Author Topic: A proposal for scientific (self-measurement) prevention.  (Read 806 times)

Offline OtisBrown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1766
A proposal for scientific (self-measurement) prevention.
« on: March 28, 2016, 09:42:23 AM »

I will always vote for this.  That a person, still reading the 20/40 line, understand the choice he has to SLOWLY get back to naked-eye 20/20, under his control.  I mean by that, that he wears a plus intelligently, and makes his own refraction measurements.  We made this recommendation for the U. S. Naval Academy.

There are two types of measurement being advocated. 

!) Find the point of "just blur" with no lenses.  In this case,  the distance is 0.8 meters.  I think a person must also measure his Visual Acuity - or he will have no idea what he is doing.

2) The other measurement, is to use your own trial lenses, and, seeing 20/40, find the MINIMUM minus to "just see" the 20/20 line.  That will almost always be a -1 to -1.25 diopter lens - IF YOU DO IT YOURSELF.

But - will the person wear the plus - for the long-term?  If an OD is involved - he will never tell you anything, and will not encourage you to do this yourself. It is for that reason alone, that I explained to my nephew, WHY he could not go to an OD, and WHY he had to understand that -1/2 diopter per year, and always exceed the 20/25 line.

Feel free to dispute self-measurement and prevention - if you wish.   Your OD will not enter into this type of critical science.

Offline OtisBrown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1766
Re: A proposal for scientific (self-measurement) prevention.
« Reply #1 on: March 28, 2016, 04:10:39 PM »
I see endless claims, and then I see counter-arguments.  The only way you know what you are doing, is to measure yourself, with your own Snellen and test lenses.  I accept that I must meet and objective standard by reading my own Snellen.  I would suggest this method of refractive measurement - just so  you have confident in yourself.

I will not argue, about "CM" or Snellen/lens verification.  That is your choice.  But I do argue that if you do not measure yourself -  you will never succeed.  This is a totally personal issue - for you to succeed.

I do accept that long-term plus wear - is an issue that most people are certain to reject.  But then, that is the most difficult issue of all to resolve.

I do not, pull my punches.  I just tell it like it is.

For the person who says, ".. I hate the idea of long-term plus wear, to preserve my distant vision,  I do not see WHY it is necessary."

My OD told me that, " the minus is the only answer, and a strong minus would not make my distant vision much worse."

Well I hear you! 

So don't wear the plus (when still at 20/40), in high school, entering college.  Hope like hell science is not right about your future vision.  You
will indeed find out the, "hard way".

But now, you know what an "educated choice" is all about.

Even more completely today - Prentice is totally correct - with very strong science - supporting him.

This is why I am wearing a +2.5 diopter as I type this.  It is why I read my own Snellen at 20/20, and better.

You complain about the "high cost" of prevention.  It is just too expensive you say. So prevention (at self-measured -1 diopter),

Then, you decide you do not want to do it.   Why is that true?

I hear people who want to blame the OD for this situation.  But what do you expect.  If you can not read the
20/50 line, and refuse to wear the plus, and get to 20/30, he has no choice, but in 10 minutes, to put you into
a strong minus lens.

So do not complain any more.

« Last Edit: March 28, 2016, 07:45:07 PM by OtisBrown »

Offline OtisBrown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1766
Re: A proposal for scientific (self-measurement) prevention.
« Reply #2 on: March 29, 2016, 03:52:49 AM »

I know that I can convince NO ONE, of any of this.  But, to the extent that I look for scientific truth (about the minus lens and the normal eye),
then this is what I looked for:

When an OD "gives up" on a minus lens, and changes, you know that is significant.  Here are two ODs, who gave up on the minus lens.

Ignorance of the the profound effect that 1) long-term close work, and 2) Wearing a strong minus all the time has, 3) Ignorance is bliss.  At least
that is scientific truth.  Here is the OD, working her way out of it.  That is indeed a sea-change in attitude for her.

Here is another OD who WORKED her way out of -3.75 diopters.  (Dr. Orfield -- Yes, it took a long time.)   When a layman makes
that claim - we ALL ignore that person.  When an OD does it, successfully, we should be more serious about it.

Then, of course you have Todd and his success.  I think we all believe that 1) Todd was nearsighted (has the prescription to prove it and
2) By his own many efforts, passes the CA state medical test to drive a car.  (VERY objective).  What you choose to believe - is always
up to you.

« Last Edit: March 29, 2016, 03:59:45 AM by OtisBrown »