Author Topic: What plus-prevention is ...  (Read 2984 times)

Offline OtisBrown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1766
What plus-prevention is ...
« on: June 17, 2015, 04:53:32 PM »
What it is: Plus-prevention was my effort to interview some very wise optometrists, who figured out how to help their own children avoid entry into nearsightedness for their totally natural eyes.  I believe that he was correct, and long-term, wise wearing of a plus is necessary to retain clear vision though the school years.

What it is NOT:  Plus prevention is not about medicine.  It is not about a cure.  It is about how to avoid entry, into "negative status" for the natural eye.  This is an approach that will never be authorized as a "medical procedure", and can never be a "cure" for anything.

With that introduction, I believe that a person could slowly change his refractive state, by about +1 diopters, or from -1.0 diopters to 0.0 diopters.  But this means that the person never takes "plus wear" as a cure.  It also means respecting objective scientific data, that shows that people with great determination, have been able to make a commitment to (almost) permanent wear of a plus, a personal success.

This is "my attitude" towards personal control of *my* distant vision - for life.

It is clear that too many people think that a "short burst" of wearing a plus, will create wonderful vision, where they never have to objectively read a Snellen - and accept any compromise.

Nothing could be further from the truth.  I do not deceive anyone on that point.  If you think about these issues - is up to you.   

I just wanted to clear up this issue - because I consider this type of prevention to be extremely difficult.
« Last Edit: June 18, 2015, 06:20:30 PM by OtisBrown »

Offline OtisBrown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1766
Re: What plus-prevention is ...
« Reply #1 on: June 18, 2015, 02:56:49 AM »
EndMyopia.

I am totally supportive of all prevention.  Here is a man who used, "plus over contacts", and got the following results.

http://endmyopia.org/will-from-5-25-to-3-50-in-one-month/

We must start SOME WHERE.

So - who is right?
« Last Edit: June 18, 2015, 08:56:30 AM by OtisBrown »

Offline OtisBrown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1766
Re: What plus-prevention is ...
« Reply #2 on: June 18, 2015, 06:32:18 PM »
The utter stupidity of "myopia studies".

I personally, and objectively pass the 20/40 line.  I am therefore, "undercorrected"  Would I EVER wear a minus, even after I verify
I can get the 20/20 line "clear" with a -1 diopter lens?

That would be the most stupid thing I could ever do.

http://www.journalofoptometry.org/en/under-correction-of-human-myopia-/articulo/90334414/

This is why, I ALWAYS confirm my visual acuity, before I *ever* go to an OD.  That FIRST over-prescribed minus lens
will kill my distant vision, permanently.

But let us not "beat around the bush", and quibble about this. I only deal with objective facts and science.

https://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~wildsoet/images/neg_lens_induce_myopia.swf

The "argument" that the minus lens is ever even safe - not reasonable.  But almost everyone loves
that extreme sharpness, and will refuse to hear about any adverse long-term effect it is certain to
have if you start wearing it all the time.

I have no "averse" attitude towards any "sitting" OD.  They can never do anything about it.

But let us stop the pretense that they can ever do anything about it.  Do not kid yourself about that issue.
« Last Edit: June 18, 2015, 08:24:18 PM by OtisBrown »

Offline OtisBrown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1766
Re: What plus-prevention is ...
« Reply #3 on: June 18, 2015, 08:40:57 PM »
Subject:  Why I objectively read both read my own Snellen, and measure my own refraction. There is no other way to do it.

If you are at 20/40 (and have passed the state DMV) what should you do?

Here is a discussion about wearing a "weak" minus - that I can support.  (But I would not do it - since it does inhibit recovery.)

http://endmyopia.org/christian-why-you-should-wear-glasses/

He talks about going to an OD can "getting a prescription".  That is the worst thing you could do.  It is very expensive, and
counter productive.  You almost never can "negotiate" a "correct minus".  This is where I simply use my own test lenses,
and do it all myself.

If in fact I was almost reading the 20/40 line, then I would not "cheat myself".  I would find the lens that gave me
"just 20/20", by my own objective measurement.  But I would not be wearing it 24/7.  I would not be wearing it in
school.  It this causes me "some problems", I would live with it - because that minus is addictive.  You put it on,
and YOU LEAVE IT ON.  That is the mistake.

Yes, it will take about nine months to a year, to get a self-measured change of about +3/4 diopter. But that
does get you to the 20/25 to 20/20 range.  That is indeed objective, and now you truly do not need
a minus lens.  (But you have your own -1/2 diopter test lens - so you objectively decide.)  Again,
all you - no OD.

Jake does make some excellent points.  But if a person at 20/30, "wises up", he will never get down to -1.5 to -2.0 diopters,
and would not have to go through what Christian is going though.

Be wise in science - about prevention at 20/30 - if you are going to college.  No one will do it for you.
« Last Edit: June 19, 2015, 03:18:31 AM by OtisBrown »

Offline OtisBrown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1766
Re: What plus-prevention is ...
« Reply #4 on: June 19, 2015, 03:17:12 AM »
Subject:  "I am reading the 20/40 line, but somehow I am NOT reading the 20/40 line"??

Otis> This is where Todd's ability, and judgment, "kicked in".  He did not wear the minus and accepted that it would take a long time of plus-wear to get to 20/20.

Otis> Here is the nub of the struggle.  It is also the issue of objective reading of your OWN SNELLEN. Christian was great to go from 20/200, to 20/70, by totally rejecting the wearing of a minus and fortunately, disciplined wearing of a plus.  (I am always amazed when a  person manages to do that.)  Then he continued, for a year, and began to pass the required DMV test of reading the 20/40 line.  This is a reasonable success, with a profoundly difficult problem.   But as I have stated, truthfully, that "last diopter" is truly the most difficult.

Christian>  Also, at the beginning of my journey I would write posts saying that I was able to see the 20/40 or 20/50 line. I was not lying; at least I wasn’t because I didn’t know that I was. I thought I could see the 20/40 line because I was able to kind of guess the letters on the chart, but in reality that’s not 20/40 vision.

Otis> I do not "guess" when I objectively read the 20/40 line.  I KNOW what letters I read objectively.  So do not kid yourself about this objective reading.  If I am on a "weight loss" program, I get on the scale and READ my weight.  I do not go to a medical doctor and have HIM do what I do much better myself.  This is a great fallacy.

Otis> Then what exactly IS 20/40 vision?

Otis>  The minus lens is like cocain.  We love that incredible sharpness.  But at 20/30, you can see well enough to avoid wearing it.  Further, from much that is pure science, it is clear that keeping the minus off - is very wise.  Further, getting a "change" of +1 diopter, is going to take another year of wearing a plus for ALL CLOSE WORK.  There is no "kidding you" about how serious this issue is.  You can get the required change, ONLY by doing that.  For me, there is no problem.  I KNOW it is necessary.  An OD does not "tell me to do it".

Otis>  Christian did the first part, with excellent success.  Now he does not know what to do.  I am not his critic - but  I know for certain what I would do, and am doing it myself.   That includes prescribing for myself - if necessary.  I want total responsibility, and the scientific education that makes that my reality.  For me there is no "sharing" responsibility with an OD in his office.  That would be impossible.
« Last Edit: June 19, 2015, 03:44:43 AM by OtisBrown »

Offline chris1213

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 76
Re: What plus-prevention is ...
« Reply #5 on: June 19, 2015, 07:16:30 AM »
Hi Otis! I'm not sure if you have access to the forum at endmyopia.org so I'll just copy my second post after what you read on the blog.

But first let me point out that you did not copy or quote the whole paragraph of what I mentioned about 20/40 vision, so here it is:

Also, at the beginning of my journey I would write posts saying that I was able to see the 20/40 or 20/50 line. I was not lying; at least I wasn’t because I didn’t know that I was. I thought I could see the 20/40 line because I was able to kind of guess the letters on the chart, but in reality that’s not 20/40 vision. This is why we need the centimeter calculator along the Snellen. Centimeters and meter are sometimes better at telling you where your eyesight is, so when you wear a normalized prescription you know it actually gives you real 20/30 – 20/40 vision. Whereas just basing your measurements on the Snellen can be useless if you don’t correctly distinguish blur from clear 20/20 vision.

There is more to measuring vision than -only- using the Snellen chart. It is NOT like "reading our weight in a scale" because, as I stated before, if one does not have a way of comparing blur from clearness one might think he is able to see the 20/40 line because one can kind of see the letters on that line, but that's not the same as having 20/40 vision. So the centimeter calculator at endmyopia.org (http://endmyopia.org/myopia-calculator-2/) can be a useful tool along with the Snellen to measure your vision too.

Now here's the forum post I had written on the other website:

Quote
P.S. For someone that has never worn glasses before, a minus prescription could be poison, specifically if they are worn for close up. But for someone that already has myopia, minus glasses are good tools for recovery, when used correctly.

This is how I understand the minus. Say someone has pseudo-myopia and their ciliary muscle has a spasm from too much close up use. Then, they are given a -1 prescription. The moment they were that prescription, they are actually looking through a -1 glass. Simple math: 0 [normal eye] – 1 [negative prescription] = -1 [minus lenses].

But now someone has been wearing a -2 prescription for a while, and their eyes have adapted. Because their eyes have adapted to this -2 prescription (after never taking their glasses of) their normal eye has become -2. Then they decided switch to a -1.75 prescription. They are not looking through -1.75 glasses. As far as their eyes are concerned they are looking through +0.25 glasses. A reduction to their actually eyesight (-2) is just an addition to their prescription (+0.25). Simple math again: -2 [a myopic’s normal eye] – (-1.75) [normalized prescription] = +0.25 [plus lenses].

So it’s not the same to tell someone that has never worn glasses before to avoid wearing the minus as it is to someone that has already been wearing the minus for a while. I hope this makes sense.


Allow me to use your writing style so I can explain my opinion further:

Otis> The minus lens is like cocain.

Christian> I suppose you say that the minus lens is like cocain because once one starts using it and seeing clearly one can become "addicted" to seeing that way. But in my opinion the minus is not like cocain as far as that analogy goes; the minus is just a tool that people with myopia (or less accurately: those who have a lifestyle that disrupts proper eye health and vision) NEED to be able to see. It's a tool, an unnecessary one for all I know, but a tool nevertheless. However, when the minus is used incorrectly, aka wearing it while focusing up close, it can, and most likely will, turn the eye to a negative refraction.

Otis> We love the incredible sharpness.

Christian> We should love incredible sharpness. Our eyes are actually supposed to give us sharpness and never blur. Letters on a Snellen or wherever they are where never supposed to look blurry but just smaller as a very healthy eye would allow to see. Sharpness is important for our brains and life in general, how else are we supposed to see everything around us?

Now, when compared to having a negative refraction, it could be better to not have that much sharpness than having our eyes deteriorate by using the minus lens while focusing up close.

Otis> But at 20/30 you can see well enough to avoid wearing it. Further, from much that is pure science, it is clear that keeping the minus off - is very wise.
 
Christian> I do agree, that at 20/30 one should see well enough to avoid wearing a minus. But now, what exactly is 20/30? And what is -1 vision or -0.5 vision or +0.5 vision? This is where my whole post comes into place: diopters are just inverse meters. -1 means one can see sharply at 1 meter of distance (1/1 = 1), -2 means one can see sharply at 0.5 cm (1/2 = 0.5) and so on. So another way to measure our vision is by using a measuring tape and measuring the point where sharpness is lost. That is why I referred to the centimeter calculator provided in endmyopia.org. For someone that has had myopia for a while or someone that has ALREADY worn the minus before, the centimeter calculator can provide better measurements than the Snellen by itself.

Now, if you've never worn the minus before then I totally agree with Otis in that you should never wear them, but in my opinion you should develop healthy eyesight habits and should indeed measure your eyesight before you allow any optometrist to do it for you.

Otis> Christian did the first part, with excellent success. Now he does not know what to do.

Christian> I  DO know what to do now. I did not know what I was doing before though, living in the blur and just throwing the minus out of the window. That is why I wrote the post that you're quoting me from (here's the link by the way: http://endmyopia.org/christian-why-you-should-wear-glasses/). There's much more to vision than just a Snellen chart and our measurements. Vision does not only happen in the eyes, it is also processed by our brains. I do not think it is wise to just stop wearing a minus and start wearing a plus all together. It can do more harm than good. Even Todd, who did recover his eyesight, has talked about lowering prescriptions before getting rid of the minus.

Please understand that by no means I'm trying to argue or anything. I'm just stating my opinion like you are.

Good luck!




Offline OtisBrown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1766
Re: What plus-prevention is ...
« Reply #6 on: June 19, 2015, 06:06:18 PM »
Hi Chris,

Subject: A very interesting post about measurement and control.  This includes my definition of "staged success".


Otis> But at 20/30 you can see well enough to avoid wearing it. Further, from much that is pure science, it is clear that keeping the minus off - is very wise.
 
Christian> I do agree, that at 20/30 one should see well enough to avoid wearing a minus.

++++++

Otis> When I was at -8 diopters, I WONDERED what I would do - if I were, "back" to 20/30.  I know the OD would over-prescribe me by quite a bit.  (I never wanted that to ever happen.)  But then why should I even trust the OD?  Why not teach myself to accept "limited" success. that is legal success.  This is why I do not waver when measuring my own Snellen shapness.

Chris>  But now, what exactly is 20/30? And what is -1 vision or -0.5 vision or +0.5 vision?

Otis> This is where I also teach myself how to make simple optical measurements.  This is to convert a visual acuity, into a minus lens.  For example, if I hold up a -1/2 diopter, and I can read the 20/20 line, then my refraction is -1/2 diopter.  Doing this myself - makes me more certain and competent.  Now, after I begin to exceed the 20/20 line (which I do now, on a regular basis), 20/20+ vision, means that I read the 20/20 line, and then I hold up a +1/2 diopter lens - and continue to read the 20/20 line.  That is they type of vision "old" Eskimos always have. They can read though a +1 diopter lens.  That is VERY sharp vision.

Chris> This is where my whole post comes into place: diopters are just inverse meters.

Otis> We both agree on that statement of physics.  Let me add, that I support Dr. Alex's cm measurement system for high myopes, and using a "reduced minus".  It is truly the same idea that I wear a strong plus for near - and NOTHING for far.  We are united in that part of the concept.

Chris>   -1 diopter, means one can see sharply at 1 meter of distance (1/1 = 1), -2 means one can see sharply at 0.5 cm (1/2 = 0.5) and so on.

Otis> Complete agreement thus far.  By sharply, I always mean reading the 20/20 line myself - objectively.

Chris>  So another way to measure our vision is by using a measuring tape and measuring the point where sharpness is lost.

Otis> You miss the point of defining "sharpness" objectively.  Sharpness has no objective definition. Reading the 20/20 line is very objective.  I am very
objective about this issue.

Chris>  That is why I referred to the centimeter calculator provided in endmyopia.org. For someone that has had myopia for a while or someone that has ALREADY worn the minus before, the centimeter calculator can provide better measurements than the Snellen by itself.

Otis> I do not agree.  It is the issue of objectively reading the Snellen, objectively. 

Otis> If you go to an OD, he will measure your vision by "his standard".  That standard is to give you the STRONGEST MINUS POSSIBLE.  For sheer self-defense, I do not agree with that idea.  If I read the 20/20 line objectively, and some OD wants me to see 20/10, though a -2 diopter lens - then WHO WINS THE ARGUMENT?

Otis> If I do not know, objectively, by self-measurement, then the OD is going to prescribe that strong minus lens.  That is why I must "stand alone", and have an exact measure of visual acuity (sharpness).

Otis> I do appreciate this discussion - so I think a person must actually read his own Snellen, and decide for himself.  That is what I do.


Offline HansK

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 52
Re: What plus-prevention is ...
« Reply #7 on: June 19, 2015, 07:21:53 PM »
Chris>  So another way to measure our vision is by using a measuring tape and measuring the point where sharpness is lost.

Otis> You miss the point of defining "sharpness" objectively.  Sharpness has no objective definition. Reading the 20/20 line is very objective.  I am very
objective about this issue.

Chris>  That is why I referred to the centimeter calculator provided in endmyopia.org. For someone that has had myopia for a while or someone that has ALREADY worn the minus before, the centimeter calculator can provide better measurements than the Snellen by itself.

Otis> I do not agree.  It is the issue of objectively reading the Snellen, objectively. 

Otis> If you go to an OD, he will measure your vision by "his standard".  That standard is to give you the STRONGEST MINUS POSSIBLE.  For sheer self-defense, I do not agree with that idea.  If I read the 20/20 line objectively, and some OD wants me to see 20/10, though a -2 diopter lens - then WHO WINS THE ARGUMENT?

Otis> If I do not know, objectively, by self-measurement, then the OD is going to prescribe that strong minus lens.  That is why I must "stand alone", and have an exact measure of visual acuity (sharpness).

Otis> I do appreciate this discussion - so I think a person must actually read his own Snellen, and decide for himself.  That is what I do.

Measuring the cm distance, sharpness is until you recognize the first indication of blur. Then, there is no total sharpness.

A Snellen score equals visual acuity and the cm measurement equals refractive error. This is a huge difference. You can "convert" visual acuity to a "prescription", but it is not accurate because:

How good is someone's retina?

Someone might read the 20/20 line with a -0.5 lens (still blurry) and clear the 20/10 line with a -1.0 lens (maximum acuity). Everything past 1 meters starts to blur. The total refractive error would be -1.0 diopters. Important: You try to achieve the maximum acuity with the lowest prescription. You could achieve 20/10 with a -1.50, too, but that would be an overprescription because 1/1 = 1, you only need 1 diopters and not 1.50.

In terms of recovery, Otis is right. The first goal should be to read the 20/20, even if you have still myopia (blur in the distance). But I would use both measurements - the Snellen and the cm measurement.

I would prefer the cm measurements because if you improved by 3 cms, you would probably not see that in your Snellen. That does not mean that you do not consider your Snellen score.

Refusing a minus lens, not using it as a tool, can be very frustrating. Some say that you strain your visual cortex if the blur is too high. It is like a diet: if you cut too many calories, you will not benefit.

Kind regards,
Hans

Offline chris1213

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 76
Re: What plus-prevention is ...
« Reply #8 on: June 20, 2015, 12:57:05 AM »
Hans and Otis,

We might not exactly agree on everything but we are on the same page for sure. I'm glad the Internet (and Todd who created the forum) can allow us to have these kinds of discussions, where else would I find people to talk about this stuff in real lie? Go to an optometrist? Hahaha

Respect for both of you, keep doing what you believe is necessary to maintain good vision.

Offline OtisBrown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1766
Re: What plus-prevention is ...
« Reply #9 on: June 24, 2015, 09:22:53 AM »
Hi  Chris and Hans,

I know that the "learning process" is very, difficult.  If it were *me*, I would be rejecting any minus-lens wear (after I had confirmed, that I was reading the 20/40 line (most of the letters).  Then I would be wearing a strong plus - for ALL close work (no exceptions).

If I were "stuck on a plateau", then that is how I would "make good", getting above that plateau.  But I can only tell you what *I* do to get above that plateau.

I know that Jake does not "like the concept", but then, it is you alone who must eventually read the 20/20 line - as I do it. 

Since I know that you know "most of this", I look forward you to eventually reading the 20/20 line (naked eye).  That will be final confirmation of your ultimate success.  But in my judgment, it will be a very slow process.  Just avoiding the minus all the time - would be a big help. 

I am totally in favor of your eventual objective success. 

« Last Edit: June 24, 2015, 11:36:07 AM by OtisBrown »