Comments for Tod.FM http://tod.fm Passion Mon, 06 Feb 2012 02:30:10 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 Comment on Rejecting Medical Reality by Edwin http://tod.fm/rejecting-medical-reality/#comment-4823 Edwin Mon, 06 Feb 2012 02:30:10 +0000 http://tod.fm/?p=1560#comment-4823 Hi, we see the advantage of plus glasses which is the elimination of accommodation at close work, which is the root cause of myopia. However it brings the side effect of dizziness as it upset the strong relationship between accommodation and converging of eye balls on close object. When we look nearer, accommodation increases, convergent also increases. We can't increase convergent without increase accommodation. Plus glass simply remove accommodation while the two eye balls still converge on the same near object. Children have no idea of the concept and never have the will to overcome the discomfort. As parent, we need to help them. I am now looking at a device called Myopter that will "fool" the eyes and remove the discomfort by duplicating the close image into 2 images and place 1 on the left, the other on the right so that the convergent is removed too. I am going to place order for 1 set soon. US$260. Hi, we see the advantage of plus glasses which is the elimination of accommodation at close work, which is the root cause of myopia. However it brings the side effect of dizziness as it upset the strong relationship between accommodation and converging of eye balls on close object. When we look nearer, accommodation increases, convergent also increases. We can’t increase convergent without increase accommodation. Plus glass simply remove accommodation while the two eye balls still converge on the same near object. Children have no idea of the concept and never have the will to overcome the discomfort. As parent, we need to help them. I am now looking at a device called Myopter that will “fool” the eyes and remove the discomfort by duplicating the close image into 2 images and place 1 on the left, the other on the right so that the convergent is removed too. I am going to place order for 1 set soon. US$260.

]]> Comment on Rejecting Medical Reality by Otis http://tod.fm/rejecting-medical-reality/#comment-4821 Otis Sun, 05 Feb 2012 20:10:08 +0000 http://tod.fm/?p=1560#comment-4821 Otis> So there are no illusions about plus-prevention, I will post remarks by a Dr. Prentice. He showed that, if a person would start the wearing a plus (with a prescription of -1 diopter, or about 20/50), he could slowly get out of it. So what is the problem? It is that most people can not make the commitment to wearing the plus for all close work (books and computer). At 20/40, you can avoid the minus. But the long-term resolve is very difficult for most people. It truly takes long-term motivation to do this. Prentice 1> Medical people -- who have truly recognized the natural eye's behavior, and that, at least at the threshold -- IT IS PREVENTABLE. Here is the commentary by a profoundly insightful ophthalmologist. But, as Dr. Prentice states, plus prevention (at -1 diopter is tedious). But to say that "prevention will never happen" is a tragic statement -- because it prevents a preventive scientific study our effort -- that could be effective Prentice 2> Age forty-three; myopia; had been wearing over the right eye -1.25 D, left eye -1 D, with little or no change for the space of two years; eyes in use more or less at the near point. I recommended the removal of the concave glasses for distant vision and prescribed +3.50 D for reading, writing and other office work. (-1.25 D is about 20/50 to 20/60 on a Snellen) Prentice 3 > After reading in these glasses for several days, the patient was able to read print twelve inches from the eyes. In six months I changed the glasses for reading and writing to a +4 D without seeing the patient. After using the +4 D glasses for several months he again came under my care for an examination, when the left eye gave twenty-twentieths vision Prentice 4 > Similar results have been attained in 34 like cases ...but the process is very tedious for the patients, and unless their understanding is clear on the subject, it is almost impossible to induce them to undergo the trial. [ Otis> This is truly the issue. It MUST be the person's wisdom, to accept the "tedious" use of a plus, and to do it with no let up, that would make prevention (at 20/50, -3/4 diopter) possible. THAT is the real and only issue. I think we should be informed of this issue when reasonable success is possible. I hate to "find out" about successful prevention, after my vision has been un-necessarly destroyed by that minus lens. It the future, we might be able to teach our children of this issue, before that first destructive minus lens -- in my opinion. Otis> So there are no illusions about plus-prevention, I will post remarks by a Dr. Prentice. He showed that, if a person would start the wearing a plus (with a prescription of -1 diopter, or about 20/50), he could slowly get out of it. So what is the problem? It is that most people can not make the commitment to wearing the plus for all close work (books and computer). At 20/40, you can avoid the minus. But the long-term resolve is very difficult for most people. It truly takes long-term motivation to do this.

Prentice 1> Medical people — who have truly recognized the natural eye’s behavior, and that, at least at the threshold — IT IS PREVENTABLE. Here is the commentary by a profoundly insightful ophthalmologist. But, as Dr. Prentice states, plus prevention (at -1 diopter is tedious). But to say that “prevention will never happen” is a tragic statement — because it prevents a preventive scientific study our effort — that could be effective

Prentice 2> Age forty-three; myopia; had been wearing over the right eye -1.25 D, left eye -1 D, with little or no change for the space of two years; eyes in use more or less at the near point. I recommended the removal of the concave glasses for distant vision and prescribed +3.50 D for reading, writing and other office work. (-1.25 D is about 20/50 to 20/60 on a Snellen)

Prentice 3 > After reading in these glasses for several days, the patient was able to read print twelve inches from the eyes. In six months I changed the glasses for reading and writing to a +4 D without seeing the patient. After using the +4 D glasses for several months he again came under my care for an examination, when the left eye gave twenty-twentieths vision

Prentice 4 > Similar results have been attained in 34 like cases …but the process is very tedious for the patients, and unless their understanding is clear on the subject, it is almost impossible to induce them to undergo the trial. [ Otis> This is truly the issue. It MUST be the person’s wisdom, to accept the “tedious” use of a plus, and to do it with no let up, that would make prevention (at 20/50, -3/4 diopter) possible. THAT is the real and only issue.

I think we should be informed of this issue when reasonable success is possible. I hate to “find out” about successful prevention, after my vision has been un-necessarly destroyed by that minus lens. It the future, we might be able to teach our children of this issue, before that first destructive minus lens — in my opinion.

]]> Comment on Myopia is on the Rise – Can I Reverse Mine? by Otis http://tod.fm/unglassed-day-4/#comment-4818 Otis Sun, 05 Feb 2012 13:56:05 +0000 http://Blog.ByTod.com/?p=355#comment-4818 There is no "perfect" way to say this, but as soon as we started reading, our eyes started to change their status, from plus to minus. The Eskimo data (study) shows this conclusively. The grandparents (Barrow, Alaska), had no school, and positive refractive status (excellent distant vision), and their kids, with 12 years in school with intensive, long-term close work, became 88 percent negative (or myopic). When a plus is used (difficult with children), the eye stops going down. Here is the graph of this effort. http://myopiafree.i-see.org/bifig1.gif What this graph shows, is that our (un-protected) eyes go down at -1/2 diopter per year, from age 7 to 17. When a plus is worn (in a bifocal) the eye does not go down. This is why it would be wise to start with the plus before your Snellen goes below 20/40 to 20/70 -- in my opinion. An OD simply will not tell you these facts, because they believe that even prevention is impossible. There is no “perfect” way to say this, but as soon as we started reading, our eyes started to change their status, from plus to minus. The Eskimo data (study) shows this conclusively. The grandparents (Barrow, Alaska), had no school, and positive refractive status (excellent distant vision), and their kids, with 12 years in school with intensive, long-term close work, became 88 percent negative (or myopic). When a plus is used (difficult with children), the eye stops going down. Here is the graph of this effort.
http://myopiafree.i-see.org/bifig1.gif
What this graph shows, is that our (un-protected) eyes go down at -1/2 diopter per year, from age 7 to 17. When a plus is worn (in a bifocal) the eye does not go down. This is why it would be wise to start with the plus before your Snellen goes below 20/40 to 20/70 — in my opinion. An OD simply will not tell you these facts, because they believe that even prevention is impossible.

]]> Comment on Rejecting Medical Reality by Otis http://tod.fm/rejecting-medical-reality/#comment-4812 Otis Sat, 04 Feb 2012 17:04:37 +0000 http://tod.fm/?p=1560#comment-4812 Hi Tod, What is medical reality? I my judgment, it is "satifying" us the general public with a strong minus lens. In ignorance we "buy" into the minus, and would reject prevention (with plus or other methods) at that point. But even the ODs destroy their own children's eyes with a minus. Here is the rationale of one for your interest: ++++++ Otis> Judy, why don't ODs help their own children with Plus-prevention? Judy> I'm an optometrist, I work in a group with five other optometrists, in a city with several dozen optometrists,have a few dozen acquaintances who are optometrists and none of us have our children use plus at near unless those are hyperopic. (Hyperopic? The natural eye with a positive refractive state.) Otis> In this sense, the use of a strong minus (makes matter worse) is indeed not a scam, but not wise either. +++++++ The "medical reality" is that they lack the ability to tell us scientific truth (that the minus makes matters worse) when we are at 20/40. But what Judy's statement means in practice is that if you wish prevention, you will have to be wise and do it yourself. Hi Tod, What is medical reality? I my judgment, it is “satifying” us the general public with a strong minus lens. In ignorance we “buy” into the minus, and would reject prevention (with plus or other methods) at that point. But even the ODs destroy their own children’s eyes with a minus. Here is the rationale of one for your interest:
++++++
Otis> Judy, why don’t ODs help their own children with Plus-prevention?
Judy> I’m an optometrist, I work in a group with five other optometrists, in a city with several dozen optometrists,have a few dozen acquaintances who are optometrists and none of us have our children use plus at near unless those are hyperopic. (Hyperopic? The natural eye with a positive refractive state.)
Otis> In this sense, the use of a strong minus (makes matter worse) is indeed not a scam, but not wise either.
+++++++
The “medical reality” is that they lack the ability to tell us scientific truth (that the minus makes matters worse) when we are at 20/40. But what Judy’s statement means in practice is that if you wish prevention, you will have to be wise and do it yourself.

]]> Comment on Rejecting Medical Reality by Edwin http://tod.fm/rejecting-medical-reality/#comment-4811 Edwin Sat, 04 Feb 2012 15:01:01 +0000 http://tod.fm/?p=1560#comment-4811 Hi Tod, You are right! We need to take charge of our own health. I am now responsible for my daughter's vision. I stop her from wearing the S$300 prescript glass (-2.25). I request for her to sit in front in school with pinhole glass. I let her read story books on 42" TV. I give her +1 glass for doing homework, so that zero accommodation is required while doing close work. We really really need to educate ourselves in order to protect our family. Hi Tod,
You are right! We need to take charge of our own health. I am now responsible for my daughter’s vision. I stop her from wearing the S$300 prescript glass (-2.25). I request for her to sit in front in school with pinhole glass. I let her read story books on 42″ TV. I give her +1 glass for doing homework, so that zero accommodation is required while doing close work. We really really need to educate ourselves in order to protect our family.

]]> Comment on Reducing Myopia With Plus Lenses by Otis http://tod.fm/unglassed-day-22/#comment-4792 Otis Thu, 02 Feb 2012 01:31:09 +0000 http://Blog.ByTod.com/?p=402#comment-4792 Hi Tod and group, I think that the use of the plus is difficult, and must start early. This is for people posting a -1 diopter prescription, and don't want to wear it. Here is one man's experience. http://schwerdfeger.name/articles/pluslens.shtml This works in the early stage, but it does take intense insight and personal motivation. Hi Tod and group,
I think that the use of the plus is difficult, and must start early. This is for people posting a -1 diopter prescription, and don’t want to wear it. Here is one man’s experience.

http://schwerdfeger.name/articles/pluslens.shtml

This works in the early stage, but it does take intense insight and personal motivation.

]]> Comment on My Vision Improved to -2.50 by Tod http://tod.fm/my-vision-improved-to-2-50/#comment-4790 Tod Wed, 01 Feb 2012 19:13:33 +0000 http://tod.fm/?p=1221#comment-4790 That's a remarkable site. Everybody should check it out. That’s a remarkable site. Everybody should check it out.

]]> Comment on My Vision Improved to -2.50 by Otis http://tod.fm/my-vision-improved-to-2-50/#comment-4789 Otis Wed, 01 Feb 2012 17:35:03 +0000 http://tod.fm/?p=1221#comment-4789 What do other ODs think? What has been their success from -3 diopters. How long does it take (when you stop wearing the minus. Why don't I know about this? Here is an OD who managed to do it. http://myopiafree.wordpress.com/od-success/ The rate at which she got out of it, was +1/2 diopter per year. If she had only started when she was at -1/2 diopter!! What do other ODs think? What has been their success from -3 diopters. How long does it take (when you stop wearing the minus. Why don’t I know about this? Here is an OD who managed to do it.

http://myopiafree.wordpress.com/od-success/

The rate at which she got out of it, was +1/2 diopter per year. If she had only started when she was at -1/2 diopter!!

]]> Comment on Do Glasses Make Your Vision Worse? by Otis http://tod.fm/do-glasses-make-your-vision-worse/#comment-4784 Otis Wed, 01 Feb 2012 12:49:51 +0000 http://Blog.ByTod.com/?p=345#comment-4784 What do second-opinion medical people think about the need for the plus -- for prevention. There is profound hostility towards any effort at prevention. Most ODs and MDs think it is a joke, or impossible. A few have stated that the general attitude (against prevention) is totally destructive. Here is a ophthalmologist to spells this problem out. http://www.doyletics.com/arj/nomyopia.htm It is too bad that we never hear about this preventive method. What do second-opinion medical people think about the need for the plus — for prevention.
There is profound hostility towards any effort at prevention. Most ODs and MDs think it is a joke, or impossible. A few have stated that the general attitude (against prevention) is totally destructive. Here is a ophthalmologist to spells this problem out.

http://www.doyletics.com/arj/nomyopia.htm
It is too bad that we never hear about this preventive method.

]]> Comment on Day 72 Update on Natural Vision Improvement by Tod http://tod.fm/unglassed-day-72/#comment-4783 Tod Wed, 01 Feb 2012 12:32:43 +0000 http://tod.fm/?p=516#comment-4783 Thank you! The videos are great. How I wish I knew about plus lenses when I was 16. Thank you! The videos are great. How I wish I knew about plus lenses when I was 16.

]]>