Author Topic: An ophthalmologist who does not want your money.  (Read 1376 times)

Offline OtisBrown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1766
An ophthalmologist who does not want your money.
« on: July 22, 2015, 05:43:01 AM »
Dear Insightful Plus-Prevention Friends,

I am an engineer, interested in pure-science and prevention (while you can still read the 20/40 line).  I know you will never
believe an engineer, if the subject is medicine.  So then, you must ask, what does an ophthalmologist think
about the adverse effect of a strong minus, placed on a child's eyes, when the child still passes the 20/40 line? 
(i.e., pseudo-myopia).  Here are the arguments of an ophthalmologist to has objected to
doing that, for the last 50 years.  It is indeed a dire warning about the "accepted practice",
of even starting with the minus lens.

It is obvious that Ophthalmologist Kaisu Viikari is correct on all counts.
It is also obvious that her 50 years of
dedication to the cause of plus-prevention has been totally ignored.

Today we have 2.5 billion myopic people.  Tomorrow, if no preventive action
(at 20/40) is taken, I am certain it will
grow to 3.0 billion.

There is science that supports the wise use of a plus, when the person can
still read the 20/40 line.  That objective
science is still totally ignored.

I wish you all well. For myself, I check my own visual acuity and
refraction, and wear a +2.5 diopter as I type this.

If you wish to preserve your distant vision (at 20/40 or better) you will
have to have the science - to do  what I am doing.

No one said that scientific prevention (at 20/40 would be easy, or fast).
It is probably the hardest intellectual
task that anyone could conduct.

My  personal attitude is, "stand and fight for this" against impossible
odds, and "keep on fighting".


Otis Brown


From: Kaisu Viikari

Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 6:06 AM

Subject: The Bibel to all your gang 

(Kaisu is Finnish, so I do not correct her choice of words.  Otis)

Pseudomyopia - The crime against humanity

" The crime against humanity“, „the tragedy which has no parallel, not
even on the global scale“, " the case which emergently deserves to be
addressed to the tribunals such as the EU Court of Justice,“ these are
some of the words by which dr Kaisu Viikari, Ph.D. describes the
situation in the eye care practice.

She is the Finish ophthalmologist, born in 1922, who during her long
practice realized that majority of eye care practitioners maltreat our
eyes instead of healing them and that it is so absurd that for many
people it would be much better to instantly buy plus glasses from the
local drugstore for close work then visit ophthalmologists who do not
hesitate to prescribe minus glasses without performing refraction tests
in accordance with /lege artis/. Even in 2015, age 93, this
extraordinary scientist and human, fluent in German, English , Finish
and Swedish has been raising her voice against this intolerable practice
and managed to use computer and internet helping “the maltreated
patients” from all over the world without any remuneration.

Her very thoroughly elaborated findings were published in Tetralogia
(1972), Panacea(1978) but her subject was faced with the reluctance of
the most influential ophthalmologists in Finland. Obviously she
addressed the taboo subject and faced with denial of scientific freedom
of speech as she elaborated in “The Struggle: Never to be forgotten”
published in 2011.

The crucial concept in this story is pseudomyopia. i.e. false
nearsightedness, which is produced by the accommodative strain which
manifests in inability to see clearly distant objects. The significance
of pseudomyopia is intentionally overlooked and pushed aside under the
influence of profit interest in this field. According to dr Viikari when
she addressed this issue at the congress held in Finland nobody of her
Finish colleagues could even understood what pseudomyopia is.

Myopia was very rare condition till the 20^th century and it is
progressively increasing. Early theories that genetic factor is the
cause of myopia nowadays clearly proved as wrong.  Namely, the real
cause of myopia is accommodative strain which is caused by focusing to
close distances for prolonged periods of time. “Stressed organ will
become ill” Such stress causes focusing muscle (ciliary muscle) to get
into cramp (spasm) which manifests by pseudomyopia, i.e. false
nearsightedness. If refraction is incorrectly done it is very possible
that wrongfully minus glasses or too strong minus glasses would be
prescribed which fuel oil to the fire and increase the accommodative
strain further. Accommodative strain will produce eyestrain, pain in and
around the eyes, headaches, migraines, blurred distance vision and
finally to the elongation of the eyeball (true myopia) which is some
kind of adaptation of organism to the constant close work visual demands.

Human eyes are not designed for the conditions we currently live in.
Untill the 20^th century majority of people were illiterate and spent
almost all the time outdoors. Nowadays, in the era of digital
technology, almost all people spend almost all their time doing close
work. Naturally, people are born with hyperopia and broad amplitude of
focusing power which enables us to get the clear picture both at far and
close distances. As we get older this focusing power decreases and
manifest in blurred close vision and this condition is named presbyopia.

After expansion of refractive surgery (LASIK, PRK, etc.) direct
financial interest of eyecare professionals appeared majority of whom
became not interested in preventing myopia but moreover in its
development in order to force as many people as possible to undergo
refractive surgery.

Impact of money on eye care professionals is clearly stated by the
authors of the only one book ever written in Serbian language specially
dedicated to refraction “/Correction of refractive anomalies of the eye
(Korekcija refrakcionih anomalija oka)/“, published in 1995, in which
these distinguished professors of Faculty of Medicine, Belgrade
University stated:

-- “From day to day the development of civilization demands from our eyes
increasingly more. From the computer at workplace till TV at thome the
man must see clearly, without strain and, of course, without damage to
the eyes. It is understandable that everybody has the wish  to see
clearly, without strain but sometimes at any cost. --

-- The fulfillment of these human needs are wholeheartedly offered  by the
army of manufacturers of glasses and contact lenses, opticians and also
ophthalmologists. Beside the wish to help the patient  all of them also
find their own interest. /*/The question is raised whether always
everything is being done in the spirit of Hypocrite oath „I shall do
everything in the best interest of the patient“ or in this there are
some other interests. It is the task of ophthalmologists that, armed
with knowledge and experience, protect not only the interest, but
firstly the health of their patients.” --

Refractive surgery is often advertised as some kind of routine
“cosmetic” intervention but all the risks are not fully disclosed to the
patients. That’s why many lawsuits around the world were started with
high amounts of damages awarded by the courts for this kind  of
malpractice in cases of severe complications. Because of the quantity of
patients who suffered damages from refractive surgery some law offices
specialized in this subject of litigation.

--  dr Viikari stated in her Struggle that her work was much influenced by
awareness of the significance of latent hyperopia and, in general, a
deficiency in the plus direction, and the advice for prescribing glasses
which she was taught and which goes back for centuries which was ringing
in her ears: --

--  *“The strongest plus glasses, the weakest minus ones”* --

-- Confirmation of this statement was found in Charles McCormick’s
“Neurology and Metaphysics” (1904) who stated: --

-- “The two greatest faults among oculist and opticians are that they
rarely get on enough + and often give too much – lenses.” --

How then explain not obeying this so obvious rule of prescribing glasses
in 2015 by majority of eye practitioners?

The answer is clearly stated by dr Viikari./../

-- “The //gleam of money/in eyes blinds, if the intellect is lacking!” --

The page will be updated soon. In the meantime you can find more
information at


Note:  Pseudo-myopia, is the equivalent of self-checked 20/40 to 20/60 vision, or self-checked refractive state
of from -1.0 to -2.0 diopters.

From the "tone" of Dr. Kaisu's statement is it clear that she considers "correcting" pseudo-myopia with a -2 to -3 diopter
lens, will not "help" but will guarantee your naked-eye vision will get profoundly worse.

I personally would have wished that I had received this education and lesson, BEFORE I went below 20/40. 

To day, only Dr. Kaisu provides that lecture.  Make your preventive choice, not on anything I might
say, but on the recommendations of a gifted ophthalmologist.

I just call this the enlightened second-opinion, to those who object to wearing the plus for
near, when they can still read the 20/40 line.


« Last Edit: July 22, 2015, 05:55:38 AM by OtisBrown »