Author Topic: Optometrists and scientists who hate the minus lens.  (Read 1562 times)

Offline OtisBrown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1766
Optometrists and scientists who hate the minus lens.
« on: March 30, 2016, 10:00:22 AM »
Most of my work started in honest curiosity - as science, never as an insult to medicine.

So - I keep it that way.  The real issue is the OD who has flashes of insight, about the minus lens - but then will not
talk to you about the proven danger of the minus - when you can still read the 20/40 line.

This is a terrible situation, because it leads to a profound distrust of an optometrist  - when you KNOW that THEY know better.

I will post remarks by a world-class scientists - who figured this out - and could not get deep change in optometry to help you with
and educated choice, BEFORE you start wearing a minus lens.

Dr. Colgate is a good friend - and I admire his success.

Offline OtisBrown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1766
Re: Optometrists and scientists who hate the minus lens.
« Reply #1 on: March 30, 2016, 10:04:07 AM »

The outlook of this concept follows the English (Scientific) Royal Society's Motto, "Nullus in Verba", which has been best translated as, "Take nobody's word for it; see for yourself."

The first step in learning to make a scientific judgment is to learn to make your own decisions, based on your own measurements.
Your eyes belong to you, and you must control your own visual future. The only way to make a responsible decision is by being cognizant of your focal state. With this knowledge you can act effectively to control the behavior of your eyes.


Because ophthalmologists are aware of existing experimental studies, they have strongly suggested that prevention is the best solution for the problem of nearsightedness. Unfortunately, this recommendation has never been effectively presented and acted upon. Although the correct solution is known, the methodology of prevention has never been implemented.

There is direct testimony as to the effectiveness of the use of a positive (plus) lens to control the negative focal state of the natural eye. Many children and adults can help themselves if the principles in this book are properly understood and applied.


Dr. Stirling Colgate, a research scientist with the Los Alamos National Laboratory, correctly deduced the behavior of the normal eye, and began using a plus 2.5 diopter lens to reverse the effect of a confined environment on his eyes. By doing this, he successfully recovered from a slight amount of myopia.

"Fortunately, I understood most of this for myself when I was studying biology and physics when I was 14. I first started to become nearsighted at 13 to 14. As soon as I noticed it, I immediately acted upon it by buying a pair of reading (farsightedness) glasses, (positive lenses), at the dime store. I used these for reading. A positive lens substitutes for further contraction of the ciliary muscle; thereby allowing the eye focus to remain in the relaxed state of infinity when reading a book up close. Within several weeks my eyesight had returned to normal -- relaxed state of focus at infinity."

"Since I am a physicist I am not dependent upon optometry or ophthalmology for my professional peer group. I have managed my own eyesight all during my life (now 63). I have undertaken to try to explain this because I believe that the condition of myopia (and then having to wear nearsighted glasses for life) is totally unnecessary for the majority of the human race. I believe that the condition of progressive myopia is a grotesque and needless distortion of human physiology, created by our intellectual environment of reading and continued because of our collective denial of that very intellect."

If a fourteen-year-old can figure out how to act effectively to avoid myopia then you should be able to duplicate his successful preventive effort.

It is always difficult to develop a book that advocates change in existing medical practices. However, if we are ever to come to grips with a major scientific problem, we must be willing to generate criticism of existing practices so that at least a few of us will have the opportunity to effectively defeat the problem of nearsightedness.

Offline OtisBrown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1766
Re: Optometrists and scientists who hate the minus lens.
« Reply #2 on: March 30, 2016, 10:09:45 AM »

The medical motto, is, "First Do No Harm"

Here is an ophthalmologist who describes that first prescription of a minus lens, as a, "CRIME".  It only gets
far worse - when you start wearing it.

I advocate that this truth be told to you - and you be empowered to make a choice, when at 20/40.

Either educated yourself about the this problem - and take responsibility for yourself - or rejecting that responsibility,
lose your distant vision to that minus lens.

I just want you to have an educated choice in this matter.  I am forced to trust BOTH your intelligence and motivation
on this issue. 

Offline EugeneS

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 38
    • Club Kozak
Re: Optometrists and scientists who hate the minus lens.
« Reply #3 on: March 30, 2016, 11:38:28 AM »
Thank you Otis!
It'll be very hard to find an optometrist that would be glad to help in preventing or lessening myopia; they'll loose business!!

Offline OtisBrown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1766
Re: Optometrists and scientists who hate the minus lens.
« Reply #4 on: March 30, 2016, 12:45:11 PM »
Hi Eugene -

Thanks for your kind commentary.

People always assume you are lying to them, when you suggest that prevention (at 20/40) is even possible.  In effect, the OD in his shop, will tell you that Dr. Colgate is lying.

Here is some more commentary on prevention at 20/40, (self-measured -1 diopter) for your interest.  No, Stirling did not "cure myopia", he PREVENTED negative status for his normal eyes - if you want exact language.


We should learn from the man who successfully defeated the myopia situation. Dr. Stirling Colgate details his struggle and success with the problem in the following paragraphs.

"Science has progressed to understanding this mechanism of slow adaptation of the relaxed focal length (focal state) of the eye to its average focal environment. A significant number (several dozen) professional people in ophthalmology and related disciplines have empirically and intuitively come to the same conclusions (that nearsightedness is preventable) and unsuccessfully attempted, even with the dedication of a lifetime, to reverse the orthodox view of solely genetically determined eye focus."


"It is perhaps worth speculating why there has not been any prior recognition by the medical and optometry professions of the approach to the management of eyesight focus. I believe there are many additional 'reasons' but I have heard these:"

"Nearsightedness is not a very severe handicap, and mostly those affected are studious anyhow and don't need distance vision."

"It is not a problem for medicine and so medical doctors are not concerned."

"If you don't want to be nearsighted, give up reading."

"Negative lenses that correct nearsightedness are relatively cheap and easy to wear so why bother with another approach."

"Glasses are a status symbol of the intellectual."

"Contact lenses make nearsightedness even less of a problem."

"Only recently has nearsightedness become a severe problem -- it is both more prevalent and, because of earlier onset, leads to progressive myopia."

"Traditionally, medicine treats or cures the symptom and, only recently, is preventative medicine respected."

"Only very recently is there a rational scientific explanation for the scientific observation of the developmental mechanism of the normal eye."

"Only the last statement is acceptable to me. So now that there is such a scientific basis, let's get on with the solution."


"Now I assume that you are young, 8 to 20 years old; have recently (within months) started or gone nearsighted and don't want to go on with thicker and thicker negative lenses for distant vision. You buy and wear positive lens reading glasses for all your reading -- or anything up close, and even for some of the rest of the time. You might get a bit of a headache at first; if so, decide which comes first -- the headache or myopia, and adjust the use of the positive lenses accordingly. Monitor your own mean relaxed focus, i.e., distance vision at least once a day.

"I may or may not be average but it took me only 2 weeks when I was 14 years old to return my initial myopia (about 20/80) to normal vision, i.e., (20/20) eyesight. (20/20 vision means that you can see at 20 feet what a "normal" person sees at 20 feet.) Twenty feet is almost the same as infinity; (20/80) vision is the start of myopia. I could see at 20 feet what good eyes could see at 80 feet. I was studious, slightly shy, introverted type -- which also included, fortunately for me, a course in physics at that age. That is when I first understood the simple facts about lenses and optics and the absurdity of using a negative lens when I was becoming nearsighted.

"I bought my own reading glasses in the dime store. They were plus 2.5 diopters and stronger than I needed, but they did the trick in a hurry. If you catch the start of myopia before the lens muscle spasm leads to irreversible lengthening of the eyeball (change of focal state), then it seems that the eyesight returns to 'normal' rapidly.

"If you make up your mind what value the mean relaxed focal distance you want in life, you can manage or lead your eye to that condition. When several times I lost my reading glasses during the war (World War II), I could not get them replaced by military optometrists because my glasses were not orthodox. I rapidly became myopic again; at 17 I read a lot in the Merchant Marine. I restored my vision to 20/20 as soon as I could purchase positive lens reading glasses when I returned to the States.

"During the war there was much social pressure to get into the officers' college training programs, but 20/20 was required. A few optometrists recognized the need and they prescribed positive lens glasses for myopic young people who desperately wanted to get into the Navy V-12 training program. This technique worked for many who were moderately myopic. An optometrist at Cornell was surprised that I had been doing this successfully since the age of 14.


Nearsightedness prevention is possible -- if the work is done properly.

You must have the internal competence and desire to do the job logically and consistently, and must have a compelling personal reason to want to succeed.

The effort must be conducted as soon as the situation is detected (20/40, -1/2 diopter myopia)

You must take the time to learn and understand the behavior of the normal eye.

« Last Edit: March 30, 2016, 12:49:45 PM by OtisBrown »

Offline EugeneS

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 38
    • Club Kozak
Re: Optometrists and scientists who hate the minus lens.
« Reply #5 on: April 02, 2016, 07:54:36 AM »
Hi Otis,
You stated:"(i.e., I would never wear a minus again, and I would always wear a plus for ALL CLOSE WORK.  This is ONLY POSSIBLE, if you have a very weak prescription.)"
In a case of myself or others with higher prescriptions, what would be recommended? Use a lower prescription? such as -0.5 less?
Thank you for your help!