Totally "Passive people", versus Active people - like Todd Becker.

[OtisBrown]

Subject:  I can not, "build a fire" under a person - to do what can be of great benefit to the person.

This subject can be "excessive weight".  It can be slight "negative status" for the natural eye.  It can not be about "medicine".

It can not be about a person's intelligence either, because many people and engineers know that you CAN lose weight.  After all, there are no obese people in a concentration camp. You can always lose weight that way.  So obese weight has nothing to do with heredity.  Yet you know that no doctor is going to tell you this.  He prefers the "public lie", that you can do nothing about excessive weight.  He just wants to be polite - and not tell you the truth.

I see that we have about 14 "Guests", who enjoy this site.  But they are not active, in the sense that they ask questions, or seek answers. That is indeed disappointing, but that is also the medical issue.

TODD'S SUCCESS:

Todd was lucky.  He made himself "active" in so many ways.  He did not accept the "status quo" minus lens, and was intelligent to know that he should stop wearing the minus, consistent with being close to 20/40.  That is a very ACTIVE and intelligent person. He sought "other answers", and that became Brian Severson and his "plus lenses" along with the training and self-discipline - that you MUST apply to yourself.

I personally, just want to be presented with the facts of science, while I can still read the 20/40 line.  Then I want to do what Todd did.  But success is for the long-term. I also suggest, for the above reasons, that success will never be medical.

This is why I post my remarks here - for those people who "wake up", and realize (from a weak prescription) what it will truly  take in terms of person activity and long-term plus wear - to make yourself become effective and successful. 

Thanks for listening.

[OtisBrown]

Subject:  Compromise - and objective success.  Who measures it?  Yourself, or an OD who does not care about you - in his office.

I know from long experience that an OD in his office dis-respects you, you intelligence, and your ability to examine all the objective science that suggest that the minus is a "bad idea".  This is the true conflict between engineers (who believe in objective science) and the OD who declares that "all prevention is impossible", and you are wrong if you believe you can protect your distant vision for life - by your own objective measurements.

+++++++

I consider this discussion to be of critical value. It explains why a person who objectively reads the 20/30 line (self-measured -1/2 diopter), goes and passes the DMV (which requires 20/40 or better) – and then goes to an optometrist, who tells you, the “patient”, that your vision is terrible, and you will require a -2 diopter for FULL TIME WEARING. This is why objective self-checking is so crucial, an must be done separately from an OD measurement. It becomes a matter of who I believe. The OD feels you must have 20/10 vision measured in almost complete darkness. In my judgement, I MUST pass the required legal standard. So I always check, objectively at home – and avoid wearing a -2 diopter — that in my judgment, will kill my distant vision permanently if I even begin to wear it.

http://endmyopia.org/steroids-to-boost-dynamic-visual-acuity/

+++++

Yes, people do not like the requirement that they be in control of their lives.  They do not like the idea that long-term plus wear is wise, and required if you are going though a four year college. They do not like the idea of "exercise", or reading at D1 and D2. 

Jake's discussion is about this issue.  It is about anyone who "runs off" to an OD for any type of measurement.  You will only believe in prevention, if you personally check yourself.  I use the 20/40 line as my standard.  But I wear the plus all the time, and report to you that I exceed the 20/40 line. This is exactly what Todd has done.  So the issue is this:

Who do you believe. Do you believe you can make your own objective measurements? Do you believe the OD is without bias, when he says he measured -2.0 diopters?

[OtisBrown]

Subject: The "Game of Life".  Will I ever get back to 20/40, and pass the DMV requirement?

We demand from an OD, that we always have 20/10 vision - even when doing 12 hours of close work.  We can not be "bothered",
to REMOVE that -2.0 diopter for all close work, and understand WHY it is both wise and necessary.

We get "hung up" on 20/20.  Life does not mean perfection, as defined by an OD in an office  Life, is about learning and compromise.

This is a tough question, that Jake asks.

http://endmyopia.org/one-single-question-to-predict-your-success-or-failure/

To me, success is to understand the legal requirement, and for me to objectively pass that requirement.  I appreciate this type
of honesty.  I just wish ODs were honest about this issue in their office.

[OtisBrown]

I truly appreciate Jake's honesty about science and prevention - with a mind prescription.

Here, a person reports wearing a plus lens.  (This requires that you be in the range of 20/60 to 20/40, or refractive STATE of about -1 diopter, always self-checked.)

http://endmyopia.org/how-can-a-dog-fix-your-eyesight/

Actually, only your intelligence and motivation can keep your Snellen in the 20/30 to 20/15 range.

I simply do not "claim" any success.  But I do believe the person, if in high school, MUST check his Snellen.  He also must accept consequences if he "blows off" wearing the plus (when required) though high school and college.

In this sense, the "plus" is NEVER A CURE".  It is not a "short term thing".  It is a matter of 'educated intelligence", to know that if you do not want it - you will not have it.

I would read the remarks about "Todd, and the office-OD.  Set an objective goal for yourself (on your Snellen) and be prepared for long-term plus wear.  No OD can do this for you.  But for exactly that reason, true-prevention, DOES NOT COST ANYTHING. 

[OtisBrown]

Subject: PLEASE do not expect an OD to do ANYTHING FOR YOU - FOR PREVENTION.

This statement was made 100  years ago - by Dr. Prentice.  He was very specific.  You MUST start with plus-prevention, BEFORE you go below
20/40 (self-measured -1 diopter).  You  must verify your own Snellen.  You can not go to an OD, and expect ANYTHING helpful or
useful from that experience.  This tells the story - of individual, complete responsibility.

http://myopiafree.i-see.org/prent.txt

In fact, this "situation" is even "tougher" that Prentice says it is.  This is because "deep" scientific research proves that if we
do not keep "up" with wearing the plus (at 20/40) our vision just keep going down.

But few people have the scientific motivation to do it.  In fact, for me, my "advocacy" is limited to a wise, objective person who can
still read the 20/40 line - entering a  four year college.

Yes - prevention is damn tough.  I am certain it is too much of a challenge for most people - but I must be clear - I do not "blame" the OD.

[OtisBrown]

Subject: The REAL MEDICAL problem of the minus lens - over your life time.  The truth you are never told.

If the minus was just an annoyance - I would probably not object.  But that is not the case.  It is well known, that
if you even start wearing a minus lens, your naked eye vision just gets worse, and worse and worse.

The eye stretches, and you develop a detached-retina, which in most cases means you go blind it that eye.  Here is the discussion for your interest.

http://endmyopia.org/the-industry-look-forward-to-your-retinal-detachment/

If your refractive state is in the normal range, 0 to +5 diopters, the probability that you will get it is, 1/ 50,000

If your refractive state is from 0 to -5 diopters, it is 1/6,000.  For higher levels, i becomes about 1/200 -- for high minus prescriptions.

So keeping your visual acuity at 20/40 or better - is worth it - for your life time.  But no one can force you to protect
your distant vision for life.   That is your choice.