When I have free time between developing apps, I sometimes respond via email.

Subject: Fair play — equal time for the majority-opinion OD.

BlueOD> …kind of depends on his age doesn’t it Otis? Or maybe you don’t
understand.
and why does his eye have to be “negative”. I know you have
difficulty following this, but not everyone is a myope. There are
emmetropes, amblyopes, anisometropes, hyperopes, astigmates, and
patients with mixed prescriptions. You are only capable of thinking
about things through the narrow slit of your own personal experiences
and that’s what makes you so unable to understand the overwhelming
facts that some trained and experienced professionals have taken the
time to present to you here over the years. Yet instead you just
default to your standard “dullard denial” stance.
Why don’t you go off somewhere else (there’s probably a “dementia”
forum out there somewhere) and give someone engineering advise on
building airplane engines, bridges, or something. Perhaps you have
something of value to say to someone on those topics. But here you
just keep shoving your foot farther and farther into your mouth every
time you open it. You’re kind of pathetic. You are doing a
disservice to the old spectacle-peddlers whose outdated theories that
you still adhere to. Ever notice how there seems to be fewer and
fewer of your like-minded buddies around. Science moves on. Old
notions get displaced by medical facts.
I know what Raphaelson and Merrill Allen have done! Fade away. Go
the way of the buggy-whip. There’s a new sheriff in town, and it’s
called medical science.
Indeed there is a lot of ongoing modern research on the topic of
myopia development all over the world. Why aren’t you all over that?
Why do you keep clinging onto a few old studies that have since been
proven wrong, and instead try to use some convoluted logic to proclaim
that all primate eyes are “fundamental eyes” blah blah blah. Get real
man. Or fade away.
Big Blue OS

++++++
I believe in “standing up” for your right if choice — for prevention. The personal attacks — don’t concern me.

Your long-term visual welfare is more important than my personal feelings.

This is the reason I get my own Snellen and trial-lens kit, and check myself.

The other people Big Blue OD attacks, are people who advocate that you be informed of EDUCATED CHOICE TO PREVENT. Obviously Blue must attack them also.

Otis

“Medical Reality” is to feed the “public” (you and I) distortions of scientific fact and truth. It is not about helping you to understand the need for prevention, before a minus lens is put on your face.

Here an OD giving assurance that a minus is perfectly safe, and you should expect your child to get stair case myopia — and you should not be concerned about it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c-hUPMni1jw&feature=related

Here is an OD that says that prevention would be wise and possible, from about 20/40, about -1 diopter — if the plus is used correctly.

http://myopiafree.i-see.org/soonicansee/index.html

I always prefer scientific truth, to being led down the “prim-rose path”, only to find that these ODs don’t have the courage to tell you that, 1) Long-term near creates negative status for the natural eye, and 2) An over-prescribed minus lens, creates stair-case myopia.

I personally think it is time for scientific truth, and enough of ODs telling us “office fibs”, because we can’t take scientific truth.

MYOPIA PREVENTION BY TEACHERS.
By W. H. BATES, M.D.,
New York

Myopia with elongation of the eyeball is incurable. It is usually acquired during school life. Acute myopia, spasm of the accommodation, or functional myopia is an early stage of incurable myopia.

Otis> Whether is “methods” would have worked — remain an “open question”. But it clear that ONLY THRESHOLD PREVENTION (BEFORE THAT FIRST MINUS) IS POSSIBLE.

Otis> There has been no follow-up, where prevention would be restricted to people at 20/40 to 20/50, who could get out of it using “exercise”, or a plus lens. In fact, people who can commit to wearing a plus lens (and confirming results on their own Snellen, confirm results — and avoid any use of a minus lens. Pilots do this, but they know for certain that no OD or MD will be of any help to them.

I had received glasses following my first major eye exam ever. Upon entering college I had slight difficulty reading some of the professors writing on the board, sitting about 15-20 feet from the board. Reading road signs was also becoming a problem, being blurry when too far away and causing me to be distracted trying to focus on them. I had a standard procedure, at least I believe so, and received a prescription of -0.50 diopters for each eye. The change the glasses made was immense, at least what me and my father who has also near-sighted vision agrees. My step-mother and her daughter disagree that the glasses are having any effect at all. I have noticed that after removing my glasses, there is a noticeable full sight blurriness that slowly goes away in my vision. Your articles on this have been MOST interesting! It really makes me question how ODs can potentially make people with near decent vision eyeglass dependent and virtually life-long customers. I want to give glasses a yearly chance, my next eye appointment, with this optometrist and another to see if there is indeed a decline in my vision. Hopefully I won’t damage my eyes too badly! I’ll have to try out similar techniques to exercise my eyes, because I definitely believe glasses are an odd obstacle to get used to. Thanks again Tod!