Getting Stronger: Discussion Forum

Discussion Topics => Rehabilitation => Topic started by: OtisBrown on October 06, 2014, 04:40:24 AM

Title: Potential Dangers of Bates (and plus-prevention).
Post by: OtisBrown on October 06, 2014, 04:40:24 AM
Subject:  I always want to be safe, so this topic is very important.

This is a good point to evaluate what you want to do, and the risks of doing it.

I know that many people fear to use the plus (or Bates).  Personally, I fear the minus lens, and this must be explained to me, while I can still read the 20/40 to 20/60 line.

The OD in his office, who had no interest in prevention of any kind, will insist that if you take any action, it is risky.  So you  must evaluate these issues by yourself.

I certainly understand the people who do not want to do exercise or wear the plus.  But equally, difficult problems are not solved by timid people

No OD will ever "prescribe" either Bates or the plus (at 20/40) because he knows that

1) You will not do it, to any effect, but much more serious, he knows this will occur.

2) If ANYTHING happens to your vision (while you are wearing the plus for near), he will be sued by you.  Further, he knows that

3) Because the plus is not "standard practice", you will be successful when you sue him for malpractice.  You will get a lot of money, and he will be in prison.

This is why no OD will "volunteer" any information on prevention with a plus.  You probably heard of this OD, "myopic silence", and that is indeed the reason for it.

This is why I check my own refraction, Visual Acuity, and am wearing a plus lens while I type this.
Title: Re: Potential Dangers of Bates (and plus-prevention).
Post by: OtisBrown on October 06, 2014, 10:25:57 AM
The reasons why you can sue an OD if he attempts to get you to wear a plus - for your long-term visual welfare.

1.  Monocular Double Vision
2.  Astigmatism
3.  Diplopia
4.  Floaters
5.  Cataract
6.  Any other complains you might feel develop because you are wearing a plus for near.

Obviously, you will be successful with your complaints.  This is why no OD will be involved in any serious, consistent prevention (with recovery) effort. 

You know what.  I do no blame them.  They spent $250,000, to get to the point where they can hold up a minus and help you go from 20/50 to 20/20 (because the minus works).

Why should an OD attempt to help you - given your ability to destroy them in a legal sense?  I would not attempt to help you under that circumstance (of your misconceptions).  Would you put yourself up to that type of threat and risk?

This is why any prevention work, can never be prescribed.  I am certain you will have your own ideas on this subject.

Obviously, the few people who are successful with the plus, like Todd, faced these issues, spelled them out, and kept on working with the plus until he got his distant vision back.

I think all of you could achieve that goal - if you can stick to it.

I am not your critic, I am trying to help you in your thinking about these issues.