The complete destruction of our vision with the FIRST minus lens.

[OtisBrown]

I have personal friends - who are "medical", that is ODs and MD.

I agree that dealing with the great, 'mass of humanity", in the sense of prevention (at 20/40) -- is impossible.

But here is what happens - when you put a young person in to a strong minus - and pretend that it is, "perfectly safe".

http://endmyopia.org/abhineet-always-worse-22-diopters-age-18/

I only advocate - that you be INFORMED - of the possibility of prevention, when in High School, and still able to read the 20/40 line.

But will ANY OD "volunteer" this information to you.  The answer is a profound NO - because they do not think you have both the intelligence and motivation to take true prevention seriously.   That is total OD arrogance. 

Todd was successful because 1) He is an engineer, 2) He had a "weak" prescription, 3) He took long-term plus wearing very seriously,  4) He took passing the 20/40 line (DMV REQUIREMENT) very seriously.

I do not advocate that a person attempt to work on "prevention" unless he is like Todd.

I will enjoy your commentary on this issue.  The question is this.  "Do you want a discussion about this issue, while you can still read the 20/40 line?"   

[j23]

hi Otis

How would you explain this study - available for years but I have just found this when surfing (it is from a renown university) ?
As you are from US, is it possible you can get more details on the study ?
I can see it is rather not  a "rigid" study as they must have surveyed the children how often they wore glasses.

http://reap.fsi.stanford.edu/research/impact-wearing-glasses-myopia-progression-0

[OtisBrown]

Hi J23 -
Any one who studies the "closed world" of medicine, knows that they run "studies" to justify their existence.  So, if you "doubt" the minus lens, they will run a study to PROVE that the minus lens is not only "safe" but helps you in the long-term.

I object.  They never think to put a minus lens on the totally normal eye - and FIND OUT, its true effect.  If you are prepared to think of all fundamental eyes as, "dynamic", you could deduce the correct answer, (eyes measured as a refractive STATE, never as an "error".)

This study - is bogus as basic science - if you ask the RIGHT QUESTIONS.  If you want to be a slave to that, "first minus", the go ahead and believe them.  I prefer science.

I also do not argue for "recovery" much beyond 20/50 (self measured -1.0 diopter).

That does mean "accepting" the need to self check both your refraction, and "accept" long-term plus wearing (for near) with nothing for distance.

That means I simply do not trust anyone who tells me that the minus  lens is even "safe".

But - you must understand - that there are studies that contradict the statement - that these people, "jumped to".

I will post a short statement about MDs, "running their own study" to show that "not washing hands", was safe. 

[OtisBrown]

Subject: Why I do not trust "medical studies" that are extremely biased and divorced from scientific common sense.

Budapest! That is where "Women Killing" by doctors - was brought to an end - by Ignaz Semmelweis.  Ignaz ran a prevention study - under his control.  Ignaz brought the death rate down from 15% to 1%.  How did the doctors respond to Ignaz's success?  Absolutely - they did NOT.  These doctors ran THEIR OWN STUDY, to convince themselves - that it was OK to dissect a corpse - and then deliver a baby.  The results of their new medical study - when implemented?  Women continued to die at the 15 % rate for the next 30 years.  This is why I do not trust optometry-myopia studies.  What did these doctors do to Ignaz?  The fired him - for life.  No good deed - goes un-punished !!  Moral of the story?  Do not trust studies that are isolated from objective science.  There is science - that does support Jake's success.  No one should attempt to put Jake down - who is medical.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Avoiding ENTRY, into "negative status", can not be done by any medical person.  But I agree.  If you wish to AVOID entry, you should study objective science, and avoid this type of intellectually blind, "medical attitude".

But, I  limit myself to ONLY PEOPLE, who are in the range of 20/40, and can self -measure their own refraction.  It take long-term, and intense dedication to always do better than 20/40, and, get to 20/20.

The study by Frank Young, proved that prevention, like this, is possible.

It is all up to you.

Just do not believe these, "cooked" studies.

[OtisBrown]

J23 -- SCIENTIFIC RESPONSE TO CORRUPTED STUDIES.  (Minus lens - good for you! )
I have seen this "internal studies" that declare the minus lens to be both "wonderful and safe".  A massive body of science, says that the minus lens - is never safe.

Yes, I do, "contest" this study - because I have exhaustively reviewed a study that shows that the minus DOES MAKE MATTERS WORSE. This study was not corrupted by intense bias.

https://myopiafree.wordpress.com/study/

Read the PDF copy, or check the Excel Spread sheet.

The kids, wearing a plus, DID NOT GO DOWN.

The kids, wearing a strong minus, WENT DOWN AT A RATE OF -2/3 DIOPTERS PER YEAR FOR EACH YEAR IN SCHOOL !!

That proves that the minus lens - is a terrible idea - and should be avoided - if possible.

At least, let us have a rational discussion of this issue, before you even start wearing that first minus, when at 20/40.

Do not expect an OD to ever be honest with you - about this science.  Too much of his money - is lost - if he is honest.

[OtisBrown]

Hi Gang,
I know you want an OD or MD, to support you. But guess what, there is NO MONEY IN HELPING YOU AVOID ENTRY, or at 20/40, getting a refractive change, necessary to go from 20/50 to 20/30 to 20/20. 
They run clearly "corrupted" studies, to convince themselves of their on, "God Hood" in their office.  I do not even argue with them any more.  But, I do look at objective science, (for all natural or dynamic eyes).  This type of question is direct, and must be understood clearly by you.  Here is a 3 minute video, that convinced *me* that my personal habits as a child, "creates negative state" for my normal eyes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xS-1X9Rd0Os&t=107s

When I asked, "what caused myopia", I just got self serving bull shit for an answer.  (I can understand that response - they never think that anyone in their office has any intelligence of scientific ability.  (Who knows, maybe they are correct with 99 % of the population.)

But when you ask, "I wonder what would happen, exactly, if I put a strong minus, on at totally normal (emmetropic) eye". (Refractive state, exactly zero.)

Try that question, on the next OD you meet - if you have the guts to do so. 

Or just look at the vido.  (This is CONFIRMED in objective science by the Smith III study.)  It is final science - if you have that ability.  It is absolutely denied, because the ODs know that they do not "like" the implication, if all natural eyes (yours included) behave that way. 

So, study science - and choose your preventive choice.  Todd did it, "his way", and after all, exceeding the DMV is all that is truly required.  More that 20/40, is pure gravy.

Enjoy this science - I certainly do - and trust deeply this science.

Now, do you have any scientific questions?