Author Topic: Why the "Box Camera" theory, is not connected with objective science.  (Read 69 times)

Offline OtisBrown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1755
First, I support the concept of the plus, as the second-opinion.  But you can not "share" prevention, with a person who believes that all prevention (at 20/40, self -1.0 diopter) is totally impossible.

Here are two video. The first, a graph of their "Box Camera" theory (Helmholtz- Donders) that has never been subjected to an objective scientific test.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUKr5-IyrV8&t=284s

All fundamental eyes are dynamic.  In pure science (where you actually run the test yourself), the eye is always proved to be responsive to its average value of accommodation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRkgvXmzk8I&t=1s

It is up to you - to decide who is honest an accurate in this type of analytical science.

The second concept, fully supports Todd's, concept and success. 

I never recommend that a person even START with any prevention, unless he can read the 20/50 line, and can find in himself the motivation for long-term plus wearing.

This is absolutely NOT MEDICINE, and no one should ever think it is. There is not cure.