Author Topic: The conflict between objective (preventive) science and optometry.  (Read 1029 times)

Offline OtisBrown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1766
Subject: Why does an optometrist over-prescribe a minus lens - when he should know it makes matters worse?

What creates the perpetuation of the "minus lens, status quo" -- as though it is perfect, and no preventive alternative is possible?

What creates objection to scientific prevention?

This man states the reason that I got started with the question, of how to prevent when I am at 20/40.

Is  the natural eye dynamic, and would "just prevention" be possible under my control - if I do it myself?

I do not "fight" with this optometrist, because I know he is going to put his own children in a strong minus.  It
is tragic, but this optometrist has had a long career, teaching 4,000 optometrists how to hold up a minus lens,
and impress the patient with the need to wear a strong minus all the time.

I truly do not know how, in an office, he could, or ever, will ever do anything different.

It is just that if I desire true-prevention, I will have to understand this man's training.

I will have to protect my distant vision myself, by wearing a plus for near, as I wear a plus as I type this message.

I will have to always confirm my Snellen at 20/25 to 20/20, myself - before I go for any "exam" by this optometrist.
« Last Edit: July 13, 2015, 04:01:50 AM by OtisBrown »