts the first signs of myopia and something
needs to be done at the treshold or if you dont and use
the wretched minus lens, your eyes will get worse year
after year.
Back to top
Mike Tyner
medicine forum Guru


Joined: 24 Mar 2005
Posts: 1299

PostPosted: Sat Jul 01, 2006 6:50 pm    Post subject: Re: Otis is your friend he will help you prevent, reduce and improve myopia Reply with quote

<otisbrown@pa.net> wrote

Quote:
Why "object". The reason is the induction of stair-case myopia for
a young child.

IF it happens. You haven't told us how you know it does. We can't find that
wearing glasses makes any difference. How many have you studied?

Quote:
Granted the child INDUCED a slight negative
refractive STATE in the first place -- which makes HIM RESPONSIBLE --

And your brain is smaller than average. That makes YOU responsible.

-MT
Back to top
Rev Jessie James
medicine forum beginner


Joined: 18 Apr 2006
Posts: 25

PostPosted: Sat Jul 01, 2006 6:14 pm    Post subject: Re: Cletis is stupid and Nancy is even stupider Reply with quote

Quote:
Myopia starts out as the person is genetically going to get it.
Environment acts upon the genetic substrate.

I totally agree with this statement. In almost every aspect of human
development there is a genetic and environmental influence. Look at the
cases of the Medina twins, 2 boys who were separated at birth. One grew up
in an enviroment where reading and academics were stressed (joe) the other
on a farm where lots of outside physical labor was the norm (jim). 20 years
later, Joe is an overweight collage student who wears -6 lenses, whereas
Jim is a mechanic and has uncorrected vision of 20/40.

From this I could claim that they both had the genetic substrate to be both
overwieght and myopic, and the difference in environment had shaped the
extent these traits were to develop.

One of the "problems" I have seen is with how vision screening program are
implemented is some schools. The parents of a 7 yr old with 20/40 are told
to take their child are told their child has vision problems, so they take
him to the recommened eye doc. The doc gives them -1.5 lenses and tells the
parents "make sure he wears them at all times". Two years later the child
is in -3 lenses. Its amazing to see the number of kids wearing glasses in
a school that promotes vision screening, vs the schools that don't. From
what I seen from schools without vision screening is, only the children
who "really need" glasses tend to get them.

I'm not against vision screening, but the threshold for declaring a child
has a problem should clearly be raised. A child with 20/40 should be moved
to the front of the class, not forced to wear glasses. From what I have
seen, many kids that take this route are still at 20/40, two years later.
Back to top
Dr Judy
medicine forum Guru


Joined: 07 May 2005
Posts: 304

PostPosted: Sat Jul 01, 2006 5:53 pm    Post subject: Re: Otis is your friend he will help you prevent, reduce and improve myopia Reply with quote

otisbrown@pa.net wrote:
Quote:

It is very clear, from the study of the dynamic primate eye, that we
INDUCE
a negative refractive STATE, because we have moved our visual "world"
close to our eyes.

No, that conclusion is not supported by the primate studies.

If human eyes behaved like primate eyes, there would be no myopes, as
the system would self correct and myopia would not develop.


Further, in the primate studies, as little as two hours a day of non
near work prevented myopia induced by constant near work. If human
eyes behave like primate eyes, the to induce myopia, a child would need
to spend more than 22 hours/day doing near point work without ever
looking up.


Dr Judy
Back to top
otisbrown@pa.net
medicine forum Guru


Joined: 24 Mar 2005
Posts: 1447

PostPosted: Sat Jul 01, 2006 2:55 pm    Post subject: Re: Otis is your friend he will help you prevent, reduce and improve myopia Reply with quote

Dear AceMan,

Subject: The public LOVES very, very sharp vision -- INSTANTLY.

When you have children -- you are going to face this issue. It
is VERY EASY to sit a person in a chair in a darkened room,
place a strong minus in front of their eyes, and create 20/15 vision
(or
what ever their retina is capable of.

Why "object". The reason is the induction of stair-case myopia for
a young child. Granted the child INDUCED a slight negative
refractive STATE in the first place -- which makes HIM RESPONSIBLE --
but
the compounding effect of a "minus" on the refractive STATE of
the natural eye IS VERY CLEAR.

I am NEVER going to "fight" with a parent who loves having
his child in a strong minus (when his Snellen is 20/40) -- but
the parent should be well-aware of the consequence of that
FIRST -2 diotper minus (when the kid actually PASSES the
DMV level test.)

It is not MY intention that the child STAY at 20/50 (let us say),
but that he WORK with a +2 diopter, and (by montoring his
OWN SNELLEN, SLOWLY clear his naked eye to 20/30,
20/25, and perhaps 20/20. 20/20 is very, very shap vision
indeed.

With this concept in mind -- here are some remark
about the value of clearing your vision to 20/50 -- to
pass the 20/40 line FIRST, and then continue with
the work to CLEAR more of the Snellen -- if you
have both the interest and motivation to do so.

++++++++++


Charles> Why this obsession with "pass the DMV"? Most people don't
want to see
20/40, despite what you repeatedly keep saying.

Otis> If you love your childern to have 20/15 -- fine. But the
kid may not love stair-case myopia. But that becomes
a CHOICE of the parent.


Charles> Please understand and
absorb the fact that most people don't want to walk around seeing
20/40, or blowing off a -1.5 diopter prescription (sph or cyl) if they
can wear glasses and see clearly.

Otis> Fine. This is going to be a CHOICE that AceMan will
have to make for HIS children. If he wants his kids wearing
an over-prescribed minus -- then he can not complain
about the consequences, now can he?


When corrected, I see 20/15 or
slightly better, and I can tell when I'm not there. Doctors on this
forum have indicated that this is not unusual (being picky). Please
assimilate this information and stop acting like everyone is as
un-demanding about their vision as you claim to be.

Otis> It depends on how much you VALUE naked eye vision.
If you love an EASY -1.5, then no one is going to argue with
you about it.

Charles> Even if you guys had a way of getting nearsighted people to
20/40, it
doesn't do all that much except keep some people from having to find
their glasses to go to the bathroom at night.

Otis> The issue is that the NATURAL eye will move from a postive
refractive STATE to a negative refractive STATE -- if placed in
a strong "near" environment -- as a matter of "pure" scientific
test.

Otis> Further, if you are PASSING the DMV with 20/40, you
have a choice. And the choice is to take the proven behavior
of the fundamental eye SERIOUSLY, and work to clear
the 20/40 line -- to much clearer NAKED EYE VISION.

Otis> I know that (as you say) you have absolulty NO INTEREST
IN CLEAR DISTANT VISION FOR LIFE -- but do not
exclude the possibility that SOME PARENTS who
are a -8 diopters -- MIGHT WISH HELP TO AVOID
ENTRY INTO A NAEGATIVE REFRACTIVE STATE,
and avoid stair-case negative change in their
kids NATURAL EYES.

But that is their choice.

Best,

Otis
Back to top
retinula@hotmail.com
medicine forum beginner


Joined: 14 Nov 2005
Posts: 44

PostPosted: Sat Jul 01, 2006 2:25 pm    Post subject: Re: Otis is your friend he will help you prevent, reduce and improve myopia Reply with quote

very funny ace-troll.

trying to stir up some crap on this forum for your personal pleasure
huh? why don't you just go down in your bedroom and eat some
mushrooms.

your Daddy would be upset if he knew you were causing trouble again.

=========
acemanvx@yahoo.com wrote:
Quote:
By realizing the fundamental eye is dynamic and understanding the
impact a wretched, evil minus lens has on stair-case myopia, one can
strive thru effort to exercise an ounce of prevention is worth a ton of
cure. Think about your poor eyes and take the effort at the treshold to
always pass the 20/40 DMV. Because Otis and I are NOT doctors, we both
have suggested you seek a second opinion optometrist who can pescribe a
plus lens(with prisms if neccessary) and he can also teach you about
the dynamic eye and how to keep it a positive refractive state. Otis
realizes the importance of preventing myopia at the threshold and
keeping your distance vision clear and always passing DMV. He has saved
dozens of children from stair-case myopia including his own nephew and
neice(she DOES pass the DMV, at least in the better eye) He is to be
praised for his way of thinking and as an engineer for understanding
that the eye is dynamic and not passive. A -2 or -3 diopter minus lens
will cause stair-case myopia in chickens and monkies and any other
animals. Lots of near work starts the first signs of myopia and
something needs to be done at the treshold or if you dont and use the
wretched minus lens, your eyes will get worse year after year.
Back to top
Google

Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 2 [24 Posts] Goto page:  1, 2 Next
View previous topic :: View next topic
The time now is Tue Dec 11, 2018 7:25 pm | All times are GMT
Forum index » Medicine forums » vision
Jump to:  

Similar Topics
Topic Author Forum Replies Last Post
No new posts My god! Corrective Corneal Contouring orthokeratology cor... acemanvx@yahoo.com vision 10 Wed Jul 19, 2006 8:23 am
No new posts Can a myope improve unaided sight - YES or NO ummwellduh vision 25 Tue Jul 18, 2006 9:04 pm
No new posts I did not know even sunglasses and binoculars cause myopi... acemanvx@yahoo.com vision 7 Tue Jul 18, 2006 7:32 am
No new posts Near work causes myopia! *genes play a factor too* acemanvx@yahoo.com vision 13 Wed Jul 12, 2006 4:44 am
No new posts Plus lenses for myopia buywheels@hotmail.com vision 10 Mon Jul 10, 2006 2:27 pm

Copyright © 2004-2005 DeniX Solutions SRL
Other DeniX Solutions sites: email marketing campaigns , electronics forum, Science forum, Unix/Linux blog, Unix/Linux documentation, Unix/Linux forums


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
[ Time: 0.0231s ][ Queries: 16 (0.0024s) ][ GZIP on - Debug on ]