Hi Jigsaw,
Two subjects
1) Has a preventive program been proposed -- that could succeed? See:
http://myopiafree.i-see.org/Embry.htmlI consider this to be science-based. The study proposal will NEVER be accepted or conducted by the National Eye Institute. I know why it will not be conducted. Do you know why medical people will object, and will not help (tragically) in any way?
All I do say is that, restricted to starting 20/50, and -1 diopter, it could succeed as science. But it would never succeed as medicine.
Why? Because it is difficult.
But never say (and medical people insist) that it will 'never work', so we will not "permit it" to be conducted. This "blocking" of a scientific study, because it is "not medicine", is the real reason there can be no progress at all.
2) Do medical people support prevention - for their own children.
Yes, in other countries, you will find that the concept of plus-prevention is more fully discussed. But the arguments are severe. Here are some remarks by Dr. Kaisu Viikari, who pioneered plus-prevention in Finland. She had complete success with her own son.
+++++
From Kaisu Viikair: (The Author is from Finland) 10/2014
Subject: Repetition Est Mater Studiorum (Clarification by Otis Brown)
I had given quite a few lectures in Stockholm, and as the Swedish Opticians wanted to see in
practice how the whole examination procedure takes place, they came to hold their meeting in my surgery in 1987.
And now a long time has elapsed, two generations since the publishing of my work Tetralogia in 1972.
As I just happened to hit upon empty promises and sentences of nice thoughts in the Journal Oftalmolog (Ophthalmology)
which provoked me to attack them rudely, I sincerely hope that the time also now is ripe for them to hear what the actual
point of the issue is.
In my first books I described in detail how my surgery was particularly advantageous for all my special arrangements
for visus examinations.
So, in the beginning, when the patients came in, I snatched their glasses and began testing with different distances
in order to get a rough estimation of their latent hyperopia.
+++++++
Addendum: an introduction to the essence of accommodation
At this point, I owe my readers an apology.
Even if I personally had this insight as early as in 1972, I know that this clarification is still necessary.
As I had exceptional possibilities of putting my insight into practice to the point of providing evidence and
I had enough energy to do everything that was required, I argue that the odds of ever finding
another person who could achieve all this are non-existent.
To develop an understanding of accommodation in the eye, you need to observe a very far-reaching event
clinically, gain the physiological knowledge explained on p. 41 of my book Panacea, and observe how
accommodation works in practice.
This process, using longer distances than what we are accustomed to and strong fogging, is the only way of forcing
the accommodation muscle, or musculus ciliaris, to relax voluntarily.
The reason for this is that the accommodation event is triggered automatically.
You can prevent it by imagining that you are walking along a deserted beach, without focusing, with no focal point for your eyes.
The patient is then given ”basic” fogging glasses, the strength of which is varied, and on top of those, so-called
Confirmation test glasses that can produce rapid changes in the dioptres (+/-1.0. +/-2.0, described in my work Learn to
Understand and Prevent Myopia, pp. 18-19.) The changes must be rapid to offer opportunities for observing the momentary
relaxation of the cramp!
This will produce a highly reliable basis for evaluating the patient’s hyperopia.
This is why the setting permitted by my apartment was irreplaceable and surely helps patients to understand
the ingenuity of the arrangements.
As accommodation, or an ability to focus at different distances, is built in our eyes and triggered automatically,
it has been impossible to prevent!
However, this very process can prevent accommodation as much as possible, allowing an estimation of the eye’s
hyperopic status, at least to an extent that is adequate for treatment purposes.
As digitalisation takes over the world, being familiar with accommodation is more important than ever before.
It thus is the key solution, which nearly got left out from this revision of the lesson! For a thorough
explanation of the accommodation event, see page 41 of my work Panacea, the section on Fogging. Its less well known form,
negative accommodation, is particularly important.
The apartment in which I had my surgery was conveniently located on the second floor, and I first brought the patients
to look out at the licence plates of cars parked in the courtyard.
+++++
Otis> This "licence plate" check was more accurate that more conventional visual acuity tests. Dr. Kailsu is indeed a "believer" in true prevention, and supports it a completely as possible.
Otis> I would compare her remarks with the optometrist Vik Kumar, to see the drastic and profound difference in opinion of these two fine people.
Otis> Rather than engage in verbal, "combat", I just respect them by calling plus prevention, the second-opinion, and seek to have you properly informed of how to do it - before you go very much below 20/40.
Otis> The science of plus prevention is very good. But few people take science seriously. Here is a study that shows that the plus, used intelligently, and correctly, can have the effect of prevention, and some recovery from 20/40 to 20/60.
http://myopiafree.wordpress.com/study/But of course, you can perhaps not understand it. Science is never easy.
Otis> Who decides what is science?
Hi Otis,
Good question. I'm guessing it's the United States, and particuarly, monied interests in the United States.
There were a couple of posts on Alex's board on how behavioral ophthamology was, and is, commonplace in the Soviet Union/former Soviet Union. With less money to go around -- among both the populace and the medical community -- folks made do with practicing good vision habits n preference to adopting the minus prescription habit. There had to be either science of folk wisdom behind this kind of practice. If it was science, I'd love to know where those studies went.
